Trump tanked the debate on purpose

[oberliner]

Last edited Wed Sep 28, 2016, 10:13 AM - Edit history (2)

So that he can get the pundits to say how much he improved in the second debate.

It's all part of the game.

Edit to add:

Thanks for all the reasoned and thoughtful responses.

I am thinking that my initial assertion is probably not accurate.

He most likely did not deliberately tank the debate, but his team will no doubt attempt to spin a narrative around how much he "improved" in the second one and the MSM will be very eager to run with that.

[geek tragedy]

1. eleventy-fourth dimensional chess nt

[grossproffit]

16. Or just wishful thinking.

[oberliner]

40. Watch what the narrative is coming out of the second debate

I predict it will be all about how much better Trump does.

[Orangepeel]

60. Sure, it will be about how much better, but that doesn't mean that was the plan

Trump did not *purposely* look like an incoherent fool.

[oberliner]

61. But he could have deliberately "winged it" and not done a whole lot of prep

Knowing that he would then have a huge amount of "room for improvement" for the next two.

Or his people could've "let Trump be Trump" for the first one and will now put the screws on him so that they can tout how much he has improved.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

218. He's got two weeks for 30 years of knowledge and 16 years of 1 on 1 debate experience.

And stamina? Will his tranquilizer wear off after 20 minutes like the first debate?

[oberliner]

222. It is not possible for him to beat her in a debate

But it is possible for him to appear less awful the second time than the first time. And to get in a memorable one liner (written for him by someone else) that the press could run with.

[JTFrog]

77. You are trying to create that narrative here.

No thanks. He is a fucking ignorant moron who got soundly trounced by the most qualified and prepared candidate he could face in the world today. He didn't tank anything except maybe a few "coke" and vodkas.

His handlers are stupid as shit, he is stupid as shit, and now the whole world knows it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Fuck Trump and his deplorables.

[oberliner]

93. No - I am trying to predict the narrative outside of DU

Obviously, on DU we have a different perspective on things than the Chuck Todds and Joe Scarboroughs of the world.

I am trying to make an educated guess about how the pundits will spin what happens at the next debate after it occurs.

[JTFrog]

110. Lol.

No, you are pushing a conspiracy not making any educated guesses. The scholars all saw an idiot getting his ass handed to him. You see a guy pretending to be an idiot and think his handlers are playing eleven dimension chess.

You should just stop.

[oberliner]

112. There is no conspiracy

I am making an educated guess about strategy. It seems, in fact, like strategy 101.

I don't think Trump is pretending to be an idiot and I don't think his handlers are playing chess.

I think Trump didn't prep very hard for the debate and I think his handlers decided to "let Trump be Trump" knowing that they could then have room to show how much he "improved" the next time around.

It seems pretty straightforward and follows with how they have dealt with the media up to this point, and the media clearly wants it to be close.

How do you explain the fact that HRC isn't winning by 10+ points in every state?

[JTFrog]

116. Nothing educated about it.

You are making something up and trying to push that narrative. A big ol conspiracy to win the next debate. Because Trump and his deplorables are just cool like that.

This is nothing but FUD.

[oberliner]

125. How do you explain the fact that HRC isn't winning by 10+ points in every state?

I am genuinely curious to know what your thoughts are on that.

[JTFrog]

132. Because sexism and cognitive dissonance are the glue that holds conservatives together.

Now you have your proof.

But instead you seem to want us to believe it's eleventy billion dimensions chess by Team PuTrump.

[oberliner]

135. Agreed

I just think Trump's team knows how to take advantage of that sexism and cognitive dissonance.

[JTFrog]

138. Yup, they are brilliant.

[oberliner]

196. It doesn't take brilliance

It takes not being a complete moron. Conway is not a complete moron.

[emulatorloo]

213. Conway is a glorified surrogate who has never led a national campaign. Bannon and Trump kids

more likely the brains behind this operations. And they don't seem like they know stategery from a hole in the ground.

[oberliner]

224. I go back to the same question then

How is HRC not beating him in every state by 10+ points?

He is a historically awful candidate who says preposterous and hateful things every day.

His campaign is run by idiots. He can't control himself on Twitter. He knows nothing about the issues.

Why is it as close as it is?

[emulatorloo]

228. Because all the last few elections have been "this close"

That's just the way modern Presidential elections are.

[oberliner]

229. But the last few elections had relatively normal Republicans running

This one has Donald Trump.

[MADem]

199. John Warner isn't buying your "narrative."

POTUS is not the prize they give out for "Most Improved" and only the rightwing sites are thrashing this narrative. It's a pathetic attempt to spin gold out of manure--and it's not working this time, either.

A more plausible (but equally false) narrative is that Trump blew the debate because he doesn't want the job--that his screw-ups were purposeful, when they weren't.

Trump lost that debate because he is an ignorant blowhard who cannot control his emotions. He's easily goaded, he's intemperate, and he is a stupid, small (fingered) man who does not do his homework. Thing is, you can't copy off your classmates during a debate (too much, anyway).

[oberliner]

204. Yeah, I used to believe the "Trump doesn't want the job" idea

It sure seemed that way throughout the campaign.

[geek tragedy]

79. You think Captain Empathy will do well in the town hall forum? nt

[oberliner]

94. He won't do well

But he might have one good line and that might be enough for the MSM that wants a close horse race.

[RobinA]

122. No.

Trump did about a well as he could do in that debate. He didn't tank. He was himself. He's not a smart or disciplined guy. He has no idea how anyone outside his base thinks, and he doesn't even know much about how his base thinks except for a couple hot button issues.

Even if they were able to transplant information into his head he isn't a flexible enough thinker to use that information in a back and forth that can follow an unpredicable path.

Plus, he's gotten as far as he has in large part because some people like his shoot from the hip manner. He will never give that up because it's the lifeblood of his campaign.

So, although I am still uncomfortable about how this election will turn out, I have no worry that Trump is suddenly going to turn in an even somewhat reasonable debate performance. It ain't in him.

[oberliner]

128. I would encourage you to watch the first two Mondale v Reagan debates if you have time to do so

Mondale thoroughly destroyed him in the first debate and everyone knew it. Every story in the press reflected that fact and Reagan dropped in the polls and people started to think that he might lose.

Mondale also destroyed Reagan in the second debate, but Reagan had one good quip about Mondale's age.

This was all anyone talked about - disregarding the actual content of what they debated, and talking about what a "winning line" that one sentence was.

That is the kind of thing that even Trump is capable of doing (having one good line - written for him by someone else).

[LeftRant]

91. lol

[jberryhill]

2. He's not that clever

[Rincewind]

25. As the saying goes, " He may look, talk,

and act like an idiot, but don't be fooled, he really is an idiot."

[oberliner]

39. His people are

Conway, in particular, has been effective.

[JTFrog]

80. No they aren't.

They are all fucking deplorable idiots. Why are you pushing this narrative here? Judging by all the replies and recs on this thread, I'd say no one is buying what you are selling. I'd be a little embarrassed if I were you.

[oberliner]

99. Yes, they are

Obviously, we on DU find them to be deplorable - but if the entire country felt that way then Trump would not have tens of millions of people saying that they will vote for him.

I am not pushing any narrative. I am trying to predict what will happen in the MSM with respect to their coverage moving forward. It is fascinating to watch the way they spin things and how the reality on the shows does not comport sometimes with what we all see with our eyes.

It's fine if people don't agree, and I could be wrong and Trump could have another debate that is universally viewed as awful and leads to him dropping precipitously in the polls. That would be wonderful.

Based on what I have seen thus far in the campaign and in past presidential elections, and looking at how the media has approached this race, I think what I am predicting will, sadly, come true.

[JTFrog]

107. Yeah, you are fighting hard for your narrative in this thread.

Pretty interesting.

[oberliner]

111. I am trying to have a discussion about how things could play out

It seems like something worth at least talking about. Aren't we all frustrated with the way the MSM covers this campaign? I know I am.

Based on how they have covered Trump to this point, I am making an educated guess about what will happen moving forward.

[JTFrog]

114. Pushing conspiracies and giving Drump and co far too much credit.

That is likely to be a very one way conversation here if you haven't figured that out yet.

[oberliner]

118. There is no conspiracy

Campaigns have strategies. I am trying to figure out what theirs is. This is something that the HRC team is probably also doing.

There has been a pattern throughout the campaign of Trump having "a bad week" and then "making a comeback" over and over again in the MSM.

This is something that is factual and observable - regardless of how awful we all know Trump to be. This is not a universally held opinion, unfortunately.

[JTFrog]

119. You are just making shit up dude. FFS, educated guess.

Giving yourself far too much credit as well.

[oberliner]

123. OK

I understand that you think I am full of crap. I could be completely wrong about everything. It's just what I think based on what I have observed in terms of the way this race has played out in the media. I respect that folks will disagree, that's the point of a discussion board, isn't it?

[JTFrog]

127. Most of us prefer reality based discussion.

But you apparently are gonna keep pushing fantasy so have at it.

[oberliner]

131. The reality is that Trump has been able to work the media succesfully

And we have a monumentally awful candidate running against of the most qualified people ever to seek the office of the presidency, and somehow the race is close.

[JTFrog]

134. That's what they want us to believe.

And apparently what you want us to believe.



Done with your little game now. Have fun.

[oberliner]

137. I am open to alternate interpretations

That HRC is not destroying Trump is mystifying to me. I am trying to figure out why it is so close. I could be totally off base and there might be other reasons why it as close as it is.

[JTFrog]

141. Not according to this thread you aren't.

And you sure seem to be quite alone in those beliefs. You keep saying you could be wrong or off base, but you certainly seem intent on getting someone to believe you.

[oberliner]

159. I do think people should believe me

I have tried to help clarify my perspective on the whole thing. While I am saying I could be wrong, I do think that I am right - in the sense that Trump could be well served by showing how much he "improved" in the second debate, and the media wanting to be able to run with such a narrative.

If the second and third debate for Trump are equal to this one and he continues to drop in the polls and the election ends up being a blowout victory for HRC, I will be absolutely thrilled to have been completely wrong in my analysis.

As it stands now, I think it will be close, and that Hillary will eke out a narrow win.

[JTFrog]

162. In the meantime just spread a little FUD.

Gotcha.

It's gonna be a fucking landslide. Your narrative is deplorable.

[oberliner]

168. Or try to engage in a discussion about the election

Since this is a discussion board.

We could all just post "Hillary will win in a landslide" and everyone can respond with "+1" but that would not make for an especially thought-provoking forum.

[JTFrog]

173. Or push ridiculous conspiracies that insult our candidate and say the deplorables are all that.

Somehow you think you are the voice of reason and educated guesses in the room. I don't think you want to know what thoughts you are provoking at this point. But I bet you can make another educated guess.

[oberliner]

177. There is no conspiracy nor has there been any insult of HRC

Nor any claim that Trump's team is "all that".

Hillary is one of the most qualified people ever to run for the office and, as I have said up and down this thread, she is leaps and bounds more qualified, smart, compassionate, and prepared than Trump to the point of any such comparison being laughable.

Hillary is fantastic. Trump is awful. Trump's people are deplorable.

Not sure I can say that any more clearly.

With that being said, I think the MSM wants a close race. I think they will be looking for any "improvement" from Trump in the second debate so that they can push that narrative to keep things close. I think even the dumbest, most deplorable political operative could see the value in feeding that narrative.

[JTFrog]

188. "Trump tanked the debate on purpose"......

You are saying that it was his and his deplorables double secret super plan to pretend to be an idiot. A conspiracy theory that he is just trying to trick or fool people into thinking he is a complete moron so he can look marginally better next debate.

No one here is ever going to buy what you are selling. You say you are trying to predict what the media will say, but you've been trying to make the argument yourself. You actually believe it.

The reality is that he got his ass kicked and smeared across the stage. The reality is Hillary showed the world what a fucking idiot he really is. DT is a fucking moron who showed his true deplorable dumbass self and will show his dumbass every single opportunity he gets. The other deplorables are not going to save him.

[oberliner]

195. Meaning - he went into it with a casual attitude

He is a moron. That is not an act.

But if you look at his pre-Conway rallies - he sounds like a complete buffoon who talks about his hotels and steaks.

If you look at his post-Conway rallies - he spews right-wing talking points that he appears to have not even read previously.

Something did change in how he approached those rallies. He went from mocking HRC for using a teleprompter, to using one himself. This came from his campaign team, and the "Never Trump" people on the RW side started to come around shortly thereafter.

Here is my belief:

Trump wanted to "wing it" in the debate. His people didn't push back on this because they figured that if he did a crappy job, he would be able to "show improvement" in the next one and that the MSM would go for that story.

That seems like a very basic strategy, which Conway and friends would be capable of.

It is my view that HRC will win every debate. But the MSM wants it to be close. So they will find some reason to say Trump improved. And that will keep the horse race going, which is what they want.

[jberryhill]

180. It doesn't matter

90 minutes is too long for him to control himself.

[oberliner]

181. Have you ever seen the full Reagan v Mondale second debate?

Reagan gets off his famous line about Mondale's age early on and then Mondale proceeds to destroy him for the remainder of the debate, but all anyone talked about afterwards was Reagan's quip.

[jberryhill]

202. Yes, I watched it as it happened

Reagan was an accomplished performer with a sense of timing, delivery, and more importantly the self discipline to utilize those senses.

[oberliner]

206. He was terrible

His timing and delivery were awful.

Watch his closing remarks - the last five minutes - again.

[jberryhill]

226. His timing and delivery was better than Trump's

The thing is... Trump's debate performance was slightly - slightly - toned down from his performances in the GOP primary debates.

But the juvenile behavior is what did him in. The GOP primary based LIKED that behavior. The general electorate not so much.

My impression of the debate was that if someone liked Trump going in, it didn't change their mind. If someone liked Hillary going in, that sentiment was probably solidified. But among the "I haven't been paying attention and let's have a look at these candidates" viewers, I'd like to think that most found his behavior off-putting.

But what those people found off-putting is really core to his personality, and that's not going to change by adjusting a dial somewhere in his head.

[Whiskeytide]

219. It's the same phenomenon today...

... anyone who understood what Reagan was trying to talk about recognized that he was full of shit substantively. He looked bad and Mondale ate his lunch.

But unfortunately 54% of viewers didn't understand what he was trying to talk about any more than he did. To them, his timing and delivery - I.e. his "acting" -looked very presidential.

We don't need to make the same mistake with Trump. DUers are generally much better informed than the electorate, and it seems inconceivable to us that anyone could watch Trump in that debate and conclude anything other than he is a blathering, orange-tinted bafoon.

But a lot of viewers don't get that. I don't think anyone other than his most rabid fans think he won - but many think he did ok, held his own, scored some points, etc...

We need to keep up the effort. The republican political machine may be sputtering because of the Trump curveball their base gave them, but all those strategist didn't suddenly become imbiciles with Trump's nomination. They are working feverishly to put lipstick on him, and in today's sound byte news cycle, that could have an impact.

[Coyotl]

3. No, he was so attracted to Hillary, he couldn't focus.

Pervert.

Seriously, this says it all:

[center]Elaine Replogle ?@ElaineReplogle
Best post-debate meme I've seen. Good summary. #ClintonWon #Debates2016

[Madam45for2923]

98. Perfect visual!! love Trump face trying to look smart & serious!

Like he has "gravitas" What a joke!

[Trust Buster]

4. I disagree. Trump's campaign have had him sequestered on FOX and tied to a TelePrompTer at

his rallies for the last month for a reason. In 90 minutes the man undid all the work his campaign has done in the last month. Sorry, that WAS NOT the plan.

[oberliner]

38. Right

But I am thinking they will intervene and get him better prepared with talking points and such so that his second debate performance will look like an improvement and that's what the pundits will talk about.

[Madam45for2923]

101. He's 70 years old! Long time being TRUMP! Really hard for him to learn anything.

When he tries to do Trump differently he looks sedated & creepy and it doesn't last, & especially now with HRC who will make sure to push his million buttons!

[oberliner]

105. Good point

Though sedated Trump seems to go over well with a lot of folks for some reason.

[Madam45for2923]

117. You are forgetting HRC! ~in the equation! She now has experienced the TRUMP in a debate!

She does her homework! She prepared for all the Trumps. Now she also knows the limitations of his mental capacities.

TRUMP might get better! HRC too! and she is good! She gave a hard time & was a challenge to Obama in 26 debates! Obama a brilliant and charming person.

The world does not revolve around Trump.

[oberliner]

120. Yes, we all can see that here

The question is how the media frames it and how the general public responds.

HRC is great. She is smarter than Trump. She knows infinitely more about the issues than Trump. She is more compassionate than Trump. She is more qualified than Trump in every respect by leaps and bounds.

And yet, here we are with a close race.

[Madam45for2923]

124. Okee

[oberliner]

129. Why do you think Hillary is not ahead by 10+ points in every state?

Trump is a monumentally awful candidate and HRC is one of the most qualified people ever to run for the office.

Why are we not looking at a 40+ state landslide?

[Madam45for2923]

130. okee

[oberliner]

133. I don't know what that response means

I'm assuming it means you don't want to talk to me about this anymore. If so, I will respect that.

If it means something else, please clarify.

[Agnosticsherbet]

5. No his ego got in the way. He is a legand in his own mind, you see.

Trump did not practice because his ego would not him llow to consider that a women could kick his ass.

[oberliner]

37. But his team might force him to practice for the next one

Conway and company got him to change from talking off the cuff at rallies to reading off teleprompters.

[Agnosticsherbet]

215. He doesn't stick to telepromoters, and can't in a debate.

Clinton has barely scratched the surface of the shit in Trump's past.

[oberliner]

223. I am interested in seeing how it plays out

Hopefully HRC wipes the floor with him and that will be that.

[JI7]

6. BS

[JustAnotherGen]

59. Times 1000

He sucks at debating when he has to actually answer a question posed - and not just let out one of his shrill nagging screams at a someone.

[JCanete]

7. hmmm, that implies that he could have done well in the debate, which I highly doubt. nt

[MH1]

8. I don't think it was intentional. But I think the pundits will do that anyway,

if he is even barely noticeably better in the second debate.

[oberliner]

36. Yes, thank you

Even if he didn't do this intentionally, I agree with you about how the media will approach the second debate.

[Avalux]

9. Nope. He couldn't do it, most of what we witnessed wasn't an act.

The first 30 minutes or so were on script then the crazy came out. It's kind of an insult to Hillary to assume he controlled the debate.

[oberliner]

35. Not an act, but maybe just not taking it too seriously

He will prepare differently for the second one, under Conway and company's guidance, and the media narrative will be all about how much he improved.

[leftynyc]

76. You're assuming he wont do something

monumentally stupid in the second debate. I wouldn't take that bet with a gun to my head.

[oberliner]

92. That is certainly quite possible

And maybe even likely. But the question is what the media will identify as the narrative and how it gets framed.

As you know, Trump says at least a dozen monumentally stupid things every day. It's almost too many - to the point that it is hard for any one of the comments to get any traction with the wider community.

[leftynyc]

95. I also disagree with you on

how good Conway is. Yes, she got him on the teleprompter but just look at yesterday. Whining about microphones and insulting the moderator he was praising the night before, doubling down on Ms. Universe - how could she possibly think either of those things are the way a President should behave?

[oberliner]

106. She's not great

But considering what she is working with, I think she has done some things well. She is certainly better than the "Says Who?" guy.

[leftynyc]

113. LOL - wow, that's

what I call damning with faint praise. It has gotten to the point where (other than the debate), I hadn't listened to donnie's voice in about a month. Can't stand him, can't stand his children, can't stand his surrogates. I didn't want Romney and certainly didn't want McCain as President - but I never was disgusted by either one of them. I'm disgusted by anything trump.

[oberliner]

115. We all despise Trump here

But, for some reason, tens of millions of Americans do not.

Why do you think Hillary isn't ahead by 10+ points in every state?

[leftynyc]

121. The media

The harping on things that have been investigated to death (Benghazi and emails) and giving donnie a pass on his crooked, vile foundation, his tax returns, his mob ties, his repulsive misogyny. Their desperation for ratings and a horse race has made their coverage magical balance fairy bullshit.

[oberliner]

126. Exactly

That is my point.

The media wants it to be close.

Trump having a bad first debate and an "improved" second debate helps feed that narrative.

[leftynyc]

142. But your assumption is that

he has it in him to BE better in the second debate. The media needs something to work with and I'm not convinced he can give them that. Not with 100 million people watching. The people I'm talking to think he's going to throw the kitchen sink at her - that it's going to get even uglier and the rest of the campaign will be run from the gutter. I don't think that will help him find voters that aren't already voting for him.

[oberliner]

157. True

It might not be in him. He might be incapable of even a mediocre performance.

But if his people are able to feed him one good zinger - that could be all the MSM decides to talk about.

[leftynyc]

171. Hillary will have zingers also

Remember, conservatives aren't funny so most of their "zingers" are insults and hurtful. All the best comedians are liberals - they can slice you up with a smile - that's all Hillary has to do. While I think the media has carried him this far, I don't think they can get him over the finish line.

[oberliner]

176. Yes, indeed

Well, here's hoping that things continue to trend in her direction.

[Blue Idaho]

10. Nope...

He really is that shallow and that dim witted.

[Dem2]

11. Well, he can't do that

but it's one of the many things we can discuss the day after

[CajunBlazer]

12. You're giving him WAY to much credit - are you into conspiricy theories?

Donald Trump's ego wouldn't allow him to do that.

Anyone could see he was flustered. Body language experts point to his constant sniffles and and water drinking was evidence of high anxiety and tension. He was shouting that he had a great demeanor.

And if that was the plan, it was a stupid one. Not one candidate who was winning in the polls after the first debate has lost the Presidency.

[oberliner]

34. I give the credit to Conway and company

They managed to get him to go from giving rallies where he talked off the top of his head, went to states that didn't matter, and mocked HRC for using a teleprompter, to going only to battleground states, talking from a prepared speech, and using a teleprompter exclusively.

In the Reagan-Mondale election, Reagan was awful in the first debate and people were starting to have doubts about him winning. Then he turned it around in the second debate with one quip (even though he wasn't great apart from that) and that was all it took to change the narrative.

[Demsrule86]

64. Really?

I think Conway is a crappy campaign manager. I don't think Donald will be able debate properly no matter what he does.

[oberliner]

65. Well it goes without saying that his entire team is creepy

But they have had an impact - and it has helped him.

If you watch his rallies in the pre-Conway days and contrast them with the post-Conway ones, they are very different from one another.

[Grammy23]

13. Losing on purpose is not something tRump would ever do. Winning is everything to him.

What we need to keep in mind is that this man is suffering from a personality disorder. It is true that, to our knowledge, he has never been officially diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder, but if you run down the symptom list, you can check every box. And there is no need to check every box to meet the criteria.

To expect him to perform normally is unrealistic. He is simply not capable of keeping up a normal fascade for 90 minutes. In addition, you know Hillary was trained to look for opportunities to go after his vulnerable issues. It is a well known fact that he can't stand to be questioned about his wealth or business acumen. So she managed to aim for those areas and hit the target. He began to crumble at that point and by the end it was clear who choked. But it was totally predictable. Look how he behaves in front of his adoring fans, vs being on the debate stage where he was not the adored entertainer. His personality disorder betrayed him and there is NOTHING he can do about that. Things won't get better next time. He will bring the same old guy he's always been....only next time it could be worse because she has bested him one time. She knows how to bait him and he simply can't resist the temptation to hit back. Hide and watch....it will be a real pleasure to see him get smacked around again.

[oberliner]

33. That's true

But he does employ odd strategies that may appear to be losses in order to win the longer game. Like going bankrupt, which he spins as part of a winning strategy.

I hope you are right and he does even more poorly the next time around. I think Kelly and the crew will get on him and he will be better prepared with talking points and will stick to them more.

It seems like it is setting up for the media narrative to be amazed at how much better he is in the second debate.

But who knows.

[grossproffit]

14. Yeah, he faked his sniffing and shortness of breath too.

What the fuck is this bullshit.

[oberliner]

32. Let's see how the media reactions to debate #2

I predict the story will be how much he improved over debate #1.

[ochem]

15. no

but i understand how youve let trump live inside your head. it gets better.

[Thinkingabout]

17. Actually Trump attended Trump University on learning what to do during a presidential campaign.

He is now an expert debater, just did not bring his best with him last night.

[AgadorSparticus]

18. No. He was truly flustered last night. She got him but good!

[oberliner]

31. You may be right

But even so, I predict that he will do better next time and the media will gush over how much he improved.

[AgadorSparticus]

230. You are probably right on that. He couldn't do much worse.

[Sandersdemocrat2020]

19. Skipping Future Debates

Trump supporter Rudy Giuliani has suggested that Trump skip the next two debates. Clearly, Trump got beaten so badly that Giuliani fears exposing Trump to another beating by Hillary. The Emperor has no clothes.

[oberliner]

30. I hope he does

This debate was awful for him. It would be great for HRC is he never debated again and this one left the only lasting impression.

[Frank Cannon]

20. I think not.

If he just wanted to look merely incompetent, he succeeded in the first hour. But he got worse as the evening progressed, until finally he was completely off the rails.

[oberliner]

28. Maybe so

But I predict the narrative after the next debate will be how much better he did compared to this one.

[athena]

21. Are you a Trump supporter?

Or are you just a total pessimist?

All I see coming from you with respect to Hillary is negativity.

If you're just a pessimist, please try to relax. Hillary's got this. She knows Donald's game way better than you -- even better than Donald himself.

[oberliner]

27. A Trump supporter?

What an odd response.

There is no negativity in this post directed at Hillary. She did an outstanding job.

Trump did poorly and everyone is saying so.

The narrative for the next debate will be how much he has improved.

[alcibiades_mystery]

22. Oh good God

Will you stop it.

Embarrassing.

[KittyWampus]

23. It's the sort of OP that seems designed to get reactions.

IMO

[alcibiades_mystery]

24. It's very sad to see the fall into this state

Long history and much respect. A shocking descent.

[oberliner]

29. Aren't all OP's designed to get reactions?

What's the point of posting something that you don't want people to respond to and discuss?

My belief having watched this cycle and others is that the narrative from the media after the next debate will be all about how much Trump has improved over this one.

[oberliner]

26. I don't understand this response

I just got to thinking that of past debates and how a frequent narrative has been how much the person who did poorly in the first debate improved in the second one.

[alcibiades_mystery]

83. I'm not engaging with you any more this cycle

I find your posts to be dishonest, and it makes me very sad.

[obamanut2012]

87. +1

[oberliner]

103. I always thought a discussion board was about discussing things

Not just writing +1.

If everyone agrees on every single thing, then what is the point?

[oberliner]

102. That is unfortunate

I always have appreciated your responses, and I enjoy having smart discussions with those who disagree with me on some points. It helps me to reflect on my own perceptions and at times re-evaluate them.

[alcibiades_mystery]

185. I'm fine with disagreement

But I only discuss things with people who are acting in good faith.

[oberliner]

192. I promise that I am acting in good faith

And I acknowledge that I could be wrong about things (and have been in the past).

I am a devoted member of Team Hillary and have been working assiduously for her campaign. I go back to the Bill Clinton days when I went door to door in Elyria, Ohio doing Get Out the Vote work.

When I am among like-minded HRC supporters, I feel comfortable engaging in discussions about looking at how the election is playing out, trying to see what Trump's strategy is, and taking note of the way the MSM covers the election.

[Demsrule86]

66. Seriously your post could make one think you are

for Trump. We have a great debate and you say ...Hillary did not win but Trump lost it deliberately...what does that say about Hillary?

[oberliner]

108. Hillary won the debate and will win every debate

She is smarter and more competent than him in every respect.

My hypothesis is that Trump didn't really prep for the first one and his team let him do it this way.

For the second one, they will force him to do more work and will arm him with more effective one liners.

Then he will have another bad debate but it won't be as bad (or it will contain one good line).

Then the media, which wants it to be close, will talk about how much he improved.

[Demsrule86]

136. I think Trump is quite lazy intellectually.

He is a Sarah Palin kind of candidate...word salad or smart ass quips ...nothing in between.

[oberliner]

140. Agreed

But in his teleprompter speeches he has lines written for him by others that are relatively coherent (though still deplorable in terms of their content).

[obamanut2012]

86. Not surprised

Which is sad.

[DetlefK]

41. Tanking on purpose is a very dangerous election-tactic. Giulinai tried that and failed.

"Hey, remember how bad I was last time? Today I'm not gonna be THAT bad."

Rudy Giuliani tried something similar in the 2008 republican primaries. He held back for the first two primaries and wanted to come back swinging for the THIRD primary. Except that by that time he had lost all momentum and media-attention.

[oberliner]

42. I was thinking more about Reagan-Mondale

Reagan gave a universally terrible debate performance the first time.

Then he has one good line in the second one, and that was all it took.

[Funtatlaguy]

43. Orrrr....he tanked it because he doesn't want to win.

He's scared he's now close enuf again in the polls, that he thinks victory is possible.
He just wants all the attention and to lose very closely (where he can claim cheating).

[oberliner]

45. I used to think that he didn't want to win

He sure doesn't seem like he actually wants to do the job of being president.

But these days it seems like he wants to win, for his own narcissistic reasons.

[Demsrule86]

67. Hillary beat him like a drum.

I would appreciate some credit for our brilliant candidate.

[Funtatlaguy]

82. Oh, she absolutely did.

On both style and substance she was outstanding.
But, the media had all spun this on this debate being a referendum on Trump.
I was only referring to his performance which was baffling to me.
Why he was so hostile and rude when he had been warned by his staff not to makes me wonder if he really wants the job and all of the hard work it would mean.

Either way, she earned a bump in the polls and I sure hope it comes next week.

[CincyDem]

44. All depends on how you define the game.

Might have been said down thread but it strikes me that Trump likely sees the debates as a means to an end.

Given the polarization between these two, it's likely that 85% of the people are locked and loaded.

For me personally, it's hard for me to imagine what I could learn between now and November that would cause me to say...hey, wtf - let's vote Trump. Just not happening on this planet.

And for every me, there's a Trump supporter with the same mindset about his/her candidate. While I disagree (vehemently) with their choice, that's why we have elections.

I wonder if they're playing a timing game on when those 15% are going to engage. Right now they're either Johnson, Stein, or truly undecided. They're going to peel off at some point and be ready to "go get some data" on the big two.

I had a conversation with my son's room mate. He's voting for Stein (I know, wtf ???) because HRC and DJT are "the same"...they both lie. He said he might reconsider as we get closer. When I asked how he was going to reconsider differentiating these two candidates that are the same he said I guess I have to start paying attention to the news. He wasn't intending to watch Monday's debate and I haven't followed up.

My point is - the group that's going to make the decision in this one...the 15% not playing between the big two today...there's a big group of the NOT engaged yet. We think 7 weeks and panic. They think 7 weeks and say...I got 6 weeks and 6 days to decide.

Looking at their strategy - I think it's valid to at least consider the possibility they're playing money and message to target the late breakers at the time when they are breaking. Marketing 101: message the consumer when and where they're ready to make a decision.

[oberliner]

46. Great points

Thank you for sharing them!

The Trump supporters are not going anywhere no matter what he says or does. He made the point that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose any support - hyperbole though that may be, it's not far from the truth.

Your marketing points are spot on - timing is critical.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

47. One more thing to consider

His ego loves "running" for President. He would hate being President.

[oberliner]

48. Yes, agreed

He wants to win the election and then not actually have to do the work.

Although, I think his ego would love the idea of him being the leader of the free world.

[joshcryer]

49. He will do even worse in the next debate.

[oberliner]

50. I don't think so

And even if he does, he will have one good line and that will be the focus from the post-debate media.

Like Reagan's quip about Mondale's age back in the day.

[joshcryer]

53. The second debate is a town hall.

Hillary has done a lot of these type of those, arguably more than Trump. Trump will struggle to answer the types of local questions that they bring about. Clinton will be able to name drop local businesses, local community organizers, and get right to the core of the issues.

Trump will be forced to resort to his pointless stump, and he will come off as ingeniune.

[oberliner]

54. Maybe the third one then

Which would be even worse, timing-wise.

Two bad debates and a strong finish would play well in the media who want this to be a horse race.

[joshcryer]

68. The third one is his only chance.

But, and this is the big one, he will have to actually sit down and learn policy, and actually be able to explain the policy in clear detail. Clinton is going to go to that thing so prepped with policy application that it's going to be kind of ridiculous. The first one she almost ran the clock out with her long drawn out explanations but by the third she's going to have to adopt Trump's more down to earth style.

Fortunately, things like Climate change and social issues will dominate that debate (the first one was economy and foreign policy, the last one will be about domestic issues). Clinton will have a free pass on that one simply by virtue of the topics that will be discussed.

[oberliner]

72. George W Bush was never really able to explain policy in clear detail

I'm not sure that it would be necessary for Trump to do so either - as long as he had the broad strokes and repeated his talking points without veering off into saying the things he actually wants to say.

Not that the media is spinning the concept that HRC was "too prepared" or that she seemed smug and condescending. Many in the MSM are looking for a way to equalize things so that the race is close and people will keep watching their shows.

Trump will be given a few sentences on climate change and social issues, but more importantly for the masses, he just needs a zinger or two that people find amusing and/or effective.

[joshcryer]

89. He pulled out all the potential zingers in the first debate.

Really, he hit the email, he hit foreign policy flubs, he even somehow tried to pull the Superpredator Gambit. It all fell flat, it went absolutely no where. Shit, the guy tried to pull the DNC/DSW/Sanders got tricked thing. It was all a mishmash of patheticness.

All Clinton has to do is point out that Trump's VAT idea is ludicrous and he'll stumble over himself once more.

[oberliner]

104. Maybe so

I have a feeling that his team will prep him with something new for the next one. It may or may not land. Hopefully it will be another disaster and he will fall off in the polls. It seems, though, that it behooves the MSM to try to keep this race close so that people will watch their shows.

[Funtatlaguy]

85. This is much more her alley.

She will be much better at walking the stage and approaching questioners.
Trump hates people....so....
Plus, it will be so hard for him to be quiet and remain seated when she has the floor and the audience may boo him if he starts with his interrupting.

[joshcryer]

88. It'll also show a side of Clinton people suppress.

She spent well over 95% of her campaign in small roundtables and local groupings. People come away from those events thinking she cares, they see a side of her that the mass media doesn't exhbit. Emails, Benghazi, calculating, evil, shrew, etc, etc. In real life she's a human being and she's actually really nice to work with.

The Clinton mythology will be completely rewritten on that Town Hall. People will come away shocked with how approachable she is. And it'll have a good 80+ million viewers.

[underpants]

51. I'd say, not on purpose but by nature

That's really who he is. From being a dolt to being an asshole. Head to tail....or in his case, vice versa.

[oberliner]

52. But will his team fix things for the next debate?

I think they will and he will do slightly better and the media will run with the narrative of how improved he was.

[underpants]

55. A. He doesn't have a team B. No he is pretty horrible at everything he does

C. If the media were close to being competent there would be no contest right now. In fact, Trump would have been ignored after his first campaign appearance (with paid actors filling in as the audience).

[oberliner]

56. He has a team. Kelly Conway, et al, have transformed his rallies

He used to talk off the top of his head until Kelly and company took over. From that point on, every rally involved prepared speeches with teleprompters - something he previously mocked HRC for doing.

The media is not competent - they want a horse race so more people will watch their yammering so they can sell more ads.

[underpants]

57. Yeah Kellyanne and Steve Bannon are looking like real geniuses after Monday night

[oberliner]

62. They sure aren't looking that way now

That's sort of my point - let's see how they are perceived in a couple of weeks.

[Demsrule86]

69. Really?

At one of his 'rallies' (Herr Trump), a 70-year-old woman was beaten. I see the same old scum there, and they behave badly too...He doubled down on his Miss Universe attack. And I can tell you woman are outraged by this sort of behavior. Also, it was during the Kelly run, that Trump totally botched the birther issue crap and the stop and frisk crap. I still say Trump will lose and badly. I don't credit him or his dime-store campaign which can't even get a ground game up and running with improving Trump's chances which in my opinion are zero.

[oberliner]

73. Yes

Watch a pre-Conway rally. He talks off the top of his head. Post-Conway, he reads off a teleprompter. It is night and day.

Obviously, we on this board are repulsed by him regardless, but my point is that the media and the people that want to like him (Republican elites, etc.) were able to get on board with him when he switched over to being Teleprompter Trump who repeated the crap they wanted to hear.

[JustAnotherGen]

58. He's going to suck

In the second and third debates too.

He's not capable of 12th dimensional chess. He's shown us who he is all of this time - and we need to believe him. We also need to believe he doesn't have the skill sets of 'thinking on his feet', memorizing statistics/data/dates/facts, and tempering his speech and body language.

[oberliner]

63. From our perspective, he will

I am talking about what the media spin will be.

Remember, we on this board want HRC to win in a landslide.

The media wants it to be a nail-biter to the end (and would probably prefer Trump as the winner, ratings-wise).

Yes, he will suck in the next two debates. But he might suck a little less - and that's all it will take to spin the narrative into a story of how much he improved.

They did that when he switched from talking off the top of his head to reading teleprompter speeches at his rallies.

[Demsrule86]

71. If he has a bad debate, the media can't help him.

Basically, they wanted to do that this time, but he did so badly, they could not help him in any way. Next time will be worse for him. Again, Hillary won the debate period... she did not win by default as this post implies.

[oberliner]

74. Yes, they can

They can say it wasn't a bad debate. They can focus on one good line. They can frame it however they want.

Watch the Reagan-Mondale second debate, 1984. Mondale destroyed him again. But all anyone talked about was Reagan's one quip about Mondale's age.

[Historic NY]

70. New memo Donald will be pivoting again....

[oberliner]

75. Watch the media

They will say how much better he came across in the second debate than the first one.

They want it to be close. That helps their ratings.

[JTFrog]

81. Why watch the media? We'll just wait for your brilliant analysis.

Sounds like you're already in the tank for him next debate. If that sounds harsh, maybe re-read your thread and your audience.

[oberliner]

100. Because that is what I am trying to predict

And my analysis will either prove to be correct or prove to be incorrect based on the media reaction.

The point I am making is that the media wants this to be a close race for obvious reasons - and it is now set up for him to "improve" in the second debate from their perspective.

This is what happened with Reagan v Mondale, even though to my mind Mondale won both debates handily.

[stonecutter357]

78. No he is what we in Alabama call a dumbass.

[oberliner]

146. Why is most of Alabama voting for him?

Along with most neighboring states.

[stonecutter357]

184. why is most of Alabama voting for him?

Racist and RWNJ's...

[oberliner]

191. How sad

Alabama is predominated by such people?

[obamanut2012]

84. lolz

No.

[oberliner]

147. Or he just didn't prep very hard?

And will prep more for the next one and then the media will spin the "improved" narrative to keep things close?

[GulfCoast66]

90. Oh please...

That is just nuts. The first debate is the most important one. Future ones may change some opinions on the edge but the first one sets the narrative.

America saw the real Trump.

[oberliner]

148. Isn't the last debate the most important one?

Since it is closest to Election Day?

[GulfCoast66]

166. First one

Is normally the most watched. But after the Trump shitshow more may watch the following just for the entertainment value.

[Madam45for2923]

96. Trump went on SNL - he's not good at "acting" What you see is what you get!

[oberliner]

149. But he is sometimes more prepared than others

I am not saying he pretended to be stupid for this debate. I am saying maybe he took it lightly and will take the second one more seriously. And that will be able to feed into a narrative that could work for him in the MSM.

[book_worm]

97. Oh, so it had nothing to do with that thin skinned orangutan being baited by HRC?

maybe if it was a man it would have been different.

[oberliner]

150. That had a lot to do with it

But maybe he will approach #2 differently and was going loose into the first one. Maybe his team will work with him more and then re-frame things into a "comeback" narrative.

[brooklynite]

109. Sometime the simple answer is the correct one...

...sometimes the stupid candidate is the stupid one...

[oberliner]

151. He is stupid

But he may come across as slightly less stupid for debate #2 and then the MSM can talk about how improved he was.

[brooklynite]

175. I think he goes the other way...

...He tried sober and "restrained" on Monday; now he'll go for the gut punch.

[oberliner]

179. Interesting

You may be right, but I bet the Conway team is advising him to go the other way.

[brooklynite]

187. But now it appears she's not actually advising him...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141583054

[oberliner]

190. That article does not say that she's not advising him

Just quotes a few unnamed sources saying that others have greater influence.

It is certainly clear that there has been a shift in the way he conducts his rallies that began when she joined the campaign.

[longship]

139. And he is going to drop out any day now!

As has been argued for months here on DU!

Hint. He ain't gonna drop out. Nor will he drop out of the debates. He's in too deep to give up. EGO!!!!

[oberliner]

152. I used to think that

I still can't believe this is real.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

143. All these years, who knew you had a sense of humor. nt

[oberliner]

153. Hopefully we can all have a good laugh after HRC wins the election

Until then, I remain anxious.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

194. But that's not what I'm talking about. I've never underestimated

the electorate's ignorance nor the capacity for Democrats to fuck this up north the gross negligence and superficiality of the media.

What I'm talking about is the laughable assertion this man is either as clever as to think of something like that. Or that he would take someone's advice to come across as a deranged uninformed buffoon on purpose. He's also not stupid enough to purposefully make himself look that much worse on purpose on the most watched debate of the year. He does understand TV and ratings. Sometimes what you see is what you get.

[oberliner]

198. Good points

The man himself is not clever enough, but what about his campaign team?

Couldn't it have played out this way:

Trump: I am going to wing it this first debate and not really do any prep work.

Team: Fine.

Trump bombs the debate since he is a moron.

Team: OK, now you need to let us give you lines to say and prepare you more.

Trump: Fine.

So from the start, the team was OK with him tanking the first debate because it would help them to build the "comeback" or "improved" narrative for the next one.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

209. Hey, you wanna cling to that? Knock yourself out. It doesn't make it

any less laughable. Nothing was done "on purpose". He didn't prepare because he doesn't think he has to. Which is the way he's always been. Even the morons he's surrounded himself with understood the importance of him "shining through" to capitalize on the recent poll tightening. Not a single one of them very cool with him shooting himself in the dick.

[oberliner]

210. No, I don't want to cling to it

In fact, I am starting to doubt my initial thought based on the reasoned responses of my fellow DU-ers.

I think the team will try to spin a narrative of "improvement" for the next one, but it probably was not the plan from the outset for him to bomb so badly in the first one.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

212. Of course they will spin it that way. The same way almost all of us expect the

corporate press to chug it up. But what you typed was that it was "tanked on purpose". Did you not? At this point I don't know why you keep pretending people are arguing with you about something else.

[oberliner]

214. You are right

I edited the initial post and will back off that argument.

[Drunken Irishman]

144. If that's his strategy, it's a really dumb one and his campaign is run by morons.

So, maybe you're right...

The first debate is always the most important. It's the most watched and generally the most talked about. A bounce back performance doesn't generally help a candidate who shat the bed in the first debate.

Case in point: 2012. Obama had a really bad first debate. He did much better in the second debate. That second debate performance might have stopped the bleeding of his poor first debate, and everyone universally said he had improved, but it didn't change the dynamics of the race like the first debate.

If Trump takes a polling hit after Monday night, a strong second debate, at best, only stops the bleeding - it won't net him any new votes. However, had he come out strong Monday, been calm, answered questions, shown respect, looked presidential, he possibly could have done much better and gained votes instead of losing 'em.

If this is his strategy, his campaign is really fucking dumb because it's a really dumb strategy.

[oberliner]

154. Do you remember that Mondale vs Reagan debates?

Here's what I wrote about them upthread:

Mondale thoroughly destroyed him in the first debate and everyone knew it. Every story in the press reflected that fact and Reagan dropped in the polls and people started to think that he might lose.

Mondale also destroyed Reagan in the second debate, but Reagan had one good quip about Mondale's age.

This was all anyone talked about - disregarding the actual content of what they debated, and talking about what a "winning line" that one sentence was.

That is the kind of thing that even Trump is capable of doing (having one good line - written for him by someone else).

[Drunken Irishman]

197. It's a dumb strategy. A really dumb strategy.

Like the dumbest strategy you can get - to purposely bomb the most viewed debate in American history so that you might be able to improve your standing during a second debate where less people will be watching.

Obama mopped the floor with Romney in the second debate, maybe having his best debate performance ever, and the best it did was stop the bleeding from his absolute terrible first debate. It didn't gain him any new votes - plus, HE WAS LEADING.

Prior to the first debate, Obama held a +4 point lead among voters over Romney. A week after the debate, Romney was +.7, meaning Obama lost a margin of 4.7 points in a WEEK over his poor debate performance. Obama never again regained that 4 point edge in the average of polls, though ended up eventually winning by about that margin in November.

Had he done well in that first debate, as well as he did in the second and third debates, he would have probably won that election by a wider margin. Instead, he gave Romney an opening to climb back into it - and he did. Because of that, 2012 was closer than it maybe should have been.

Almost the exact same thing happened in 2004 for Bush and Kerry. Bush bombed the first debate, Kerry erased a seven-point deficit in the polls seemingly overnight, and made it the horse race it would remain, despite stronger debates by Bush and Cheney.

The big difference here is that Trump was losing prior to the debate and now runs the risk of even losing more votes. IF the trend continues of poor poll numbers, even including Mondale in '84, Trump's deficit will grow, which means he'll have to gain a far larger net amount of votes after the second debate - which is generally not likely. In 2012, and 2004, more relevant elections than 1984, Obama and Bush only managed to gain a portion of the support they had lost after the second debate. If that's the same for Trump, he's still in the negative.

No. The smartest prep would have been to come out calmly, look presidential, get in some zingers, but otherwise handle the debate like, you know, a debate. The expectations were SO LOW for Trump that he would have won Monday had he just done that - and potentially took control of the race. Instead, in front of the largest audience in debate history, he shat all over the stage. It doesn't matter what he does in the next two debates. He royally mucked up that first debate and that will be the lasting impression of this election.

[oberliner]

200. Well said

I can't really argue with what you've written here.

[MADem]

225. LOL-thank you for my Laugh of the Day!!!

I must say, there's no one as articulate as an Irishman in full voice:

The expectations were SO LOW for Trump that he would have won Monday had he just done that - and potentially took control of the race. Instead, in front of the largest audience in debate history, he shat all over the stage.

[bullwinkle428]

145. Trump's default position is BEING A DICK. Why can't people understand this?

"Oh...NOW he's going to pivot and become PRESIDENTIAL!!!1!"

[oberliner]

155. And yet, here we are with a close race

I think it behooves us to try to understand why it is not Hillary ahead by ten in every state.

[bullwinkle428]

169. Sad evidence that many in this country have a tendency to be attracted

to "dick-ish-ness".

[oberliner]

170. Indeed

What this says about tens of millions of Americans is really depressing.

[Hoyt]

156. The old grinch on the 700 Club just said, "God bless Trump, but he has got to prepare for the

next debate."

BTW: Not my type program, but I turned TV on this morning and one of the morning talk shows was showing the clip. It was funny watching that old guy try to avoid saying Trump was awful, but you could see it in his face.

[oberliner]

167. Yes, exactly

They want to be able to say that he did better in the second one.

[bigtree]

158. you're making the case that this inveterate liar and simpleton can win a debate?

...I mean, repeatedly on this thread.

I'm just gobsmacked at the effort. WTF is this?

[oberliner]

163. No I have not

He can't win a debate. I have repeatedly said in this thread that Hillary will win every debate. That she is better than him by leaps and bounds in every respect.

I am saying, he could have a better debate than he did the first time, and the media could spin it as an improvement and could focus on maybe one good "zinger" that was written for him and delivered at some point in the debate, because they want it to be close.

This is what happened with Reagan v Mondale in 1984.

[bigtree]

193. most mainstream media sources are done with Trump

...he's openly trashed them at every opportunity and they're chomping at the bit to prove him wrong and unsuccessful - like almost everyone who has a modicum of self-respect.

When was the last time you saw so many major news sources flat out calling a candidate a liar? That's no small feat for Trump. He's been asking for this from the press and he's getting it full-blast. Who really wants to be known for propping this moron up, in any way? You really would be clinging to the last strand of toilet paper looking to clean-up his shitshow.

Glad to hear you're not holding out any chance that he'll best Hillary in any way, shape, or form in these debates. No one can spin away what is essentially classic Trump. His lies and half-truths worked just fine in the republican primary, with like-minded conservative audiences and pundits. On the national stage, in this major venue, however, Trump was revealed to be a pathetic moron. That's not going to change.

[Adrahil]

160. You are way overthinking this...

Trump has no where NEAR the self-discipline it would take to pull that off.

[oberliner]

164. Possibly

But did you notice how he went from giving rallies where he just talked off the top of his head, to ones where he spoke completely off a teleprompter? It was a complete transformation of how he approached those things.

[Adrahil]

174. That was not him. That was Conway.

Conway knows that when he's left to talk on his own, he goes off the rails. They can get him to use a Teleprompter (badly), but he can't use a teleprompter at a debate, and his natural inner asshole comes right on out.

No. No way this is part of some big plan.

[oberliner]

178. Exactly my point

Conway took over and got him to do what she wanted him to do.

You might be right that this is not part of some big plan, but I think that the media does want to be able to keep the horse race going and will look for any "improvement" from Trump in debate #2. Conway will give him advice in that general direction. He might be incapable of taking it, but he has listened to her in the past.

[LisaM]

161. But he thinks he did well.

Last edited Wed Sep 28, 2016, 01:23 PM - Edit history (1)

Apparently he thinks he's done well in all his debates.

[oberliner]

165. He always thinks that

But I cannot imagine that his inner circle agrees.

[bullwinkle428]

172. In addition, Trump was quite praiseworthy of Lester Holt in the immediate

aftermath. Then, once he found out what a complete clown and joke he was perceived as by much of the country, he totally pivoted and claimed that Lester Holt was absolutely horrible.

[oberliner]

182. Yes, that was amusing

He didn't realize what his talking points were supposed to be and was, as you say, speaking quite well of Holt at first.

[wishstar]

183. His only 'strategic plan' is to hit her harder on insults next time which will backfire again

He will be even nastier seeking revenge, not just hitting hard on Benghazi, email crap but more personal insults

[Jade Fox]

186. He doesn't have that much self control IMO. nt

[yuiyoshida]

189. Trump Certainly did Tank the Debate...

Something Fishy going on!

[oberliner]

201. Fish Tank?

I think I get the play on words, but I'm not sure.

[yuiyoshida]

207. Yes....

Aquarium would make no sense at all

[Pisces]

203. Ha, No, he is not that talented.

[Doodley]

205. I always thought Trump was a master debater, but obviously that is difficult with small hands.

[oberliner]

208. Old jokes are the best jokes

Is there something funny to you about the word tromboner?

[longship]

211. Absolute rubbish!

And Drumpf is going to give up ANY DAY NOW!!!!

Only part of some people's game. Delusional.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

216. Reg. the edit: I will admit to being kind of a dick above

but this fucking election is driving me nuts. I need to step back and realize that whatever will happen happen. Regardless of how much I panic or yell at my computer. I'm beyond disgusted that half the electorate thinks "Sarah Palin with a dick in a cheap ass, over sized, shitty Chinese suit" is anywhere near qualified to hold that office.

[oberliner]

220. I've definitely learned to think things through a bit more before posting an OP

This election has been driving me nuts as well.

In particular, how some in the media seemed to be so "impressed" by the "new and improved" Trump when he started reading from teleprompters.

They seem to be so easily duped by such obviously choreographed BS moves by their campaign. For instance, when he visited Mexico, I heard a lot about how "presidential" he looked.

So I guess, it struck me that perhaps Trump's people were good with him having a poor first debate so that they can lead the media towards the "comeback" narrative that they so very much want to be able to promote to keep people watching.

But, in retrospect, it probably was not a deliberate calculation to have him do poorly in the debate, they will just take that fact and try to use it in the way described above.

[bigbrother05]

217. Think he'll be much more aggressive/abusive

He believes he was too "respectful" of her and still didn't get enough credit. Now he'll show them how a real debate should look and be gunning for her from the opening bell.

He'll be like a wounded bull, spitting blood and bile. Hope she comes in with a cape and sword to end this mercifully.

Also think Trump will be bolder in the 2nd debate with Martha Raddatz and Anderson Cooper because he perceives them differently than Lester Holt. Pretty certain given the format and his hubris, he'll challenge the moderators almost as much as HRC. That's likely to be a big mistake on his part.

[CJohnson_LS]

221. Interesting theory

I think I get your point. It does really feel like he intentionally underperformed, in order to get the standards for him lowered ever further for the 2nd and 3rd debates. On the other hand, considering how much of a dumbass Donald is, I don't think he's that clever.
I mean, it's pretty obvious that he can't handle 1 on 1 debates, especially with a seasoned debater like Hillary.

[lunamagica]

227. The second and third debates wont get record breaking audiences like this one did

This was his chance to show America he was "presidential". No way he's throw it away knowing he will never be seen by such a huge audience again