Presidential Debate

[JRB]

I saw those on Facebook. FB Fact Checkers labeled it "Out of context." Not false, but out of context. Now what the heck does that mean?

That's FB's way of saying something is true when they'd rather it be false. Gives the confirmation-bias seeking left leaning sorts the ability to deny it.

[blues]

That's FB's way of saying something is true when they'd rather it be false. Gives the confirmation-bias seeking left leaning sorts the ability to deny it.

Maybe Joe was on Trump's Secret Service protection detail.

[NEPAKevin]

I would like to see more of the "I've (Trump) done more in 47 months than you (Biden) did in 47 years. " Nice, simple, catch phrase that sums up why Biden shouldn't be allowed in any decision process beyond what flavor jello he wants with lunch. But apparently it got lost in all the back and forth bickering.

[Sensei]

"Yes, I condemn white supremists. I condemn all violent and hateful groups, but the left in general and Antifa in particular are the worse offenders and are responsible for the violence currently plaguing our cities. Can Sleepy Joe over there condemn Antifa and the violence from the left?"

Slam dunk/home run, whatever metaphor you want to use.

It was a bad answer when you have Brian Kilmeade of "Fox and Friends" saying:

"Donald Trump ruined the biggest layup in the history of debates by not condemning white supremists. I don't know if he didn't hear it, but he's gotta clarify that right away. … Why the president didn't just knock it out of the park, I'm not sure."

I was not surprised that Trump missed that layup. His ardent supports claim that the Tweets are his means of bypassing a hostile media to communicate directly with his constituents - an insult to the constituent’s intellect when you think about it. After last night, there should be no doubt that the Tweets are about as deep as his abilities allow, and it doesn’t get any better in person.

Simply put, Trump is not a consistent communicator which, in his current job, means that he is ineffective. The people who like the things that he says or feel like he “speaks to them“ are the kinds of people who would vote to bring back gladiator fighting. They are entertained by the conflict rather than solving problems.

[GyroF-16]

Although I am sure you are aware of this, what you are replying to is the tactic of redefining a word for the purpose of obtaining a desired interpretation—a tactic typically employed by the Left. In this case, we have a perfect example where the word "sure'' has been redefined from its usual meaning as an answer in the affirmative (in this case, it is a ''yes'' that Mr. Trump would indeed condemn racist/bigoted/violent behavior) to a definition which the person doing the redefining has not—and will not—provide leaving us to argue over something that never occurred.

So, now, we have a new, unknown definition of the word ''sure'' causing you to have to respond to it even though the meaning of ''sure'' was plain to all in its original context....unless of course, one wants to ignore that for their own purposes.

Distract. Deny. Delay. All part of the Left's play-book.

In fairness, I think a common usage of “sure” would mean “yes” or “yes I will”. But it’s not the same thing as condemning.
If someone asks you if you’ll walk through that door, and you say “sure”, you’ve indicated a willingness to do so, but you haven’t walked through that door yet. They would not be unreasonable then say “well... go ahead then.”

I’m willing to believe that President Trump was agreeing to condemn white supremacist groups. But he badly flubbed the actual condemnation. A clever speaker would have also segued into condemning and ANTIFA and violent BLM rioters, and then asked Biden to do the same. But he didn’t. And from the perspective of this watcher, I thought he had an easy score and failed at it. He failed to clearly state an obviously mainstream position, and to refute accusations that have been made by the Left for years.

[jc000]

Donald Trump has already condemned white supremacists – it's beyond tiresome to even waste time debating it. No matter what acts of "condemnation" he performs, the left will never accept it. Why bother?

I'll say this, and I really don't care who's butt it hurts – there WERE some very fine people one both sides in Charlottesville: people who are deeply troubled by the pervasive legacy of the confederacy and the related pains they experience today, along with people who don't want to see their heritage or city / state / country re-engineered to marginalize them for a past they don't own.

Besides democrats, libertarians, republicans, socialists, etc., our constitution and government serves nazis, black/white/"aztlan" nationalists, jihadists, fascists, theists, communists, anarchists. Donald Trump serves all these constituents, whether you like it or not.

[SiriusBlunder]

In fairness, I think a common usage of “sure” would mean “yes” or “yes I will”. But it’s not the same thing as condemning.
If someone asks you if you’ll walk through that door, and you say “sure”, you’ve indicated a willingness to do so, but you haven’t walked through that door yet. They would not be unreasonable then say “well... go ahead then.”

I’m willing to believe that President Trump was agreeing to condemn white supremacist groups. But he badly flubbed the actual condemnation. A clever speaker would have also segued into condemning and ANTIFA and violent BLM rioters, and then asked Biden to do the same. But he didn’t. And from the perspective of this watcher, I thought he had an easy score and failed at it. He failed to clearly state an obviously mainstream position, and to refute accusations that have been made by the Left for years.

Great minds think alike! :-)

[Maple Syrup Actual]

If you come, please bring amendments. There are several we could use although obviously the 2nd is our most glaring deficiency.

[SiriusBlunder]

If you come, please bring amendments. There are several we could use although obviously the 2nd is our most glaring deficiency.

Seen soon after the debate:

Right now, I bet Canada feels like they live in an apartment above a Meth lab

[TAZ]

If you come, please bring amendments. There are several we could use although obviously the 2nd is our most glaring deficiency.

Lol. Maybe this time they will actually do it and move. Not holding my breath.