SadKangaroo wrote on Sep 13^th, 2024 at 12:16pm:


Swing voters fear 'incompetent' Trump may be a 'vessel' for extremists: opinion editor


https://www.rawstory.com/trump-swing-voters/

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 14^th, 2024 at 12:08pm:


The only people who say Trump won the debate are those who are in his MAGA cult and suffer from delusions. Every genuine, serious poll shows Harris won that debate and that she won it convincingly.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Sep 14^th, 2024 at 12:59pm:


It will only be forgotten if Trump drops the racist cats and dogs claim.

If he keeps it going, it will keep the loss of the debate fresh in everyone minds.

Given he has nothing else in his campaign, certainly no policy, maybe a concept of a plan on healthcare, I don't see him dropping it as a talking point.

His base certainly won't.  The racists in his base are loving it and the feedback loop on Truth Social will mean he will think it's a winning move.

chimera wrote on Sep 14^th, 2024 at 1:16pm:


And don't you dare say you want Ukraine to win.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Sep 14^th, 2024 at 1:49pm:


I'm not so sure he'll drop it.

He's been challenged on it too many time, asking for proof, having reporters who don't normally push back doing just that on this topic and he keeps doubling down.

The only way he'll drop it is if he can do so without having to accept he was wrong or it was an unfounded claim.

But I'm sure his minders will find a way if it keeps heading towards being too toxic.

Will he do what he's told however?

At least there won't be a second debate where Harris can so easily bait him into ruining his minders plans.

In the context of a conventional debate, Harris was the clear victor. She adeptly got under Trump's skin, manipulating him into shedding his carefully curated facade of calmness, control, and statesmanship. This manoeuvre reduced him to his familiar "rally Trump" persona, characterised by erratic tirades and unsubstantiated claims.

However, debating Trump does not fit the mould of a "normal debate." Harris demonstrated her ability to confront the "strongman" image of Trump, indicating she is well-equipped for the global stage.

Yet, Trump achieved his own objective: galvanising his base and perpetuating the belief that he dominated Harris, a conviction they held even before the debate commenced.

When both participants accomplish their respective goals, declaring a definitive winner becomes complex. In a traditional sense, Harris triumphed over Trump. However, in the eyes of his supporters, Trump emerged victorious.

Which of these perspectives holds the most significance? That remains uncertain until the election's outcome is known.

Perhaps an alternative metric is required. Instead of focusing on what Trump's base anticipated or the conventional criteria of debate success, we might consider the willingness of each to engage in a subsequent debate.

In that light, Trump's apparent retreat suggests he was indeed outmatched and is now unwilling to risk a repeat performance, fearing the potential repercussions.

From this vantage point, one could reasonably argue that Harris was the true victor.

Does anyone else in Australia cram research for the United States elections like I do, in October?