Machiavellian said:
EricHiggin said:
I really wondered how he would answer it as well when asked. I was pretty sure he wouldn't flat out condemn white supremacists directly again, because no politician likes to condemn anything directly, not even Biden, like him walking the line with Antifa and simply condemning violence in general. Which would never be seen as an acceptable response from Trump himself by some. On top of that, Trumps already condemned them in the past, and even then the media either ignored or spun it, and yet they still continue to come after him for it. Trump knows darn well most people who think he's a racist won't change their minds no matter what he says or does to their approval. He also knows he's already tackled this question and that his base will spread that information to those open enough, who had a problem with his debate response.
While he could have just given a similar past response, that would be giving the media the go ahead to simply dig up everything Trumps ever been questioned about that's seen as negative, and ask him again. Trump want's to make sure he makes it clear it's unlikely that will be tolerated. Not only that, but Trump is a businessman, and in his typical world, time is money. In his Presidential world, wasting his time is wasting the people's time. If you're seemingly wasting his time by asking the same questions over and over, especially if he's given a more than acceptable response in the past, he's going to get irritated. When Trump get's irritated, he punches back or flat out acts like a dick to let you know you're wasting his time. It's obviously not the most politically correct way to deal with the situation, but neither is asking the same negative gotcha questions after you've been warned plenty of times by Trump in the past, and yet both continue.
People are going to see and hear what they want to see and hear, and both Trump and Biden know this for the most part. Both should have a pretty good idea of where they may potentially be able to sway people, and that's where they need to be extra strategic in what they say. On the other hand, times like when Trump was pointing out Biden was 'losing the left', was mostly useless because those individuals aren't so much voting for Biden, they're voting against Trump. Sure, that may have slightly helped to solidify his base but I doubt it weakened Biden's base at all. Same with going after Trump for white supremacy. His base will just get strengthened by the irritation and victimhood of this coming up again after Trump already legitimately covered it prior.
Hopefully the next debate is reasonably professional. I get the feeling it will be.
|
That move will not work. What I mean is that Trump isn't trying to convince his base or even get more votes from White Supremacy groups and so forth because he already have them. The President is looking to get the votes of the undecided and people who are neither Dem or GOP. In order to get them trying to play games with the media only benefits the media because not being able to answer that question in a concise way still makes him look bad. Those games are stupid now and using the same stragety as he did in 2016 will cost him the election. Neither candidate is trying to sway or should be doing anything to play to their base, they are not going anywhere. They both want those undecided voters and Trump use of words on this issue came across as bad. No body cares what you said in the past, they only care what you say now, when asked on national TV. All news outlets are going with that story and only conservative media isn't but he already have those people and the polls have him far behind. Really it was a very easy question for him to answer without worrying about any blowback. Trump could have called all those groups the devil and they would not change their vote because they are never going to vote for Biden anyway. He lost his chance on that point and he will be constantly hammered for it as well he should.
|
Unless those undecided aren't paying attention at all, in which case they may get a bad taste for Trump, they'll see it's something the media has brought up again though he's already clarified it. If you're someone who thinks the candidates need to constantly be asked the same thing over and over, then your just asking for poor results. The more questions you don't repeat when properly answered, the more questions you can get out, which is much more useful if you actually care about what the candidates are planning. If all you want are gotcha moments, then sure, ask, rinse, and repeat.
The way the question was asked was like how it was spun last time when he properly explained it. Anyone who takes any time at all will see it legitimately fits Trumps fake news narrative, and I'd bet Trumps people assume if you're not someone who's willing to be open and do a little research, you're the kind of person who will likely side with Biden anyway. People don't only care about what was said on national TV as you point out, that most of the media is running the supremacy story? Why? To further explain why it's a bad thing to those undecided voters. If those undecided voters only pay attention to that anyway, they were going to get spin from the media afterwards regardless. If they're not locked into the msm bubble, they'll see Trumps already gone against this and that the media is just after him for it again for no legitimate reason.
Trump has 3 debates, and he knows he doesn't need to cater to the undecided the entire time. He got away with the same thing with Hillary, though I do think he needs to perform better this time overall. It was also seen as though Hillary stomped Trump in the first debate, but by the last debate he clearly had made up for it. If he's doing what he did last time like I think he might, the next debate will be catered more to the undecided, and the final will be catered majority to the undecided. Trumps doing the checkbox thing and he got at least some of what he wanted in the first debate. He'll move on to the rest of the checklist for the rest of the debates unless he's not strategizing at all, which is quite unlikely. He's partially winging it as Trump does, which explains some of his poorer responses, but there looks to be an underlying strategy there. Whether there truly is or isn't, and whether it works or not by the end, we'll see.
Bofferbrauer2 said:
That's great, and really needed considering how last debate went.
I just fear MAGAs will cry foul and that they are (literally) getting silenced. But depending on how it goes, it might not be the case.
|
This can still work in Trumps favor if he wants it to, though I don't think he plans to be near as aggressive next time, but we'll see.
First, he can still be a loudmouth all he wants to try and rattle Biden, and this time, the people watching aren't really going to be able to hear it much but Biden sure will. I think this would actually irritate Biden more, because he'd still have Trump in his ear while the viewers wouldn't really be able to tell as easily as they would if the mics were always hot. If Biden screws up because he can't think straight due to Trump chirping him off mic, it won't be as evident to the viewers why, and even worse if he loses it going off on Trump again.
Second, if Trump by chance plans to be super aggressive again, he can simply use this to pose an ultimatum to the moderator. If they unfairly cut him off, you just ignore the next question and keep blasting Biden. Make it indirectly clear to the moderator that if you cut me off too early, you'll never get a direct answer from your posed questions to me. Make the moderator choose. They'll likely side with letting Trump fully respond so they can get direct answers to the questions they pose to him. If they don't, Trump can always be on the offensive.
Third, he can spin his answers more and skirt the line with white lies and try to force Biden to want to respond more or let it go. If Biden wants to clear everything up in constant responses, that helps Trump 'legitimately' get more responses. If Biden ignores them and moves on, it favors Trump.
Lastly, if he's cut off a lot, he can cry fowl and that will play to some people considering the media is always after him and now have gone to the degree of silencing him, assuming he's not being so aggressive that he's clearly asking for it. That'll depend a lot on the moderator themselves, so it could certainly vary.
I'd rather this not be the case, and don't think it will, but killing the mic's isn't exactly problem solved like some might think.
Last edited by EricHiggin - on 01 October 2020
PS1 - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.
PS2 - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.
PS3 - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.
PS4 - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.
PRO -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.
PS5 - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.
PRO -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.
Currently Online 
