Trump was very-expertly corn-holed by ABC last night. He fought the good fight and went down swinging but he could not beat the moderators plus Harris (who rarely answered any of the questions but was not reminded of the fact)
"But ERJ, WHY would ABC want to kick Trump in the gonads?"
Frankly, they would rather be kicking Governor DeSantis in the gonads but had to settle for Trump.
DeSantis brought Disney to heel over their repeated nonfeasance and extreme tolerance for pedophilia. Disney had been granted a charter to allow them to be self-policing...sort of like Epstein's Island. Yeah, self-policing didn't happen so much.
So DeSantis, working through the Florida Legislature retooled the sweetheart charter and made Disney more accountable to State of Florida statutes.
Assorted sting operations were also conducted those seem to have a chilling effect on the staff at Disney World.
So why am I talking about Disney? Because Disney owns ABC.
Ever since DeSantis started using them for a pinata, they have struggled to make money on their new productions. Costs bloated. Audiences have not been impressed. Of course, this is just my opinion.
They don't want to blame proud management, unwilling to recognize and correct mistakes. They want to blame conservatives, and yesterday, Trump was the target of choice. And ABC was the arm holding Disney's club.
That might prove short-sighted on Disney's and ABC's part. Time will tell.
Political Kabuki theater. Window dressing. The election this year was decided in 2020. The left can't afford to lose. They risk prison of they are removed from power. So they aren't going to allow Trump to win. They will do quite lit anything to insure that they don't lose. Anything....including taking the current conflicts not and using nukes. Nothing is off the table. Expect the cheating to be even more widespread and more blatant than 2020. And expect the GOP/political right to do what they did in 2020. Bitch and moan and then roll over and surrender.
ReplyDeleteI said that we need people stationed outside of the polling places for the late night "voting" and Lara (new head of RNC) has announced they will have 20K outside of many key counting places. Here's hoping it helps. Because the cheating will be in full force that night.
DeleteThey are paying for it but you will never hear it in media. Some day a buyer will come along and I will celebrate but it will continue on the same course
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Displaced_aggression
ReplyDeleteHe lost because didn't prepare or listen to advisors. Instead of issues, he runs on about people eating cats. He looked like an idiot because he is one.
He could have lost worse, much worse. He did not lose his temper.
DeleteKamala didn't seem to have to talk about the issues. She said "I have a plan..." multiple times but never gave any details. That is like saying "I have $500 trillion, give me an aircraft carrier and I will pay you on Tuesday". And the moderators never pressed her on that.
How would preparing or listening to advisors have helped with that? I am not trying to score points, here. I just want more concrete details on how you think more/different prep would have yielded a different outcome.
Fred in Texas, Hit them in the wallet. I told my wife that ABC is dead to us and if I see it on our tv the tv goes. Fox is dead to me and now ABC. Boycott, Boycott, BOYCOTT!!! And their advertisers also. write letters to the senior management. Send it by certified mail to their house explaining why they're dead to us. I am.
ReplyDeletePreparation would result in clear, concise answers and rebuttals which would fight his problem with flight of ideas. It would have kept him on point to contrast his accomplishments and their failures. His tendency to perseverate is off putting to the people he needs to carry the election.
ReplyDeleteEveryone I spoke with was upset that it seemed she got to him with her jabs. Preparation would have helped him avoid that. It also would have helped his demeanor on the stage. He needs to communicate effectively to the people on the fence.
No matter how good you think you are you can be better if you prepare.
Let's remember that carrying the election by 3-4 points in the battleground states is not enough. It has to be much more than that.
Thank-you for taking the time to comment. That was helpful.
DeleteTrump entered the debate without having a clear mission and it showed.
ReplyDeleteA certain number of people are already committed to vote for Trump, and will not be dissuaded; he does not need to enlist those people, they are already enlisted. All Trump has to do is not damage their level of confidence in him.
A certain number of people would never vote for Trump under any circumstances, and no matter how good his arguments or how impressive his debate performance it is extremely unlikely more than a very, very few would switch allegiance. These people will not be convinced their current choice is incorrect.
Remaining is the group of "not fully committed, aka "the so-called undecideds," those who have embraced neither alternative firmly. Addressing their concerns, and convincing them he is the proper choice, is Trump's Mission.
I'm not convinced he fully understands that, nor does his staff; if they did they could have gotten a committment from Trump to prepare more fully for a heavily biased debate. Had Trump largely - and very politely - ignored the efforts at restricting his answers, he would have turned in a much better performance. That process would be challenging because Trump is very used to being in a position of "The Director - we''ll build this property, so I'll hire the necessary technical personnel to do everything required and monitor their performance" - direction and management, in other words. That works as President, in fact is the essence of the job; getting to be President is, however, a completely different job with different job requirements and Trump has fewer skills to draw on for that task, which is why a staff to train him on it is necessary, as is his ability to learn well that skill set.
Looking, again, at the video, I'm not convinced the debate is a negative; given the blatantly obvious prejudice of the "moderators" I'd judge it, at worst, to be neutral or maybe even slightly positive.
That said, there is no excuse to not get the positive message out; Trump seems best suited to doing that in controlled venues, the falsehoods from the other side and the deliberately built-in bias of the debate environment.
I have not trusted a debate moderator since Candy Crowley. These two did what I expected them to do. Just my $.98(corrected for inflation).
ReplyDeleteStay safe