360
Harris delivered a ‘masterclass’ debate. Will it change the race?
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
360 points (96.9% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2074 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Did she? I listened to the debate and she sounded mid for most of it. She spent more time attacking Trump than she did answering the questions she was asked.
Sure, she fared better than her predecessor, but "not shitting her pants" is a low bar. Trump was definitely worse than her, but again, if the bar is "don't act butthurt when your opponent says your rallies are boring", then congrats, I guess.
Reading comments from both sides, it seems that the left sees her not being geriatric as a win; and the right thinks that Trump was unjustly treated (targeted questions, live fact-checking, etc...), which is absurd considering that (a) they also asked Harris difficult questions (fracking and Israel, for example, which she did have a hard time answering), and (b) he was given free reign to talk out of order more times than I can count.
I think Harris "won" because Trump sucked. He sidestepped questions regarding an abortion ban ("I haven't talked with JD about it" fucking lol) and Ukraine ("Do you want Ukraine to win the war?" "I want the war stopped" TWICE in a row, followed by "I know Putin really well" and a rant about the awesomeness of Victor Orban); he repeatedly told lies (post-birth abortion and pets-eating immigrants being the highlight) which were promptly caught by the live fact-checker, and even showed weakness and undecisiveness ("do you have a plan?" "I have concepts of a plan").
But those are blunders that Trump committed, not something that Harris should take credit for. Nothing I heard screamed of "masterclass" debate, and I doubt that it will give her an edge in the upcoming elections or sway electors one way or the other. After all, the people who lived under four years of Trump's presidency and watched January 6th unfold live, and still call themselves "undecided" are pretty much lying to themselves at this point.
Enlightened centrist bullshit
Yes, that whole paragraph sounded like "She won" in an awful lot of frustrated and apologetic words
For fuck's sake, y'all should stop this "enlightened centrist" bullshit whenever someone is slightly critical of the leftist candidate.
Trump sucks. It's incredible that he's even allowed to be a candidate for presidency after the shit he's done. He's dangerous for the US and dangerous for the democracy of the entire world. If there's some justice left in the US system, he will lose the elections and he will pay for his crimes.
Not liking Harris' speech doesn't make me an "enlightened centrist". It just means that I don't think her words were strong enough, or bold enough, to win her new voters, which should be the point of the presidential debate. I think she won because Trump's ineptitude will bleed him some voters, but I'm not willing to credit that to Harris' speech skills.
I'm not sure what debate you watched, because her performance was not only good in comparison to Biden or Trump, on an absolute scale I'd probably still give it at least a B+. Your comment came off as just shitting all over Harris and trying to bring her down to Trump's level. Because that vibe was so strong, I didn't even read the whole comment. Which is on you, not me.
Have you considered stopping the enlightened centrist bullshit instead?
Kamala Harris is not a leftist.
This is sealioning
This is a leftist being extremely fucking mad that liberals are wrapping themselves in our colors and calling themselves "left" and "progressive" and shit.
Who is the leftist candidate and why are the Democrats fielding a back the blue prosecutor instead of them :(
I don't think it's generous to conclude that many of those blunders can in fact be credited to Harris deliberately striking his ego.
Those still undecided aren't going to change their vote because of actual policy. But some don't want to be associated with losers - and showing just how much of a loser Trump is might make them at least not vote for him.
That's a strategy.
Tell yourself if it's more important to make Trump look like an idiot or to say actual policy right now. We're all voting for Kamala we just need the idiots to not vote for Trump
Who on the left?
I think she actually attacked him less than she should have. Trump said he didn't know who the President is anymore. That seemed like a perfect opportunity to call out how much his age is affecting his judgement and clearly everyone else can tell you who the President is.
I hate to agree but I don't think you're wrong, and accept the down votes in advance. She did some things well though, the trolling on rallies was actually her sneakiest trick to rattle him. I think she could've performed better but maybe she learned some lessons for a second debate.
Overall I think there was a double standard on mic control, whenever he wanted to talk they let him. He even got to speak during fact checks, what the fuck is that? On the flip side, they didn't unmute her on rebuttals and he made a point to tell her to shut up if she spoke over him.
He is saying that she didn't win, he lost.
Which is a longer way of saying that she won, he is contradicting himself.