11.40pm According to (Spanish-language) Telemundo's viewers, Trump won the debate, beating Biden 66-34.
Hmm...
10.50pm One final thought on Chris Wallace: Why would you insert Amy Coney Barrett into a question on concerns about mail-in ballots?
This debate was a good example of something we touched on in today's show. The conversation, and the topics of conversation, are all framed in the left's terms: Trump is pressed on his taxes, but Biden gets a pass on his corruption. Trump is ordered to distance himself from the "Proud Boys", whom 90 per cent of Americans have never heard of, but Biden isn't asked about the Democrat mobs 90 per cent of Americans see on TV every night rampaging across Minneapolis, Atlanta, Rochester, Louisville...
10.41pm God, that was awful. Joe was woozy and meandering, but he didn't wet his knickers or drool on the stage, so the press will present it as a Biden triumph ...and a Trump flop that failed to do what he needed and change the "trajectory" of the race.
10.37pm Wallace isn't shy about rebuking Trump for interrupting. Why doesn't he tell Biden to stop saying "Here's the deal"?
10.35pm I'm afraid Wallace is turning into Candy Crowley.
10.30pm Accepting that the suburban moms don't like it, I'm not sure that Trump was obnoxious enough. Wallace became more and more of a lopsided arbiter as the evening proceeded, stepping in to rescue Biden from having to answer Trump's question about his corrupt crackhead of a son (a question that was far more sharply formulated than Wallace's) in order to talk about "climate change".
And the correct answer to the "climate change" question is that this is an indulgence that no serious power has time for after 2020 - except insofar as the warm-mongers' lack of forest management is destroying the American west and obliges Californians to ask themselves whether they wish to virtue-signal unto death.
10.25pm Biden: We can create millions of jobs by paying people to "weatherize" the homes of people who don't want their homes weatherized. Fewer and fewer people in America are engaged in primary wealth creation, but sure, this'll get us back to the world's leading economic superpower.
10.23pm Biden to the Brazilians: "Here's $20 billion. Stop tearing down the forest."
10.22pm This stupid deference to "climate change" which always rates Number Thirty-Seven on voters' list of concerns - and that was before the pandemic, China, lockdown and looting.
10.17pm Wallace: "I'd like to talk about climate change. The fires raging across the west..."
You've just taken a side, Mister Moderator.
10.15pm There's fifteen minutes to go. Why can't Wallace ask Biden whether he'll pack the court? That would be the biggest change to America's institutional norms in a century. Okay, asking about Hunter, okay, that would make Chris feel a bit icky. But why not a straight-up question on court-packing?
And why, if Trump has to be asked directly about white supremacists and Charlottesville, does Biden not get a question about antifa/#BLM and Minneapolis/Portland/Rochester/Your City Here?
10.10pm When Chris Wallace tried to shut up Trump and said, "If you'd like to change places, sir," Trump should have called him on it, and said: "Sure."
10.05pm From Walt Trimmer in the comments:
Trump is losing the suburban female bloc. Trump should say less and force Ol' Joe to fill in the silence. But that's not going to happen.
That's the toughest thing for anybody on a stage to do. It requires enormous self-discipline. This is the point in the evening when Joe usually falls asleep, but if anything Trump seems to have kept him awake well after his bedtime. The Trump interruption-avalanche was designed to get Biden to say something idiotic or ugly in the first half-hour that would be the audience takeaway. Biden never quite fell into the trap.
10pm I get that Trump is struggling with key demographics - like "suburban women", who supposedly find him "obnoxious". Tonight is unlikely to change their minds on that. But the only alternative is Biden, and he's doing a very good impression of an old lame incontinent pooch wandering around in circles. You feel sorry for him maybe ...but enough to give him the country?
9.50pm "Just out of curiosity," says Trump, "why did the Mayor of Moscow's wife give Hunter three-and-a-half million dollars?" Wallace, affronted at a candidate who asks sharper questions than the moderator, rouses himself to object to Trump straying beyond the bounds of the format. The formats of these debates are bollocks, and I'm glad to see someone punching through them.
9.45pm Trump's answer on the $750 was not good. That year he'd paid millions of dollars to the IRS, and the IRS replied, "Thanks for that. By the way, there's still 750 bucks outstanding." It was an add-on, not his total tax liability. I know whereof I speak because the f**kers did the same thing to me not so long ago. It shouldn't be difficult to put that $750 number to bed.
9.40pm This is difficult to watch, because it's cringey-awful not fun-awful. But the core reality is that Trump is making Biden look like a guy who can't handle Trump. And in a normal political environment that would prove decisive: people don't vote for the beta-male, especially one who seems totally exhausted and is visibly trying to recall his lines and numbers. But these are not normal times, and the inability to conduct a normal presidential debate is a consequence of that.
9.22pm Biden: "Will you shut up, man?"
Trump: "The people understand, Joe."
9.20pm Okay, Biden's already wobbling on the tightrope. In the initial two-minute answer, Joe kinda sorta managed to half-remember the point he wanted to make. In the free-for-all, he's stumbling around and falling back on verbal props - "Look, here's the deal... Here's the deal... Here's the deal..."
Trump seems to grasp that he needs to land a knockout punch, and the best way to do that is to keep interrupting Biden because he's not nimble enough to respond. It risks looking rude, but that's what Biden did to Paul Ryan in 2012.
8.55pm EDT Is "live blogging" still a thing? In the Conrad Black case, I was the first guy to "live blog" a criminal trial, to the point where one of the defense counsel laughed out loud in court reading on his Blackberry my near contemporaneous mockery of the prosecution's closing argument. But blogging faded, and the last time we tried this was Election Night four years ago. Still, we'll give it a go - unless, as my old chums at The Spectator have it, the most anticipated showdown in decades turns out to be just the usual yawneroo. The tediously over-formatted debates preferred by American TV tend inevitably to go that way, and one notes that the choice of topics announced for tonight seems consciously to avoid many subjects that might sharpen the differences - such as immigration, which I hope, notwithstanding its formal exclusion, the President manages to bring up tonight.
For my part, I thought candidate Trump was far more effective in the primary debates (the Rosie O'Donnell answer, the putdowns of Jeb and Rand Paul) than in the face-offs with Hillary (aside from "You'd be in jail", a flash of the old primary Trump). So I'd like to see 2015 Trump on stage tonight. Here's how I put it almost five years ago:
Maybe Rove is right [about message discipline]. But as a practical matter it's led to the stilted robotic artificiality of the eternally on-message candidate - which is one of the things that normal people hate about politics. And Trump's messages are so clear that he doesn't have to 'stay on' them. People get them instantly: On Thursday he did a little bit of audience participation. 'Who's going to pay for the wall?' And everyone yelled back, 'Mexico!' He may appear to be totally undisciplined, yet everyone's got the message.
An apparently undisciplined guy who nevertheless puts over his message brilliantly: that's the most effective Trump.
As for Joe Biden staying "on message", I would be surprised. But the whole Dementia Joe thing is so baked in by now that the "Come on, mans" and the quartermasters-in-the-ladies'-department rabbit-holes may be regarded as charming and endearing. Alternatively, as I posited the other day, it may just be the most ingenious head-fake in political history, and a sharp, focused, ruthlessly forensic Biden will slice and dice Trump in the first five minutes. We shall see.
Mark Steyn Club members are welcome to give their take in the comments below.
~We opened The Mark Steyn Club over three years ago, and I'm thrilled by all those SteynOnline supporters across the globe - from Fargo to Fiji, Vancouver to Vanuatu, Surrey to the Solomon Islands - who've signed up to be a part of it. My only regret is that we didn't launch it seventeen years ago, but better late than never. You can find more information about the Club here - and, if you've a pal who might be partial to this sort of thing, don't forget our special Gift Membership.
Oh, and if you're seriously chafing under the lockdown and looting, there's no better way to cock a snook at the lockdown than by booking a berth on our Third Annual Steyn Cruise sailing the Med next year - and with Conrad Black, Michele Bachmann, John O'Sullivan and Douglas Murray among our shipmates. We'll be attempting some seaboard versions of The Mark Steyn Show, Tales for Our Time, our Sunday Poem and other favorite features. If you're minded to give it a go, don't leave it too late: as with most travel and accommodations, the price is more favorable the earlier you book - and, if the lockdown ever does gets totally lifted, why use your newfound freedom of movement just to visit the county fair or see X-Men 47 at the multiplex when you can bestride the world like a cruising colossus?
I'll be back tomorrow night for more considered debate analysis with Tucker. Hope you'll tune in.
Comment on this item (members only)
Submission of reader comments is restricted to Mark Steyn Club members only. If you are not yet a member, please click here to join. If you are already a member, please log in here:
Member Login
88 Member Comments
It is disconcerting and irritating to me, the reality we saw on display last night once again, which is that Trump cannot articulate the arguments against Antifa, BLM, climate change and "racial sensitivity training" as well as any of us in this here Club very well could.
I've seen comments on here all night last and this morning, people from all over the globe who can make an incisive, trenchant, biting case against the Left. Most of the time with a droll wit of which Mr. Steyn is king.
He needs somebody (or team) to coach him on this stuff, apparently. And Chris Christie and half-crazy Rudy are not making the cut. When I heard he was prepping with those fellas, honestly I got a bit nervous. I think America is ready for a more heady, erudite case against the Left. And all ya had to do was look calmer and more Presidential than Joe. Exercise sone self control, some discipline. He couldn't do it.
Listen to how smart and articulate conservatives formulate their arguments against leftist insanity and take some notes, Mr. President. Otherwise your next two performances are going to be just like this one- as you say, sir- "Sad!"
Walt Trimmer nailed it. 20 seconds in, Trump had answered and sounded fine. He just should have stopped talking. He could have done that all night, ceding all his extra time to let Joe really ramble away.
"That's the toughest thing for anybody on a stage to do. It requires enormous self-discipline."
Mark at his droll best.
If Trump could demonstrate even half a normal level of decorum he'd be 10 points ahead. Instead he remains his own worst promoter. He squanders what could have been a sure thing. It's Hillary-esque.
Spot on
My only question is have you all by now seen the shots of the wire on Joe...hopefully Tucker will show this tonight...FB and Twitter are working like mad to take it down..
You could say Biden won by not being the most confused participant in this thing. That was Chris Wallace. But, Trump was not the most egotistical either, that was also Chris Wallace.
This whole issue of bias by moderator could be made to go away by simply eliminating moderators and replacing them with a chess clock. Each participant gets the same amount of time 'on mic' (say, 40 minutes). When a debater has used his time, his microphone goes dead. I doubt Lincoln and Douglas had moderators.
Brilliant idea! It'll neva happen.
Donald Trump had to deal with two people who hate him and one of them wasn't running for president and failed being "invisible" and made it known which side he was on. Trump could've addressed some things but Biden would've told him to shut up and the "moderator" would let him or the "moderator" would passive aggressively fact check him with a followup question.
Climate change is being treated like cancer awareness in that "it's real" but no one can provide the evidence that fossil fuels burned in Minneapolis can prevent rain clouds from being blown towards California or Australia. If climate change was a thing then why are the forests in China still there and not burned down along with the rest of the rain forests in Asia?
Too bad President didn't whack the CC question out of the ballpark with one word: Solyndra. Remember Solyndra, Joe? How much money did Obama make off of that renewable lead pipe investment? How many hundreds of millions of dollars did the American taxpayer lose? Make Joe answer that one. There are a lot of first time voters that may have been in high school when that fiasco went down.
Do you think anyone will be brave enough to point out that the result of the Telemundo poll suggests that this is the preferred level of political discourse in Latin American culture?
It's called caudilloism -- strong man rule. It came along for the ride North.
How much longer do comments take when [ if ever] the Steyn commune can't agree ?
Fan club not club.
There was a special on the Disaster Channel, "Greatest Train Wrecks", so I couldn't watch the debate. What'd I miss?
Trump thrives in chaos; tumult (one of Rush's favorite words) is the stream in which he swims. I can't imagine Biden keeping his head above water for long. And while in the water, he'd lose himself in fascination with his leg hairs.
Speaking of water, I'm afraid I'm doubtful for the next debate as well. The Forensic Channel has a two-hour special, "Drowning Autopsies", that sounds like must-see TV. Popcorn worthy, for sure.
Was the Tay Bridge included?
We streamed Monday night's episode of Dancing with the Stars - it was Disney Night - followed by a couple of episodes of Harrow, an Australian series starring Ioan Gruffudd as a not-by-the-book forensic pathologist, who uncovers the truth about "perfect crime" murders. So far, I have avoided watching the news to catch the highlights - although lowlights would probably be a better word - of Trump versus the dreaded Wallace-Biden tag team. But M. Steyn's brief chronological post mortem suffices.
Very depressing
Fox was supposed to be Trumps "home venue" even though from the moment Wallace was announced as moderator it was clear from 4,000 miles away that the President would be double-teamed.
Sadly the next two debates will be worse and for the very small number of genuine undecided voters the over-riding impression will be the most recent one. Both the British bookmakers and the betting exchanges (hard cash can be a better indicator than mere opinions) now show Biden with around a 60% chance of winning.
I won $470 on the Donald winning from friends, family and colleagues last time round. Nobody's betting me this time, with one exception, which is a bit arcane with too many conditions.
This refusal has been going on all year.
I won $100 from a friend who said that Trump would resign if he was impeached. Interesting that your friends, family and collegues are not so ready with their money this year. I hope it bodes well for Trump. Biden and the radical left would be a disaster. I really think the country would never be the same again.
You're right, Lisa, you wouldn't want to go down this road in your country or state if you help it. You would never come back from a one-party majority if the radical Left gets Biden over the finish line. Take a close look at the quality of life with a one-party majority at the state level. California is the state most discussed but consider New Mexico, a classic case of a state that has largely one-party governance. It's education ranking (next to last) and violent crime against women (highest in the country) are two depressing indicators of that one-party downward trajectory. Albuquerque has a crime rate three times the other major US cities. We have an abundant natural resource industry that contributes heavily to the New Mexico budget and yet the Democrats want to get to 50% renewables by 2030. The Democrat Governor who developed a lust for heavy- handed and arbitrary diktats just now announced that we're not to expect any reopenings. We may have had the fewest Covid deaths in the country per capita. This is not a governance but a rule.
There's a difference between being forceful and being rude. Neither candidate performed well in this regard.
SS said earlier that Mr. Wallace appeared to come to Mr. Biden's rescue with some of his lefty talking point questions. I hadn't thought of that, because I was so charged up about the President's missed opportunities. On Charlottesville, I think he should have said, "Really, Chris, you should have watched the entire video; you would have seen that I condemned the neo-Nazis and white supremicists." On climate change: "No credible scientist denies climate change -- so what melted the Ice Age 10,000 years ago? It wasn't Republicans driving SUVs. I assume you had some science in 8th grade -- you know plants use carbon dioxide and water to make food and oxygen. CO-two isn't a pollutant, it's the feedstock for food for all life on earth. There's good scientific evidence that the concentration of CO-two in the atmosphere has been 10 times (and more) what it is now." There are several others, including the one about his tax payments, where a simple declarative statement like the one proposed by our host would have knocked Mr. Biden and Mr. Wallace right off their talking points. I would have really enjoyed the few seconds of embarrassed silence.
About "changing the trajectory," I am sure more good would have been done by civility and politeness without losing the edge in answering the questions. Tactful forcefulness is better and more memorable than rudeness if you want someone to remember you favorably.
Good point. Which was worse, Wallace's bias and propping up of Biden, or Trump's missed opportunities? I thought it had to be the worst presidential debate I've ever seen. So much for all the hype.
Good points. If there is second debate, I hope his staff can convince to prepare a bit more. He can do well off the cuff. But more prep could have helped. This is a debate not a rally. And we must always think of the vaunted suburban women and some of their menfolk. A well delivered zinger can help. It has happened before.
I certainly share your preferences, J. One could fill a book with intelligent arguments not made in the debate. Wrong participants for those even to come into the question, I suggest.
We're all entertained by the horse which the Democrats have brought to the gallop. The Republicans have brought along a fairly interesting choice too. It's not going to be a contest for connoisseurs. It certainly hasn't shown the least sign of being one, anyway.
I responded to another commenter about the suburban women thing, but being one myself, I don't get it. Is this the equivalent of the 90's "soccer moms" who voted for Clinton? The Democrat party wasn't as scary or extreme back then. Today's suburban women are worried about the economy, which has already taken a huge hit because of COVID-19, real estate values and home prices, scarcity of products in stores (still) and/or inflated prices and whether they can get back to leading normal lives soon. And they are also concerned about the racial violence occurring in the cities spilling over into suburbia. I don't see how Biden allays any of these fears, nor the Dem platform on the issues, which we rarely even hear about. Would they not cast their vote for Trump just because he comes across as a bully at times? Maybe they realize you have to be combative to survive D.C. political intrigue and battle your enemies, which he's had to do for four years. Biden comes across as a puppet, and not his own man despite what he says, and you can easily see how once in office he would be pushed aside by the radical Left and militant activists that have taken over the Democrat party.
The Australian MSM seem disinclined to call a winner - which I'll interpret as meaning that Trump won well.
But I understand that Joe didn't soil himself onstage or start reciting old Jack Benny and Rochester routines, so the Dems will be relieved.
For once agree with Australian MSM ; there was no winner.
What a shambles ,caused by President Trump's constant interruptions.
Thought the moderator did a good job in impossible circumstances.
Good luck USA.
The first debate gave me some grating heebee jeebees. I wish President Trump lit up more at the awful accusations Biden made, delete the funny facial expressions, stay stoical and hit back hard with a verbal assault. Every opportunity. Joe showed what a bubble environment his basement has been, although I was surprised he didn't have a major gaff. (Hasn't Kamala told him yet it's going to be her administration?) I almost feel sorry for him. No, not really. He doesn't come across as too presidential. He had some nerve to tell President Trump to "shut up," calling him a liar a dozen times, and even called him "a clown." But that's what the leftists like to do, accuse you of what they do, what they themselves are. Did I hear that right when the men came on stage, Joe said, "Hey, man?" Not too polished for the big entrance.
You came in with high expectations, evidently, F. Does you credit, but sure to lead to disappointment. I came in expecting Beavis vs Butt-head, revealing what a dreadful person i am, but I had a grand old time. And I think that President Trump did well! Bonus points for me!
Beavis vs Butt-head, wow, S., that sort of nails it. What part did Wallace play? I think more like an inexperienced young frazzled mommy who has two little ornery rug rats she can't control and wants to hit the liquor cabinet at 10 am.
:-D !!!
Well that was sure chaotic. Trump was a fighter, much more animated with his facial expressions, better dressed. Biden was whimpy, that toothpaste ad grin was moronic, his black and white tie really bothered my eyes. I found Biden's outfit prim. Trump did score a hit when he asked Biden to name one law enforcement agency that supported him, and Biden seemed to look at the floor. Trump's tendency to repeat things work well in that instance.
There where 2 issues on which Trump is held despised by the Dems: Climate Change and Racism. He had a chance to redirect the debate. He didn't. When asked whether he believed the science of CC, he could have said that the science isn't settled and that what we read in the MSM is fake science. E.g., to say that C02 is a pollutant is NOT science, and those who believe that and keep saying it are scientifically illiterate. Many of the statements of the IPCC are totally misrepresented in the MSM, and statements to the effect that the world is going to end in 12 years are a) a pure fabrication (the IPCC never said that), b) they are alarmist propaganda for political purposes, and c) they are the excuse for insane proposals like the Green New Deal. Why didn't the Presidents' advisors prep him to say something like that? It would have taken less than his allotted 2 minutes to say it.
On the issue of rejecting Critical Race Theory, it would have been helpful for the President to flesh out his statement that it was racist. A theory that starts from the premise that ALL (and ONLY) white people are racist (whether they know it or not) is indeed racist. To say that because of "white supremacy" whites are the oppressors and everybody else is oppressed by them is a recipe for division, pitting groups against each other. Finishing on a positive note on race by invoking the words and approach of Martin Luther King would have shown what a disaster CRT is and what negative consequences it will have on society. Again all this can be said in less than 2 minutes.
Well put, BR. One of the worst missed opportunities for the President. He should have told Mr. Wallace: "Chris, by changing the name of Critical Race Theory to 'race sensitivity training' you have removed the virulent bias from it. When you put a group of white men in a room and tell them that because they are white they are racists, that statement in itself is the very definition of racism. Critical Race Theory is an attempt to guilt-shame people without presenting any evidence that their behavior has been in any way against the law or morally objectionable. That is unfair and dishonest, and that's why I put an end to it in my administration."
I enjoyed Mark's commentary, but it seemed a little more subdued than usual. I didn't see any news, so I doubt any minds were changed. But it's the first round, and first rounds only win the bout by KO, so more entertainment to come. I liked Joe's assertion that he's in charge of the party, not AOC and not his antifa shock troops. I doubt he believes that, nor that many others did. But it might lose him some of his more excitable followers. Like Mark, I hope Trump will learn to be more precise in his arguments against the climate pushers. The biggest issue for me is Joe has no plan, for anything, and didn't assert he does on any subject. Trump doesn't need a new plan, he's executing it now and will probably continue it. Joe is vulnerable on what, exactly, he would do about anything.
Biden Static/ Trump Dynamic; early poll Telemundo per hannity T 60- B 30
Yes.
Spot on, Mark!
I don't know if anybody takes these debates seriously. They've become fodder for SNL skits, although I don't think they're producing them this year, sadly. I didn't watch, but preferred to follow along with Mark's live blog (thanks, Mark!). Trump can be his own worst enemy. He wasn't well-prepared for Wallace's aggressively biased questions and hostile demeanor. It's unfortunate because a lot of American are looking to the President to speak for them - the ol' Silent Majority - and he just didn't do that tonight.
Very well put, AlyM. On the other hand, alluding to what SS says below, I wouldn't expect to have to defend myself against the "moderator." If that's what "moderator" actually means, every nuclear reactor in the world is going to turn into a blinding white fireball tonight.
Good points, Mark. My better half was put off a bit by Trump's performance, but she concedes he didn't fall into the Mitt Romney trap in his interactions with Candy Wallace.
Painful to watch. Trump could have the better of it if he had only let Old Joe dig his own grave and jump in, but noooo, Trump cannot help himself.
Much appreciated the boss-man's comments and yours, M., and would like to add my own view. It's at odds with yours, but is not meant to detract from the point which you have made. Please feel free to counter-rebut: I'd value more of your perspective.
Firstly, my impression of Ex-vice-president Biden's preferred style is the avuncular delivery of rehearsed sententiae larded with some memorised facts, and he has given it a great deal of play in communiqués from his cellar up to this point. It seemed important to me to shake him out of that, not least because he's quite good at it. Differently put, I'm not so sure that, sans pressure, he would have dug his own grave and jumped in. I'm open to correction, of course.
From my remove - admittedly a very distant remove, so my predictions should be liberally salted - President Trump appeared to make the start he needed to make, and to have got under way to a big win. Remember, the polling is largely telephonic, owing to the 'flu, and is certain to understate Republican support in the first place in view of the media revilement of the president. In the debate, the president got his opponent to lie, to change policy in mid-stream, to evade crucial issues, to make ungrounded character attacks and to fall back on filler-phrases, while doing none of the same things in any discernible extent. He came over as an emotive but sincere layman when his opponent gave the look and feel of a self-serving career politician. I don't suppose that President Trump won over any of Ex-vice-president Biden's support (That would be too much to hope for!), but he allowed Ex-vice-president Biden to do and say enough to bring the president's own support out and to give pause to his opponent's less fanatical support. He also didn't behave boorishly enough to provoke a strong "I'll never vote for that pig" response from people not absolutely determined to express such a response in any case, but will have reaffirmed his willingness to stand up for himself to the voters who value that sort of thing.
And it is in my opinion an excellent thing that Mr Wallace felt impelled to come increasingly to Ex-vice-president Biden's rescue. I don't think he'd have done that if the poor fellow had simply been digging his own grave, Being rescued is humiliating. I liked it very much. Thank you Mr Wallace.
Thanks for bearing with me. Fire away: I've said all I have to say. Except that I'm not normally what one might call a Trumpista.
Mark, you took the words right out of Rich Lowry's mouth. I just heard him on NBC saying Trump didn't change the trajectory of the debate.
This is one of those horrendous moments when you realize that the only thing stopping the impending rule by the enlightened denizens of Chopistan are the opinions formed by "low information" voters on the basis of this totally irrelevant exchange of personal attacks and discussions of non-existent issues. Why doesn't Chris Wallace ask about the wave of violence unleashed by the Democrats pour encouragez les autres after they had the temerity yo consider voting for Trump. Bring me a reactionary monarch I've had well enough of this absurd managerial state whose fortunes are governed by fatuous applause lines generated by gender questioning Harvard grads designed to manipulate the sensibilities of soccer moms who get their political cues from "Modern Family"...
It's not high-flying stuff, for sure, A. I think I'm okay with that because I didn't think either candidate was capable of high-flying stuff from the outset. I'm afraid that institutions like the MSC have to supply that and choose the candidate whose actual deeds might not stick too solidly in the craw. Defensive cynicism, if you will.
Thank you Mark for doing the work Americans just won't do anymore.
No question about mideast peace deals ?
I should have bet the over on Chris Wallace face time.
Fairly meaningless, so average results as these things go. Would guess that Trump's strategists are looking for a steady grind against Biden from now on going forward while setting a pace that the other side will have difficulty matching.
I wonder how Biden's answers sound to a Sanders progresssive; he was running against Sanders and AOC nearly as hard as he was against Trump, just like in his disingenuous platitude laden and flag draped convention speech that pivoted away from the rest of the convention.
I think Wallace is worse than Crawley. MUCH more obvious.
Wallace was awful, so biased. The questions were all lefty talking points and the constant badgering and interrupting of Trump was over the top.
This "debate" had "Trash Trump" written all over it. Even if Trump were to do what many thought he should do, Wallace would have shamed him like he did when he brought up the fact that "Your party agreed that you wouldn't interrupt Biden" and what not. Next debate, Tucker Carlson should be the moderator. No BS from Tucker.
Yes indeed, L. President Trump has sustained a really rather remarkable pretext: he manages to come over as a besieged outsider even when he shows every evidence of coming from a rather privileged part of the establishment and occupies the ultimate establishment position. His appeal relies on giving the impression of speaking like and for the common man in the face of obvious establishment efforts to silence him. The estimable Mr Wallace could not have played his part better if it had been scripted.
Well, perhaps it's a crazy point of view in the first place to suspect that an erudite, informative debate was never going to change many minds, and that dinging the sad clown from behind with the giant balloon mallet while he tries to get his hat back from the silly clown in the clown car will win sympathy for the poor old put-upon sad clown. I don't know. The world really has changed too quickly for the likes of me. Still, speaking of clowns, it gave me some pleasure to think that Mr Wallace seemed blissfully unaware that he could not have played his part better if it had been scripted, and probably went to bed pleased with a night's work well done.
"It's a rigged election."
Good point. Trump needed to be better prepared on that f&cking White Supremacy hooey.
Wish I'd looked here earlier. I've watched sporadically. Agree with Walt, Trump should not be constantly interrupting. Also, Wallace seems to be debating Trump, not moderating.
A disaster. If he could just channel 1/100th of Ronald Reagan...
Classic Reagan response.... "There you go again!". " Oh Joe....not another lie....there you go again... "
Ditto on the "cringey-awful".
It's SO awful it's amazing.
This debate reminds me of Mark Twain's quote, "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
It doesn't help that the moderator accepts Biden's ramblings as established fact.
I am getting so upset I had to switch channels to Gary Cooper in The Virginian (1929.) It's pretty relevant though, "When you call me that, smile." Later The Virginian will hang Trampas. I am hoping life imitates art.
OK man, once more into the breach!
When did Chris Wallace start working for CNN?
Trump is losing the suburban female bloc. Trump should say less and force Ol' Joe to fill in the silence.
But that's not going to happen.
I don't know which suburban female bloc you're referring to. The Facebook enthusiasts who are eager to show they're hip and progressive because they live in suburbia so they are all in on the BLM and climate change and they won't vote for Trump no matters how he does in the debates. Or the other suburban female voters who are scared sh*tless of BLM and the looting and violence because it might upset their insular world. They also hate the lockdown and not being able to go to the gym and having to wear masks that cover up those expensive Juviderm lip injections and they're mad the kids are distance-learning at home which means more work for them, not to mention cutting into their "me" time. They will vote for Trump no matter what comes out of his mouth.
You seem to know more about this demo than I do. I was referring to the women who say, "I just want to restore dignity to the White House." It only matters that Trump not lose this category too badly. The victory will be won or lost in the swing states by the working class White voters without college educations as in 2016. It will be about turnout.
I have said before in these comments that the real determinant will be voter fraud. As Mark puts it, winning beyond the margin of lawyer.
It's confusing because some states are totally mail-in ballots like mine (California) but maybe other states are going to have polls open? you're right about the demographic that will win it for Trump - "working class white voters without college educations" - but it's a sad observation nonetheless. Those are the Americans that feel rejected and excluded from the national conversation. No one cares about them anymore, certainly not the Democrats, which is ironic because that demographic was once their base.
This is brutal. Trump needs to let joe talk himself into bumbling and stumbling. He needs to stop interrupting, look calm and cool, and let joe dig his own grave.
Thanks for watching the debate, Mark, so I don't have to, Man!
Chris Wallace's dad Mike would be ashamed of this performance
FINALLY-Hunter Biden comes up. Go git em.
Pointed out Hunter's drug discharge form the Navy after a few months as a public info officer (heroic!) while Joe was waxing poetic about Beau. Joe popped up "that's untrue". I read it in a Washington Times report based on FOIA docs, so I'm inclined to believe the president. A lot of accusations of false statements from both candidates which I hope someone reliable catalogs for us. I suspect Joe was flailing on a lot of them.
I've seen more substantive high school debates
Indeed, B. But it was always going to be like that. The last presidential election was Beavis versus Butt-head. This time we have Beavis versus Blockhead. We shouldn't kid ourselves.
Ohhh so glad I checked my email and saw this live blog was up and running!
Did Biden actually just say 'when, Inshallah'???
Trump is cleaning Joe's clock.
Dem HQ be like SCRAMBLE THE LID, STAT!!!!!!
I'm not watching the debate (will read a transcript tomorrow), but I sure am refreshing this page with glee!
If people are playing the drinking game at home, taking a shot every time Joe says, "Man," they are already under the table.
Is this like MST3K? Can I be Crow?
It does seem like a sick experiment being run by mad scientists.
Brilliant, W.
"My party is me."
OH MAH GAWD. Right Harris/Biden ticket. For sure.
That statement worked for Louis XIV but after that...not so well. "It's my party and I'll lie if I want to...you would lie too if it happened to you.."
Mark, where does "death wish" appear in the Constitution. I'm a dummy I guess on this.
It's a living dead Constitution, man!
Melania looks hot even with a mask!
Oh! This is cool. But no visuals???
Please describe your debate outfit. Thanks.
(Ladies, you're welcome, I know you all wanted to ask but someone has to have the chutzpah around these parts.)