2024 US Presidential Election

[SGR]

Biden says he doesn't debate as well as he used to but knows "how to tell the truth"

So that appears to be the best recourse message that the Democrats have after that mess of a debate. 'Biden didn't debate well, but he told the truth.' Which isn't true, in the sense that he didn't lie (maybe he lied less than Trump, not sure), but it's worth a shot I guess. 

You wanna see something funny? Listen to Joe Scarborough explain how this version of Biden we have now is the best version of Biden there's ever been. This was from only three months ago.

If a Democrat largely paid attention to clowns like this guy, I'd understand why some of them were so shocked after watching the debate.

[SGR]

For all the thrashing Biden is getting for his debate performance, he did have some good moments. When he went after Trump for having sex with a porn star (Stormy Daniels) while his wife (Melania) was pregnant - and then he said the most old-timey thing I heard the whole debate: "You have the morals of an alley cat!"   

Body language is key. Notice how Trump's head shakes in disagreement when he mentions having sex with the porn star (I'm sure he was prepared for that), but then notice how his head nods in a visual sign of agreement (yes) when he mentions he did it when Melania was pregnant. Trump then denies having sex with a porn star but doesn't address the Melania thing. My guess is when Biden said that about how Melania was pregnant at the time, Trump felt guilty and remorseful (which he obviously wouldn't verbalize in a debate). That's the body language reading I got, at least.

[Lisnaholic]

Your long post is a good appraisal of how last night's debate went, SGR, and there's little doubt that Biden was a fumbling disappointment. One big mistake of his was trying to muster statistics that he couldn't present in a commanding way: I got really bored with his various mumbled numbers. Conversely, with Trump, I got really sick of his glib, evidence-free superlatives about his own time in office, "The best this, the greatest that, etc."

So that appears to be the best recourse message that the Democrats have after that mess of a debate. 'Biden didn't debate well, but he told the truth.' Which isn't true, in the sense that he didn't lie (maybe he lied less than Trump, not sure), but it's worth a shot I guess. 

As far I can tell, it was business as usual regarding the honesty of the candidates: Trump flat-out lying over and over again, Biden ocassionally fudging figures and deliberately using quotes out of context. ( Again, the Charlottesville one, which you have educated me about SGR, )

Here's a fact-check assessment of the debate:-  https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-misinformation-election-debate-trump-biden-577507522762aa10f6ee5be3a0ced2bb

tldr ? This is their liars' list: Trump: 11 lies, Biden: 5.

You wanna see something funny? Listen to Joe Scarborough explain how this version of Biden we have now is the best version of Biden there's ever been. This was from only three months ago.

If a Democrat largely paid attention to clowns like this guy, I'd understand why some of them were so shocked after watching the debate.

Joe Scarborough spoils his own show by talking too much, incl talking over long-suffering co-presenter, Mika. It's a really dated, sexist performance imo. Nonetheless, as used to be said, "a week is a long time in politics" so perhaps it's unfair to ridicule an opinion from 3 months back - especially as Biden seems to have immediately bounced back from his ghastly debate performance. Here are (admittedly edited) highlights of the fiery, confident Joe, so sadly missing from the Presidential debate:-

[SGR]

Your long post is a good appraisal of how last night's debate went, SGR, and there's little doubt that Biden was a fumbling disappointment. One big mistake of his was trying to muster statistics that he couldn't present in a commanding way: I got really bored with his various mumbled numbers. Conversely, with Trump, I got really sick of his glib, evidence-free superlatives about his own time in office, "The best this, the greatest that, etc."

As far I can tell, it was business as usual regarding the honesty of the candidates: Trump flat-out lying over and over again, Biden ocassionally fudging figures and deliberately using quotes out of context. ( Again, the Charlottesville one, which you have educated me about SGR, )

Here's a fact-check assessment of the debate:-  https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-misinformation-election-debate-trump-biden-577507522762aa10f6ee5be3a0ced2bb

tldr ? This is their liars' list: Trump: 11 lies, Biden: 5.

Joe Scarborough spoils his own show by talking too much, incl talking over long-suffering co-presenter, Mika. It's a really dated, sexist performance imo. Nonetheless, as used to be said, "a week is a long time in politics" so perhaps it's unfair to ridicule an opinion from 3 months back - especially as Biden seems to have immediately bounced back from his ghastly debate performance. Here are (admittedly edited) highlights of the fiery, confident Joe, so sadly missing from the Presidential debate:-

Thanks Lisna!

Suprisingly, there's very little here I'd disagree with you on. 

Trump's whole 'greatest this, best that' schtick is sort of on brand with him. Probably 90% of the time, whatever he is talking about is not the 'greatest this' or the 'best that', but he's a salesman in nature.

In terms of lies, yeah, we can agree that both candidates lied. I haven't gone through the transcript or anything myself yet to fact check everything (and I won't, I don't care that much lol), but I'm willing to bet Trump and Biden both lied more times than those AP figures. Here's one article from the Federalist that lists 20 lies Biden told for example (ignore #19, because Biden corrected himself immediately afterwards, in a quote I've already included earlier in this thread - counting this one as a lie is a complete cheap shot):

Here Are The 20 Biggest Whoppers Biden Told During His Debate With Trump

That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if the real number of Trump lies is twice as much or even greater.

Agreed that a week is a long time in politics, by election time, perhaps this will be forgotten, especially if Biden has a much better debate performance next time (which is totally possible) but Biden has had many instances like this on less big of a stage, and longer ago than 3 months, so for Joe Scarborough to say something like 'this is the best version of Biden' we've ever had is completely dishonest. He himself must know it's not true. And just knowing it's possible that your president will have days like this (what we saw at the debate) is very, very concerning. It's like the USSR telling its citizens via Pravda that Brezhnev in his later years was perfectly mentally capable. It's just not true. And to be fair, if anyone claimed the version of Trump we have now is the 'best version of Trump' we've ever had mentally and physically, that would be just as untrue. They're both old, and with age comes inevitable decline. Truly, at their ages, they should both be disqualified from being president, but here we are.

To your point from his rally today, I did catch some of that, and I did think it was awfully strange the complete contrast between his rally presence and his debate presence - moreso than could be explained simply by him reading from a teleprompter at the rally. I don't know what kind of medication Joe is on these days, I won't stoop to say they're pumping him with anything crazy, but he's certainly taking some things and surely Trump is too. At their age, it's very possible Biden just had an 'off-night' last night, and it could be due to something as simple as him having a bad night of sleep.

[SGR]

Here we go folks!

Schmoyoho and Weird Al have officially launched the first official remix of the latest presidential debate. Props to these guys - no clue how they get it out so quick. Mind boggling really.

Look forward to the Remix Bros take on it next week.

[Psy-Fi]

[DJChameleon]

Trump AND Biden lies fact checked

Here is some fact checking in video form if you don't wanna read through the link.


Also Trump saying "let's not act like children" after acting like a child is just eye roll worthy.

It screams "I know you are but what am I?"


Kyle Clark should've been the moderator. He did extremely well during the Colorado one that happened a month ago.

[Lisnaholic]

^ Yes, that Kyle Clark does a great job of putting the candidates on the spot with the kind of questions we would really like straight answers to.

An excellent point raised at the end of your fact-checking video clip is this: the pre-agreed policy that the debate moderators would not call out falsehoods led to a bunch of lies being uncontested and broadcast to 51 million viewers. As the journalist says, "The American people deserve to know when a presidential candidate is spreading falsehoods." I couldn't agree more, and wonder if, at the end of the debates, there should be a quick fact-check run down, like we've be doing here: "Ladies and gentlemen, you have just been lied to 16 times during this program..."
 

Thanks Lisna!

Suprisingly, there's very little here I'd disagree with you on. 

^ Thanks to you too, SGR: I see it as a good sign when we can come to an agreement. There's so much talk about the "far-right media bubble" and the "fake news" of the channels I usually watch, that it's reassuring that, sifting through all the bias, it's still possible to agree on some facts.

Trump's whole 'greatest this, best that' schtick is sort of on brand with him. Probably 90% of the time, whatever he is talking about is not the 'greatest this' or the 'best that', but he's a salesman in nature.

^ TBH my reaction to this comment was (i) does anyone want their country to be run by someone with a salesman mentality? (ii) you seem to have a much more forgiving, greater tolerence when it comes to lies-per-minute from Trump than I do. Using the AP figures I posted, and assuming Trump talked for half or the debate time, that would work out to a lie every four minutes.  

[Jwb]

@SGR


Did you watch RFK's version?

If they don't introduce a new candidate during DNC. Trump is winning in November.

RFK should have absolutely been at the debate imo. I don't even support him but there's no justification in keeping him off the stage when both of the main candidates are this weak.

[SGR]

^ Thanks to you too, SGR: I see it as a good sign when we can come to an agreement. There's so much talk about the "far-right media bubble" and the "fake news" of the channels I usually watch, that it's reassuring that, sifting through all the bias, it's still possible to agree on some facts.

Absolutely.

^ TBH my reaction to this comment was (i) does anyone want their country to be run by someone with a salesman mentality? (ii) you seem to have a much more forgiving, greater tolerence when it comes to lies-per-minute from Trump than I do. Using the AP figures I posted, and assuming Trump talked for half or the debate time, that would work out to a lie every four minutes.  

The underlined is a thought-provoking question. I think it really depends on the big issues the president in question is tackling. There are certain issues that we might find benefit in having a president with a salesman mentality (international trade agreements, military defense agreements, certain foreign policy) and certain big issues that we'd find not benefit, but detriment in having a president with a salesman mentality (like COVID and the pandemic). It's sort of similar to a military president (one who has served in the military) and a career politician president would each have pros and cons depending on the issues you're tackling.

I didn't double check your math, but if Trump only lied once every four minutes of speaking time, I'd be greatly surprised.  I'd expect the number to be much bigger.

But yeah, I suppose you could call it a 'tolerance', but I'd characterize it more as an 'understanding'. Not just with Trump, but also with Biden. These guys are politicians, and they will lie. Sometimes, not even purposely. What I mean is, any time Trump and Biden start talking numbers, there will probably be a 'lie', even if it wasn't intentional.

Biden just had an optics disaster at the debate. The Democrats, assuming they're going to stick with Biden (and I think they will), need to find some kind of message to counteract or blunt the effect of that optics mess. So saying "Biden had an awful debate, but Trump lied more" is a valid way to play it, but I just doubt it's going to be very persuasive to anyone who was on the fence about who to vote for - I have massive doubts there are any swing-voters out there who upon hearing that message will have a moment of revelation and say: "Wait, really? Trump lies more than Biden?!" 

I would note though, if there was one new big lie by either candidate, that might make a difference, but looking through the AP link, the lies listed are essentially the same (or in the same ballpark of lies) they've both told many times over in the past.

This kinda goes back to a previous discussion you and I had which essentially boiled down to: do voters vote with their hearts or with their minds? I leaned towards heart, and you seemed to lean towards mind. I think people will largely vote on how a candidate makes them feel. Here's an interesting article on the subject:

Bringing this back to elections, results like ours — especially when they are combined with other research on the importance of the cultural underpinnings of preference — strongly suggest that the usual evaluative benefits of a side-by-side comparison virtually disappear when the options themselves invoke strong emotions. Wilson and I called this "value neglect." The emotional signals sent out by the alternatives themselves are so powerful that we neglect to consider the objective information that should help us to distinguish the pros and cons of the options in the first place.

This isn't good news from the standpoint of voters who claim they are voting for one candidate over another because of where each candidate stands on the issues. In reality, these voters are probably making their selection based in large part on the emotional connections they forge with the candidates themselves.

In other words, voters prefer Donald Trump — or Hillary Clinton, for that matter — because of the emotional connection they (or the parties they represent) have forged with the electorate. So, in a democracy where people are almost evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats, it's hardly surprising that people don't take the time to look more closely at the issues. Put another way, when it comes to political ice cream flavours, people are either partial to Donald or Hillary; how much or — in Trump's case — how little they actually receive in their proverbial cup or cone barely registers. The best evidence for this is that, in spite of the key differences between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump (not to mention between countless other candidates and initiatives that can be found further down the ballot), they find themselves uncomfortably close to one another in terms of the expected popular vote, where Clinton right now leads Trump by a flimsy 5-point margin.

So my argument essentially is that the Democrats, just like the Republicans, know that their optics and how they make the voters feel is more important to winning votes than any running fact-check/lie count between the candidates, and often times, even more important than specific policy differences between the candidates. It's why liberal media was ablaze after the debate, and even the New York Times has formally called on Biden to step down. It's also why Trump, with the aforementioned 'salesman schtick' goes out and says he had 'the greatest economy in history', rather than 'the greatest economy since Clinton'. It's all about how it makes the voters feel.

[DJChameleon]

RFK should have absolutely been at the debate imo. I don't even support him but there's no justification in keeping him off the stage when both of the main candidates are this weak.

the justification is that he didn't get enough support to be up there

[SGR]

the justification is that he didn't get enough support to be up there

I'm pretty sure the polling threshold for independents to do general debates used to be much lower. Fact check me on it, but I'm pretty sure they raised it after Ross Perot in 92. It's the Democrats and Republicans colluding to ice out their competition.

[SGR]

And another.

[Jwb]

the justification is that he didn't get enough support to be up there

what were the specific criteria? He's polled well enough to at least give him a shot.   And he is doing so mainly as a reflection of how unsatisfied people are with the options on offer. So that's more of a reason to throw him in there. If not to give him an actual shot at winning, then at least use his presence to punish the existing candidates for putting us through another round of this cursed match up.

[DJChameleon]

what were the specific criteria? He's polled well enough to at least give him a shot.   And he is doing so mainly as a reflection of how unsatisfied people are with the options on offer. So that's more of a reason to throw him in there. If not to give him an actual shot at winning, then at least use his presence to punish the existing candidates for putting us through another round of this cursed match up.

He's not polling well enough though.

This is what I found.

Under the 2024 Criteria, to receive an invitation to debate, a candidate must: (i) be Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States; (ii) appear on a sufficient number of state ballots to have a mathematical chance of winning a majority vote in the Electoral College; (iii) have a level of support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate, as determined by five national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations' most recently publicly-reported results at the time of the determination. The polls to be relied upon will be selected based on the quality of the methodology employed, the reputation of the polling organizations and the frequency of the polling conducted. The CPD will identify the selected polling organizations well in advance of the time the criteria are applied.