73
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 21 Feb 2024
73 points (85.4% liked)
politics
18870 readers
3730 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.
- 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.
- 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 fine by what metric? Because it's really not about cognitive abilities to debate. I just don't see a good reason to do it. It sounds like both a waste of Biden's time and a chance to give Trump ammo by ignoring ever crazy thing he says but putting every gaffe Biden makes into a supercut he plays at every rally.
Doing it would mainly call Trump's bluffs, and help put to rest the "handlers are hiding him from the public" line of attack.
And did fine by my personal opinion. If my memory serves, he mainly played to the calm in the face of Trump's crazy, and it worked well. Particularly with moderates.
His bluffs are never-ending and he can put that to rest by simply not hiding from the public. Just get out there and talk. He doesn't need to stand on a stage while Trump yells over him.
I disagree, I think showing the contrast directly is necessary in the face of modern media bubbling. Trump yelling over him does not hurt him.
Who doesn't already know the contrast?
Unfortunately, a fair number of people, most likely. People can have short memories with politics, and the presidential debates tend to draw a wide audience. On top of that, some people are simply new to the political world in the past 4 years, finally reaching voting age and such.
He's a veteran politician, spent decades in the Senate. There's probably few people on the planet that can handle yelling as smoothly as he can. He'll benefit from facing it down. People want strength and resilience in a president.
Did Hillary benefit from it?
No, but she had to battle sexism and subconscious biases. He's in a different situation.
Hilary probably should've gone for the nuts. It's not fair, but neither is politics.