Trump vs Clinton Round 2. Bigger debate than the last one.

[claig]

Round 2, Monday morning 2 am UK time.

Will "the real Trump" show up?

It doesn't divert from the argument, my God, it's what will send more support Trump's way. It's a classic lack of understanding of how people think. People are not goldfish. They remember. They know what hypocrisy is. Not even Trump is saying what he did wasn't wrong. Saying it over and over again will enrage his supporters because they remember how it wasn't like this with Bill's victims, it wasn't like this with Cologne, this new found outrage over misogyny is reserved for this 'poor, bullied outsider' Donald Trump. They will cleave to him more devoutly.

Farage because he's a pathologically dishonest pub bore

But he gave up a good job in the City to start Ukip, I think that was 25 yrs ago and what stamina and determination he has shown. He must hv been on his knees with despair at times.

I remember seeing that 3-way debate Clegg, Farage and whoever. Clegg was openly lying to the audience by saying we can control our borders. Farage stepped in and explained succinctly why it was impossible to do so. He nailed it.

It doesn't divert from the argument, my God, it's what will send more support Trump's way

Just like what this revelation will do for support for grammar schools

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3829560/I-m-not-hypocrite-claims-Corbyn-ally-Shami-Chakrabarti-opposes-grammar-schools-despite-paying-son-attend-selective-school.html

Winchester You are absolutely right. If Trump can reconstruct himself as the victim here, he's nailed it.

You know the Clinton campaign team should really get some Brexiteers on it. It seems like people are so sponged up with the Hail Hillary juice that they cannot actually think straight about what people will actually be considering here.

Shammi Chakrabarit is aaarrgghh the words can't describe how much I dislike that self-important, self righteous, shifty, hypocritical, liberalist fat cat trougher.

In fact she also threw the racism accusation around when the Cologne attacks happened and it emerged that MENA migrants were behind the organised assaults of women. She's just a total waste of space .

These are the best bits from that article:

The new shadow attorney general claimed she was simply ‘trying to do her best’ for her child by enrolling him at one of Britain’s top private schools.

It emerged last week that Baroness Chakrabarti’s son won a place at the £18,000-a-year Dulwich College in south London after sitting a tough entrance exam.

The former head of civil rights organisation Liberty told ITV’s Peston on Sunday that she opposed grammar schools because they enforce ‘segregation’.

Trump's and Clinton's teams should both be studying this. My word.

Apparently she tried for Eton. Another private school hypocrite Diane Abbott defended Chakarbarti's elevation to the Lords.

And these elites wonder why people are desperate to vote for something so very different to this cosy, establishment hypocrisy so in evidence across the UK, across Europe and across the US.

What does other people or media being hypocrites or not have to do with how Trump views women and acts around them?
Is it acceptable or not in a President?

Is it acceptable or not in a President?

This issue is meaningless as a stand-alone question. The answer is obviously "No" but social comparison is a key feature of humanity. If he can portray himself as a victim of hypocrisy (as he is showing signs of doing), he'll go a along way toward ameliorating his transgressions. People don't like hypocrisy and feel sorry for those on the receiving end. Basically, what Winchester said.

It's just sad that people who should know better seem to be falling for his "defense".

It has to do with who people vote for, how they will vote and what will persuade them to vote one way or another. I assumed this was what it was all about. It's not about falling for his defence either. The worst thing he could do (morally but also, signally, for his campaign) is to defend himself in the debate. For his campaign, he needs to be the victim - and the media are basically weaponising their own hypocrisy in his defence.

In fact saying that people are 'falling for his defence' is another failure to understand. I imagine most Trump voters are not 'falling for his defence'. There is no defence. He said it - and probably did it. But the Trump vote for so many people is a 'not Hillary' vote. The Trump vote 'for Trump' won't be affected by this. At all. The 'not Hillary' vote could be affected - but the obvious train of thought is Media = hypocrites = on Hillary's side = can't be trusted = may be lying about other things.

I think the biggest danger for Donald Trump's campaign is not that people will switch sides, but that they won't vote at all, and his key thing is getting people out to vote who've given up on the political process before now.

No-one is defending him. Personally, I have been fascinated by the phenomenon of Trump. I want to know what it is that is bringing out the voters despite transgressions of such magnitude. It's a significant thing that's going on and is a point of interest. How can he keep going? I've come to the conclusion that it's not him, it's the voters themselves, the ordinary people, who are holding him afloat. Why? Because, as Winchester said, people are sick of the alternative. He'd never have survived thus far in ordinary times. But these are extraordinary times. Why are they? What's going on? This is what I want to know.

Anyone watching the debate? I'm tempted to stay up.

I'm going to sleep

Is it acceptable or not in a President? This is not the key question, because it also applies to Hillary Clinton and her actions in office, and Trump voters all think no she isn't.

Agree four mummy. The voters must be yearning for something vast and unacknowledged if they'll vote for Donald Trump. And still vote for him. And still vote for him.

I'll watch it at lunch time tomorrow.

Claig, are you staying up to watch?

Yes, I'm staying up as long as I can

Massive news. Media all saying Trump should be contrite and not attack. Rumours coming out of Trump Tower that Trump will attack. Nobody knows.

COnspiracy theorist Alex Jones says that Trump had an October Surprise for Bill Clinton etc that his advisers persuaded him to drop and he took their advice and then the Clinton camp hit him with this which they had prepared. Jones says this is just the warmup for what they will hit Trump with, false stuff to come. That is why Trump now has to attack and tell the truth on them or they will smear him and finish him.

Establishment all watching, praying that Trump will fall. People behind Trump.

it also applies to Hillary Clinton and her actions in office, and Trump voters all think no she isn't.

Yes, voters must consider what they thing is least acceptable in both candidates.

What I meant in relation to falling for his defence was how the thread derailed into the hypocrisy of the media. It's not particularly important in relation to how Trump is.
If anything, what's relevant here is Hillary's hypocrisy, as voters will have to choose between the two.

But, even if you buy into what Trump proposes as something you want, can you trust him to deliver it?

Media and Establishment panicked as Trump's campaign manager, Stephen Bannon, has a video interview today on breitbart.com of Juannita Broaddrick , Kathryn Willey and Paula Jones. Establisjment fear what Trump will say. All of the Establishment advising and begging Trump not to "go there".

First question in debate will be on the leaked Trump video. Out of thr Establishment's control about what Trump will do. They have tried game theory and their best brains are confounded by Trump. All they have left is to pray.

But this thread is about the debate and campaign. It's in many ways an entirely pragmatic issue for both sides and the hypocrisy of the media is playing a role. Moral outrage does not sit well on hypocrites and this is a factor, it will play to the debate, it will play to Hillary's response. Seeking to generate ever higher pitched squeals of moral outrage may be a tactic you enjoy but your average Trump supporter is playing for bigger stakes.

But, even if you buy into what Trump proposes as something you want, can you trust him to deliver it?
No, but he might become superfluous to needs by then. I am beginning to think that the voters are playing a strategic game with him (see my previous comments about what happened in the UK re the GE and then Brexit, ie, keep Labour out of power so that Tories deliver Brexit, take a breather, regroup and see where we go from here). Vote Trump to keep Hillary out, get him in, take a breather, regroup, and see where we go from here including getting him out again if necessary. He might be voted in despite himself

Lewin I think maybe that you think you are posting on the other thread. Which is more about how awful he is. Claig: he has to be careful he doesn't put hillary in the victim corner. He wants dibs on that spot.