GOP Urges Trump to Accept Second Debate with Harris

[StandardIssue]

6 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

 

No need. It was impartial. For normal candidates answering questions normally. Not bringing up extreme issues and comments that begged to be fact checked. If he stuck to the odd exaggeration or an area that was difficult to fact check on the spot he would have been left unscathed by the moderators. But he is lazy, overconfident, and was held to account. 

Exactly, he went off the rails quite a few times and was fact checked on his outrageous claims. Immigrants eating pets? I mean what kind of rational candidate for any public office says this kind of crap?

[JCauto]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooo, only of benefit to her. If anyone in the US doesn't already know everything they need to about Trump they must have been living in a cave since 2016.

 

I thought it a mistake for Trump to play her game this time and more so about a future debate.

 

It's completely understandable why you support him. You also like to lie like a rug. 

"I thought is a mistake for Trump to play her game this time" is a lot different than...

 

"In other words, Harris has nothing worth saying, and is just going to copy Trump's policies. The debate is certainly going to be interesting, if she doesn't find some excuse to avoid it."

 

That was YOU on 16 August. You know there's a search function where you can search by author, right? So when you lie and obfuscate it's really easy to go and find the evidence.

 

It's like debating toddlers who don't realize that you also are a sentient being with ears and eyes and a memory that goes longer than a day.

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, StandardIssue said:

Exactly, he went off the rails quite a few times and was fact checked on his outrageous claims. Immigrants eating pets? I mean what kind of rational candidate for any public office says this kind of crap?

More to the point, what kind of rational thought goes through the heads of his supporters, both foreign and domestic, to leave them still believing he’s fit for the Presidency?

 

We know he’s not fit for the job, he just showed us precisely why.

 

So why is his clear cognitive decline not front and center of all discussions on him and his candidacy.

 

He’s a doddering rambling wreck.

 

 

[StandardIssue]

9 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

I'll let Victor Davis Hanson describe the debacle...

 

The Sept. 10th presidential debate went down as expected. Summed up, it was Sappy and the Blob pile on Grouchy.

The swarmy and evasive Vice President Kamala Harris preened, posed and proffered empty platitudes.

 

The ABC moderators proved they were predictably and shamelessly biased.

 

And an irate former President Donald Trump confirmed that he was too touchy and easily triggered.

 

https://dailycaller.com/2024/09/12/victor-davis-hanson-forgettable-warped-debate-donald-trump-kamala-harris-abc/

 

I started my own news media outlet too. It's called https://dailycrapper.com it completely unbiased and geared towards making America crap free again.

[impulse]

1 minute ago, StandardIssue said:

I started my own news media outlet too. It's called https://dailycrapper.com it completely unbiased and geared towards making America respected again.

 

Victor Davis Hanson is a famous (Stanford) historian, and not a fan of Trump.  Your credentials?

 

 

[placeholder]

39 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

There will not be another debate.

 

Trump would insist on impartial moderators this time and then Harris would not agree. 

 

That's it folks. Roll on November. 

 

 

Why would he care? He has declared very emphatically that he won.

[spidermike007]

57 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

One has to wonder what world of delusion Trump lives in, when he claims he won on Truth Social. Or is that just for his pitiable followers?

He is flailing. He is desperate. And he lives in an alternate reality, surrounded by sycophants. His fragile ego cannot accept the concept of failure and deceit. 

 

Get used to it Donnie. 

[JCauto]

7 minutes ago, StandardIssue said:

 

I started my own news media outlet too. It's called https://dailycrapper.com it completely unbiased and geared towards making America crap free again.

 

I'm sure you're going to be a big hit! Just a suggestion, you might start brushing up on those pesky grammar, spelling and punctuation rules if you're going big-time into publishing.

I love it when people say they're "unbiased". LOL.

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Why would he care? He has declared very emphatically that he won.

 

The margin of victory would have been more significant with impartial moderation.

 

3 v 1 is never easy. 

[StandardIssue]

9 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Victor Davis Hanson is a famous (Stanford) historian, and not a fan of Trump.  Your credentials?

 

 

I don't need someone to tell me what I saw and heard no matter what their so called credentials are. I can do my own research. My command of English and ability to comprehend it is above average as I am a professional technical writer.

 

So you require someone else's opinion to make up your mind about what you heard and saw?

[JonnyF]

13 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

So why is his clear cognitive decline not front and center of all discussions on him and his candidacy.

 

He’s a doddering rambling wreck.

 

Interesting how you claim to see this in Trump but never could in Biden .

[placeholder]

13 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Victor Davis Hanson is a famous (Stanford) historian, and not a fan of Trump.  Your credentials?

 

 

Maybe in your alternative reality. On this version of Planet Earth, not so much

 

Victor Davis Hanson: The Case For Trump

In a forthcoming book, Victor Davis Hanson advises people to take a historical perspective—and not the media narrative—in evaluating the activities and policy outcomes of the Trump Administration on key issues such as judicial appointments, energy, economic growth, jobs, and foreign policy.

https://www.hoover.org/research/victor-davis-hanson-case-trump

 

Donald Trump 'set for victory' in Presidential election against 'Communist' Kamala Harris - Victor Davis Hanson

Discussing the ABC debate on GBN America, historian Victor Davis Hanson claimed that the moderators "fact checked Trump four times" but "did not fact check Kamala once"...

However, Hanson claimed that if American voters re-listen to the debate, Trump "won" because he "zeroed in on three important issues".

Hanson explained: "One issue was that if she's such a candidate of change, why didn't she do anything when she was Vice President for three and a half years?

https://www.gbnews.com/politics/us/donald-trump-victory-us-presidential-election-kamala-harris

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

The margin of victory would have been more significant with impartial moderation.

 

3 v 1 is never easy. 

Sure. He won but it wasn't by a big enough margin. It is to laugh.

[impulse]

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Maybe in your alternative reality. On this version of Planet Earth, not so much

 

Victor Davis Hanson: The Case For Trump

In a forthcoming book, Victor Davis Hanson advises people to take a historical perspective—and not the media narrative—in evaluating the activities and policy outcomes of the Trump Administration on key issues such as judicial appointments, energy, economic growth, jobs, and foreign policy.

https://www.hoover.org/research/victor-davis-hanson-case-trump

 

Donald Trump 'set for victory' in Presidential election against 'Communist' Kamala Harris - Victor Davis Hanson

Discussing the ABC debate on GBN America, historian Victor Davis Hanson claimed that the moderators "fact checked Trump four times" but "did not fact check Kamala once"...

However, Hanson claimed that if American voters re-listen to the debate, Trump "won" because he "zeroed in on three important issues".

Hanson explained: "One issue was that if she's such a candidate of change, why didn't she do anything when she was Vice President for three and a half years?

https://www.gbnews.com/politics/us/donald-trump-victory-us-presidential-election-kamala-harris

 

From his editorial I linked:

 

And an irate former President Donald Trump confirmed that he was too touchy and easily triggered.

 

Does that sound like a Trump fan?

 

[Lacessit]

14 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Victor Davis Hanson is a famous (Stanford) historian, and not a fan of Trump.  Your credentials?

 

 

I sometimes have to marvel at the assumption everybody knows a certain academic. I have never heard of Hanson. Looked him up on Google.

 

Just like you have probably never heard of Geoffrey Blainey or Donald Horne.

 

The insularity and ignorance of Americans can be quite alarming. I've read books by John Steinbeck, Sinclair Lewis, Ernest Hemingway, Booth Tarkington, John D MacDonald. Some Americans don't even know who J.D. MacDonald is, and he is one of your greatest authors.

 

 

[impulse]

2 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I sometimes have to marvel at the assumption everybody knows a certain academic. I have never heard of Hanson. Looked him up on Google.

 

Just like you have probably never heard of Geoffrey Blainey or Donald Horne.

 

The insularity and ignorance of Americans can be quite alarming. I've read books by John Steinbeck, Sinclair Lewis, Ernest Hemingway, Booth Tarkington, John D MacDonald. Some Americans don't even know who J.D. MacDonald is, and he is one of your greatest authors.

 

It's not just Americans.  I get blasted every time I post this, but I've never encountered a group that's so proud to be ignorant. 

 

I freely admit that I am ignorant about more than 99% of the world.  (With ignorance being a description denoting lack of knowledge, and not an insult or pejorative)  I don't possess more than a fraction of a percent of the world's knowledge.  But I don't hold my nose and refuse to dig into information I don't agree with.  How else can I understand the other guy's arguments, no matter how stupid I may think they are?

 

[300sd]

Interesting the Chameleon doesn't do interviews when she is so good at debates!

[Lacessit]

12 minutes ago, 300sd said:

Interesting the Chameleon doesn't do interviews when she is so good at debates!

It's a different environment.

 

You have probably never heard of Andrew Denton. Perhaps the most incisive interviewer Australia has ever produced, he would astound the celebrities he interviewed with the depth of his research.

 

I'd love to watch him interview Trump or Harris. There would be no softballs.

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

No reason for Harris to agree.

What are you on about? It's her that wants another debate.

 

IMO she only wants it because she imagines she won the first one,

[stevenl]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

What are you on about? It's her that wants another debate.

 

IMO she only wants it because she imagines she won the first one,

She didn't imagine it, she won.
She said she wanted more. Doesn't mean she really wants more. Considering the poor performance from Trump it would make sense for her though to want more.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, impulse said:

It's not just Americans.  I get blasted every time I post this, but I've never encountered a group that's so proud to be ignorant. 

Perhaps they are so tied up with the man made climate nonsense, the gender nonsense, the social media nonsense and various other silliness that they have no time to read actual books.

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, stevenl said:

She didn't imagine it, she won.
She said she wanted more. Doesn't mean she really wants more. Considering the poor performance from Trump it would make sense for her though to want more.

She only won in the fevered imaginings of the Trump haters. IMO neither "won" as both were rubbish.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Interesting how you claim to see this in Trump but never could in Biden .

To remind you, I have frequently made the factual observation that Trump’s allegations of Biden’s cognitive decline, parroted by his supporters, both foreign and domestic, started in the immediate aftermath of Trump being rushed into the Walter Reid Memorial Hospital to be administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test.

 

I have been consistent in my view that Trump was engaging in accusation confession, and that while the reason it was deemed necessary for Trump to be rushed into hospital for that test has been kept from voters, the necessity would eventually reveal itself.

 

It revealed itself in the debate.

 

Trump is very clearly not fit for the Presidency, he does however do a very convincing impression of a confused and meaninglessly rambling old man.

 

Biden, lest you have forgotten, is not nor never was the Democratic Candidate for this 2024 Presidential Election.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

He is flailing. He is desperate. And he lives in an alternate reality, surrounded by sycophants. His fragile ego cannot accept the concept of failure and deceit. 

 

Get used to it Donnie. 

My my, you really are going to have a problem if he wins. Will you be one of the snowflakes crying on U Tube that I so enjoyed when he won before?

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Interesting how you claim to see this in Trump but never could in Biden .

+1

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, JCauto said:

 

It's completely understandable why you support him. You also like to lie like a rug. 

"I thought is a mistake for Trump to play her game this time" is a lot different than...

 

"In other words, Harris has nothing worth saying, and is just going to copy Trump's policies. The debate is certainly going to be interesting, if she doesn't find some excuse to avoid it."

 

That was YOU on 16 August. You know there's a search function where you can search by author, right? So when you lie and obfuscate it's really easy to go and find the evidence.

 

It's like debating toddlers who don't realize that you also are a sentient being with ears and eyes and a memory that goes longer than a day.

Given that you have joined the ranks of those with nothing to say on the topic, but think attacking other posters that you disagree with is clever, I'm going to vanish you from my sight where I don't have to read your off topic rants.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

From his editorial I linked:

 

And an irate former President Donald Trump confirmed that he was too touchy and easily triggered.

 

Does that sound like a Trump fan?

 

To me it sounds like realism setting in.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

7 hours ago, Social Media said:

However, not all Republicans are on board with the idea of another debate. “I wouldn’t ever debate again in a liberal setting. I don’t think it should be at CNN, I don’t think it needs to be at ABC. He’s done two of those,” said Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), suggesting that Fox News or another conservative outlet should host the next meeting. Fox News has already proposed three dates in October for a debate, which would likely be moderated by anchors Bret Baier and Martha McCallum.

 

More liberal lies and distortions - Trump has demanded that any extra debate be fair and unbiased.

Trump has had 2 debates moderated by liberal lefty media shrills - it is time for a right wing moderated debate.

At least then we will know that Harris will not get the questions in advance.

 

Fox News has proposed 3 dates in October - Harris has not accepted. 

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), co-chair of Vice President Harris’s presidential campaign, urged the Democratic nominee to accept Fox News’s invitation for a second debate against former President Trump.

 

[Patong2021]

2 hours ago, impulse said:

 

She didn't kick his ass.  They did.  It was a tag team effort.

 

 

No. Trump did it all on his own. Blaming  the moderators, who moderated is a cop out. Thy were not biased and despite claims to the contrary were not fact checking Trump.

[Chomper Higgot]

9 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

+1

A whole one.
 

Are you sure?