Tuesday, September 27, 2016

The Clear Winner of the US Presidential Debate:

rorschach1

16 comments:

  1. Hillary won this one. Trump was mumbling and defensive. Of course she didn't actually say anything besides platitudes, but her presentation was better. She was playacting Obama's style, down to little mannerisms.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Her victory will mean continued pressure on the Jews of the Middle East to capitulate to terrorist demands and a further embrace of Jihadi organizations and states like the Brotherhood and Iran, as they continue to stomp on the face of all non-Muslims, women, and Gay people.

      Delete
    2. Michael, you often use the term, "Jews of the Middle East". That makes it sound like there are still Jews in the Middle East outside of Israel.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous,

      I think that I am trying to get across the idea that when we lambaste Israelis that we are, in fact, lambasting Israeli Jews specifically.

      With the exception of a few thousand Jews in Iran, Israeli Jews are, in fact, the Jews of the Middle East.

      I am also just experimenting with different ways of discussing the conflict.

      Thank you for the input and please drop in anytime.

      Delete
  2. No one will be swayed either way by any of this. So it's irrelevant. what is telling though is the imperious disdain Hillary holds most of us in. She can barely contain her new money contempt, her nouveau riche arrogance and entitlement to the point where she barely feels she need tolerate our presence there or hers among us. Smug smug smug. Make no mistake, 'deplorables' is not a misstep. It's how she and the DNC elite deeply and truly feel. Most of the rest of us are barely human to them.

    Her points such as they are are neither good nor bad. They are political fodder like any other. And every hack has them. The first day in office they throw them all away and laugh at the rubes. As Earl Long, the longtime governor of Louisiana once quipped when some farmers stormed his office complaining he hadn't made good on his promise to pave their roads. His secretary shouted into his office "Well what do I tell them, Sir?" and he shouted back "Tell 'em I lied!"

    But Hillary takes this to another level. The fake pity party, the imperious glare, the passive aggressive "I won't say Donald is a liar, but he's a liar!" She really has no need of any of us, even her own supporters. She's as indifferent to US as I've ever seen a politician openly behave during an election they're trying to win.

    Bizarrely it works. I guess much like middle class blue collar people vote to repeal an estate tax they'll never experience because they have an aspiration they might, someday, Hillary supports were a fake aristocratic mantle of absolute scorn and contempt because they too hope someday to have nice job in government deciding our fates.

    ReplyDelete
  3. And...I wish this thing had an editor......

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mike,
    Your take on the "debate" is brilliant (although I thought I was watching a bad version of You Bet Your Life with her as Groucho Marx, Lester Holt as George Fenneman and Trump as a hapless contestant).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I honestly do not know who won or lost or what that even means, exactly.

      I suppose if over the next few days her numbers go up it means that she "won" and visa versa.

      Delete
  5. I suspect Hillary will see a tiny bump. But all either of them had to do was not get crushed. That's all. All anyone hoped for was a draw. After all, hasn't Hillary already successfully navigated 15 one on one debates already vs Trump zero? Didn't we more or less expect that she'd be prepared with factoids and semi-factoids and such?

    BTW why have neither of them ever commented on her TWO terms as US senator. Isn't she supposed to be the most qualified person in the history of people for the job? Why the 12 year gap and why has no one pointed out her twelve year gap?

    Because there's nothing to point to. It's like down here our recently defeated one term Kay Hagan who lost to Tom Tillis last year. A complete cipher. Never held a press conference, never held a rally, never granted an interview, never published an article, never submitted any legislation, never gave a speech. Her sole claim to fame by her own admission was that she happened to pass the last vote to push the ACA over the top.

    And then, poof, Kay Hagan was gone like the morning dew. I suspect Hillary is worried that if she points to or tries to point to something she claims she did in 1.33 terms as US the junior US senator from NY especially since she won her first election by 13 points and her second by 30 points after having spent 10x what her opponent did and having so much left over she transferred a surplus of 10 million dollars from that kitty immediately to her 2008 Presidential election campaign (in 2006 on the day she was sworn in....I guess she didn't plan on staying long).

    In any case her most notable activity during her first term, other than voting against the Iraq surge but for CIRA2007 and for TARP, and against the ban on same sex marriage, was to lead an inquiry into the 'hidden' sexual content in the Grand Theft Auto video game series.

    She also filibustered all of Bush's nominees to the Supreme Court, something she now charges Republicans with, as a 'crime'.

    I'd just be curious to see how hard anyone goes for or against her and her Senate record.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What??

      Hillary had it in for Grand Theft Auto???

      I used to love that fucking game.

      In any case, the Vegas odds-makers, if I am not mistaken, are giving Hillary 2-1 in favor.

      My bet is that Hillary will win, which will mean an acceleration of Obama's embrace of Jihadism posing as liberal humanitarianism, a further deterioration of US-Israel relations, the continued racialization of American politics, a generalized tendency toward EU-style global elitism, and the further erosion of fundamental western values, such as free speech, in deference to al-Sharia.

      What people do not understand - because it is virtually never discussed - is that what underlines all of this is an ongoing tension between the twin-pillars of American progressivism, i.e., a tension between the multicultural ideal versus the ideal of universal human rights.

      By embracing the former, it threw the latter in the toilet and thereby undermined its very reason to be.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for restating your original thesis which attracted me to your blog in the first place. It's a good thing to do now and then.
      I do think that the erosion of free speech is in deference to more than al-Sharia, and that the deference to al-Sharia is a symptom of the larger problem.
      America is about to elect a leader, whom it knows is dishonest, and whom it doesn't like. Interesting times.

      Delete
  6. What?
    A teddy bear with a nasty lump on its head and an AK 47 in each hand won the debate?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Precisely.

      Except where you see a teddy bear, I see a devil with horns wearing a shroud.

      And where you see a pair of AK 47's, I see a pair of hand-axes.

      In truth, I'm not sure which is scarier.

      Delete
  7. Debates are like NASCAR or bullfights. I only want to see the disasters

    ReplyDelete