Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TomCADem

(17,387 posts)
Thu Sep 8, 2016, 12:16 AM Sep 2016

Forum Offers Preview of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Presidential Debate

Source: NY Times

Mrs. Clinton was far more specific than Mr. Trump in laying out her ideas to provide mental health care and create jobs for veterans, and she highlighted her extensive foreign policy experience as secretary of state and as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

On body language, the two diverged as well. Mrs. Clinton was far more likely to look audience members in the eye, nod along as they expressed concern or curiosity, and give relatively direct if sometimes uncomfortable answers. Mr. Trump came off as more relaxed but also far lighter on policy explanations, and he faced no questions about his past insults of veterans and their families or his own Vietnam-era draft deferments.

* * *

Earlier on Wednesday he called for a massive expansion of the military, including many thousands more troops for the Army for a total of 540,000 and increasing the number of Marine Corps battalions from 23 to 36. To do so, Mr. Trump said he would ask Congress to eliminate so-called sequestration caps on military spending that have forced the reduction of troops — budget limits that Mr. Trump had supported until recently.

But in a sign of the relatively gentle questioning of Mr. Trump at the forum, no one challenged him over the chances that his proposals would come to pass. Democrats in Congress have stood firm against lifting the caps unless domestic spending is allowed to grow too, and some military analysts have questioned the need for some spending goals.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/us/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-national-security.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0



Interesting overview of the forum, which also notes the gentle question of Trump. If anything, Trump's aggressive and vindictive attacks on the media have worked. Also, by lifting the blacklist, media organizations will be reluctant to cross Trump or get placed back on the blacklist. The fact of the matter is that it is the path of least resistant to just attack Clinton, then blame her for their own bias and cowardice for "failing to effectively respond to Trump's attacks."
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Forum Offers Preview of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Presidential Debate (Original Post) TomCADem Sep 2016 OP
Trump handled with kid gloves and Clinton handled with a spiked, mailed fist. Agnosticsherbet Sep 2016 #1
"But in a sign of the relatively gentle questioning" BumRushDaShow Sep 2016 #2
Like Rumsfeld and his "troops are fungible" comment. haele Sep 2016 #3
+infinity BumRushDaShow Sep 2016 #4

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
1. Trump handled with kid gloves and Clinton handled with a spiked, mailed fist.
Thu Sep 8, 2016, 12:32 AM
Sep 2016

Got to love the cowardly media...not.

BumRushDaShow

(128,943 posts)
2. "But in a sign of the relatively gentle questioning"
Thu Sep 8, 2016, 07:02 AM
Sep 2016

The only ones who seem to be calling out the bullshit are the print media. And unfortunately, the print media is little read by a large segment of the population... and they only hear about these types of stories if the teevee talking heads mention the articles.

What boggles the mind is Drumpf's call for "more troops" but then he demands that we "don't intervene". So then what does he expect the "more troops" to be doing when we already have enough for defense?

It's as if he wants them to be like an art collection - hoards of them to "displayed" for public consumption and bragging rights, but not functional for any other reason.

haele

(12,652 posts)
3. Like Rumsfeld and his "troops are fungible" comment.
Thu Sep 8, 2016, 03:25 PM
Sep 2016

Drumpf and his cadre of Bircher sociopathic con men and rentiers seem to believe that the people who actually have to produce something for a living are not human. We are automatons that can be dressed up in whatever stereotype they feel like dressing us up as. We are fungible and disposable.
The rest of the world is not supposed to have a life outside their narrow universe.
So it's not surprising that Drumpf would talk about lots of troops - that he can use as props to his vanity. But pay them, or care for them when they get damaged or too old to play war with? Screw that, they should have gone to Chicago School of Business and become a hedge fund manager, or real estate lawyer if they wanted to be real. Someone who can make money.

To a person who views the world as monetized, everyone is only worth the price tag tied around his/her neck.

Haele

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Forum Offers Preview of H...