Friends, I would love to hear your take on the big debate tonight. The Dems are ecstatic, because their candidate, Kamala Harris, looked like a legitimate contender for the presidency. She had an answer for everything, and none of her answers were second-guessed by the moderators, for obvious reasons. Trump, on the other hand, was Trump: love him or hate him, but your evaluation probably wasn't changed by what transpired in the debate. My guess, for what it's worth, is that this debate won't alter the dynamics of the race all that much, and no part of it will prove tremendously memorable. Harris cleared a bar and her supporters will breathe a sigh of relief. Trump offered us what he always does: invective and self-congratulation. The real question is: who had the advantage going into the debate, and did the debate change those dynamics even slightly? What say YOU?
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I can't stomach watching that four flusher posture so I didn't watch. She's already a "legitimate" contender only in that she does have a real chance to win. I rely on your well grounded perceptions. If DJT is still DJT that's fine. I'm glad if he showed disdain for her because I'm certain she radiated characteristic Dem contempt for any who oppose them. On to Richmond!
ReplyDeleteRAY TO DR. WADDY AND JACK
ReplyDeleteThe only thing that really matters, is that Taylor Swift endorsed Harris after the debate.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I watched some of the highlights. From what I could see and hear together with the accounts I read, including yours, here are my thoughts: I don't think anyone who has about made up their mind already will change; her obnoxious mien, characterized by patronizing smirks and "put downs"reminiscent of Hillary's imperious manhating style, may well have hardened the resolve to vote in those who like DJT.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to imagine many independents have decided for whom to vote based on this encounter. How could one who considers voting for one of them, as obviously different as they are and representative of bitterly opposed sides in our polity, see any merit in the other?
She appears to have responded well to coaching and would make
a good subordinate and factotum for the Obamas. If she were actually to try to originate policy she would no doubt be "advised" to think again and remember Biden's fate.
Gads, to think that anyone shallow enough to vote according to Taylor Swift's preference would actually vote may be a reach.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: The DJT campaign had to have fully anticipated the apparently blatant bias of the ABC "moderators", so they must have seen some advantage for him in accepting this venue.
ReplyDeleteThere has been much comment to the effect that public disgust with left wing bias in the MSM is rapidly growing as the public realizes the contempt for them obvious in this patronizing and presumptuous deceit and betrayal of a once respected news profession. Perhaps DJT's campaign hopes the favoritism openly shown Harris will confirm this in people not yet persuaded of it.
The Dems are very much like the criminals they extol. Any gesture of accomodation (eg. voluntarily entering one of the leftist "Star Chambers" like ABC) is regarded by the left as puppyish squatting and wetting born of weakness and lack of resolve. Like criminals, they reflexively size people up to assess what brand of disingenuousness would work best in establishing a superior/subordinate relationship to their advantage. Cooperation is to them, as it is with a hard punching boxer, simply an opportunity to work inside and pound away.
@Ray
ReplyDeleteAllow me to opine on the good news regarding the Taylor Swift endorsement.
There are 410 Million NFL fans worldwide. Of which, only 2.5 Million align themselves with the Kansas City Chiefs. (less than.5%. To which I can totally relate)
The REST of the NFL Fans have had the strong urge to Chunder whenever the networks focus their cameras on her suite while watching her manufacture excitement for good things that happen surrounding Travis and his boys.
The VAST majority of her minions WON'T/DON'T vote and wouldn't know where to find a ballot or a voting booth. (I get it, you already know that)
Her endorsement is a Net Positive for Trump and more motivation for his base to get their asses out to vote.
There... now you know how Richie feels about T-Swizzle and her followers.
Her endorsement may be analogous to Pee Wee Herman endorsing Trump. (Don't give the Dems any ideas!)
My my! You surprise me, Jack. I figured you would watch your hero in action! It certainly was vintage Trump. No one but he could have put in such a performance. Kamala is a bit more of an enigma. She's smart -- that was made abundantly clear -- but possibly too smart for her own good, and too reliant on offense against Trump. Time will tell.
ReplyDeleteRay may be right that Taylor Swift carries more weight than ABC. In fact, I'm almost sure of it. Of course, that's a low bar.
Will others find Kamala's aggression and arrogance off-putting? Could be. A woman in politics has to walk a very fine line...
I'm not sure what would possess the Trump campaign to agree to a debate schedule that facilitated the ouster of the Dems' weakest possible candidate, and then to accept venues that put moderating into the hands of two of the most virulently anti-conservative networks around. If that's strategy, I call that strategy DUMB!!!
Richie, you may well be right that Hollyweird's love affair with Kamala, and the toadying she's getting from the MSM, will, in combination, cause a backlash. I imagine quite a few people already support Trump because it irks the powers-that-be. He's the forbidden fruit that Americans refuse to quit.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Speaking of Taylor Swift, I watched small parts of the "MTV Awards" last night. What mindless, insipid excess! We know we'll see it reprised at the Super Bowl and no doubt a dem inauguration parade would be as "inclusive" as to feature it.No wonder many other cultures fear the corrosive effect of any incursion of our popular culture. No doubt some of it is coming to some public libraries for story time if the far left American Library Association and its unapologetically radical President have their way. The better to school we provincials in "tolerance" of the intolerable, (at taxpayer's expense )yes!?
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: That's Kamala's America!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Imperious manhaters have to tone it down a bit I'd say. It may have sunk Hillary and it could do for Kamala. They are the ones who need to walk a fine line I think. Tulsi Gabbard was very assertive and courageous without resorting to reflexive excoriation of men and has garnered great respect for it. I think any woman who relies on her own merits and refrains from sneering at half the human race will be afforded a fair chance.
ReplyDeleteJack, it seems to me that Harris is quite cognizant of the need to strike an upbeat, optimistic tone, at least some of the time. Her ads, from what I've seen, are forward-looking and cheerful. She may have lost the plot a little with DJT in the room, of course, but I think she may be a much more skilled messenger than we bargained for.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Her staged public appearances are apparently largely free of her vicious biases. But as one who faced much manhater derision as a male librarian , I see in her body language, her patronizing tones of voice and her contemptuous smirks, in spontaneous settings like the debates or in interviews by obvious friends, that her comprehensive vindictiveness toward men simmers just below the surface.
ReplyDelete