First presidential debate (15 Viewers)

[Optimus Prime]

Since we usually have a separate thread for these
=================

NEW YORK (AP) — President Joe Biden begins an intense period of private preparations Friday at Camp David for what may be the most consequential presidential debate in decades.

The 81-year-old Democrat’s team is aware that he cannot afford an underwhelming performance when he faces Republican rival Donald Trump for 90 minutes on live television Thursday night. Biden’s team is expecting aggressive attacks on his physical and mental strength, his record on the economy and immigration and even his family.

Trump, 78 and ever confident, will stay on the campaign trail before going to his Florida estate next week for two days of private meetings as part of an informal prep process.

The former president’s allies are pushing him to stay focused on his governing plans, but they’re expecting him to be tested by pointed questions about his unrelenting focus on election fraud, his role in the erosion of abortion rights and his unprecedented legal baggage.

Thursday’s debate on CNN will be full of firsts, with the potential to reshape the presidential race. Never before in the modern era have two presumptive nominees met on the debate stage so early in the general election season. Never before have two White House contenders faced off at such advanced ages, with widespread questions about their readiness.

And never before has a general election debate participant been saddled with a felony conviction. The debate-stage meeting comes just two weeks before Trump is scheduled to be sentenced on 34 felony counts in his New York hush money trial.

“You can argue this will be the most important debate, at least in my lifetime,” said Democratic strategist Jim Messina, 54, who managed former President Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign.

PRESSURE ON BIDEN


The ground rules for Thursday’s debate, the first of two scheduled meetings, are unusual.

The candidates agreed to meet at a CNN studio in Atlanta with no audience. Each candidate’s microphone will be muted, except when it’s his turn to speak. No props or prewritten notes will be allowed onstage. The candidates will be given only a pen, a pad of paper and a bottle of water.

There will be no opening statements. A coin flip determined that Biden would stand at the podium to the viewer’s right, while Trump would deliver the final closing statement.


The next debate won’t be until September. Any stumbles Thursday will be hard to erase or replace quickly.………..

How Biden and Trump are taking very different approaches to preparing for next week's debate

President Joe Biden is beginning an intense period of private debate preparations at Camp David. His trip comes as officials in both parties scramble to set expectations for what may be the most consequential presidential debate in decades.

apnews.com

 

[LA - L.A.]

I think this is a reasoned take from Molly Jong-Fast, hitting on some key points that should be considered.

Let’s Slow the Rush to Dump Joe

Tune out the West Wing fan fiction. Swapping out the president at this stage in the race would be a political—and logistical—nightmare.

www.vanityfair.com

If Biden stays on the ticket, there's a chance he wins.

If they replace him, Trump wins, no if's, and's, or but's about it. These armchair campaign managers clearly don't have any clue on everything it takes to win a campaign, as much or more money to spend than the opponent which no one but Biden and Harris have. Everyone who is not them will be at $0.00 to over $100M disadvantage to Trump with no prayer of gaining any ground on Trump.

If Biden is replaced, then when Trump wins I'm going to do something I don't ever do. I'm going to quote everyone, who said Biden had to go so someone else could win, and told them I warned you so.

Then I'm going to decide if I'm going to fight, flight, or freeze, and I won't be alone in having to make that decision.

 

[LA - L.A.]

This is a situation where only true insiders can know what is actually going on. Not the public, reading articles from anonymous sources. Not people who were never sold on Biden pushing to oust him just to win some sort of pissing contest.

Especially not MAGA idiots with conspiracy theories.

Losing the incumbent advantage is huge. It shouldn’t happen on a whim. I’m of the opinion that if Biden is unable to run, then replace him now. Have Harris take the oath and she can run and pick a trendy governor as her VP. That’s about the only way I see this logistically working.

Harris Newsom is probably the best possible combination. I'll explain based on general societal views and not my personal views and that it's really to create the a ticket with people who have the least objections from the voting public.

Keep in mind that all of these people are in a dead heat according to polling, so none of them offer a real polling advantage. I haven't seen any polling on Shapiro, so he seems like too much of a risk at this time. That could change with polling.

Harris has to be at the top of the ticket for financial and demographic reasons. People have been saying Biden is losing the black vote, without any objective, definitive data to support it. Same thing with young votes. If you want to do your best to lose black and young voters, then by all means make her take a seat at the back or just leave her out completely.

Harris is a non-white woman, that's a double barrelled obstacle for her to overcome. It shouldn't be, but it is. So Whitmer's out. Two women turns a double barrel challenge into a Howitzer problem.

Buttigieg is out, because his homosexuality poses extra challenges as well.

That leaves Newsom as the least objectionable and as a VP any "skeletons" he has want be as damaging. He just has the accetpable time of person to the most voters, and unfortuantely white straight Christian male fits that better than the other options who poll as well as Biden and as Harris does. Here's the rub, Newsom is very sincere when he says he's not getting into the mix. He'll have to be persuaded first and it may be easier to persuade him if Biden voluntarily steps down and Newsom isn't replacing Biden directly.

I think Harris would be able to make herself more acceptable to a majority of voters than Trump, even though she's a non-white woman. I think having Newsom would help her with that. I think Harris would make Trump look like a fool in any debate format and Newsom would do the same with whoever Trump picks as his VP. Harris can legally use the money Biden has already raised and would likely retain all of the current campaign staffers and volunteers which is critical already. Newsom is a also a strong fundraiser.

The sneaky advantage I think Harris has that polls have been whiffing on since Dobbs overturned Roe, is women and young voters. They are voting at higher rates than polls have picked up on and they are a large voting block. Harris is liked by both groups. Harris has also been attacked some by Trump's camp and she's weathered it well. We don't know how any of the other options will hold up to Trump's attacks and it's a big risk to go into that without a clue.

If Biden is replaced, I thimk Harris-Newsom gives the only viable chance of winning. Despite what people think, a presidential campaign is not simply just a popularty contest. Popularity will get you nowhere with out the money that's need to execute the collasal logitstical undertaking that a presidential campaign is.

 

[LA - L.A.]

That poll is from openlabs.

Yes, it is and as I objectively showed they are all in a statistical dead heat. You've incorrectly interpreted that poll in a misleading way.

After that poll was leaked you saw major Dem players in Pelosi,

Again you're incorrectly interpreting what Pelosi actually said in a misleading way. Pelosi said it was a valid and understandable question and discussion to have. She also went out of her way make it clear that she still fully supports Biden.

...and Clyburn express doubts about Biden.

I have no idea what Clyburn actually said, but I've learned from experience not to take your word on what he said, because you consistently incorrectly interpret things.

The first sitting Dem Congressman openly called for Biden to be replaced. I think if insiders believe it's legitimate polling you can as well.

Please cite and quote the source that says Lloyd Doggett has insider connections to the Biden campaign. Also, please cite and quote all of these "insiders" you keep referring to without providing any citations or names.

Or don't, IDC.

Obviously, you do care or you wouldn't keep getting so angry at those of us who disagree with you. You cared enough to insult me with the bullshirt "you're huffing copium" nonsense. You've take similar personal pot shots at other people.

You obviously cared enough to start of this post with:

This board dude......

 

[LA - L.A.]

In the poll CNN did, Harris actually was performing better against Trump than Biden.

How many points better. For example, doing 1% better is numerically better, but it's a statistically irrelevant difference. It's considered a dead heat or neck and neck.

 

[DaveXA]

From that document:

Nothing about this poll makes any argument for replacing Biden, let alone a strong or definitive argument. Let's break it down objectively and rationally.

The spread is Biden at the low end with 47.5% and Whitmer at the high end of 49.7% in the a two way tipping point state.

That's a whopping 2.25% spread from a poll that is suspiciously lacking it's margin of error. I've never seen a poll that had a margin of error of less than 2.25%.

It's irrational to think this poll proves that any of them have a better chance than any of the rest of them. It's a statistical dead heat among all of them. So it's weird to me that you just say "they all do better than Biden" which misleading suggests they are all doing significantly better than Biden, when as a matter of objective fact they are not doing significantly better than Biden.

The Name Recognition Adjusted formulas are highly subjective and I think they should be ignored, but let's look at those as well. Biden's at the low end of the Tipping Point State at 47.5% and Buttigieg & Whitmer are tied at the high end with 51.1%. That's a whopping 3.6% spread and most likely well within the margin of error. As a general, it's wise to be suspicious of any poll that doesn't provide it's margin of error for exactly this reason.

What this poll rationally suggests is that it's not time to freak out about replacing Biden, because none of the alternatives have a real advantage over Biden and everyone of them except Harris would be starting out at a $0.00 dollar to Trump's over $100M to spend right out the gate with no hopes of catching up in four months. That's a severe and impactful disadvantage that would be hard to overcome.

Also keep in mind, only Biden is being attacked at the moment. None of the other candidates have been attacked by Trump. Republicans and PAC's. Even with that benefit the other candidates only have statistically irrelevant leads over Biden. What happens when they are the candidate getting attacked?

No one knows, but what we do know is that even with all the attacks and the poor debate performance Biden is in a statistical dead heat with the other candidates who have no money and have not been attacked. It's completely irrational to conclude that any of the other candidates have a definitive advantage over Trump.

I will say that if Biden has more days like he did at the debate, that narrow margin will change a good bit. He clearly isn't going to has as much margin for error as he did prior to the debate.

I will say the White House doesn't have a choice but to assure people that it was a fluke by making him more available to the public.

If they try to protect him too much, they'll raise more questions than answers.

 

[LA - L.A.]

This board is gaslighting itself.

You're the one gaslighting yourself and, as a result, this board. You selectively choose what to quote and what to leave out to only support what you say.

For instance:

That's Nancy Pelosi VERY CLEARLY stating Biden should take a cognitive test.

It doesn't even occur to you that maybe Nancy wants Biden to take a test to prove his orientation to people, place and time are fine. Instead you imply that she wants him to take the test because he's incapacitated.

That is NOT fully supporting a candidate.

That itty bitty portion of the entirety of what she said in that interview is not fully supportive and I suspect that's why you cherry picked it and left out the fact that Nancy Pelosi in very certain and unambigous languagne said that she fully supported Biden.

Why do you keep leaving that part out @J-DONK? It's been point out to you already and you keep ignoring it.

Are you guys really grasping at Nancy was tricked by a news reporter into saying this? That MSNBC of all places is up to no good?

The person who cherry picks quotes to create a false impression that Nancy Pelosi does not support Biden when Nancy Pelosi in fact said very clearly that she fully supports Biden, that's the person @J-DONK who is actually grasping and gaslighting.

Why do you keep misrepresenting what polls actually show and what people actually say? You keep lashing out at people accusing them of doing what you are actually the one doing.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I will say that if Biden has more days like he did at the debate, that narrow margin will change a good bit. He clearly isn't going to has as much margin for error as he did prior to the debate.

I will say the White House doesn't have a choice but to assure people that it was a fluke by making him more available to the public.

If they try to protect him too much, they'll raise more questions than answers.

That all seems reasonable to me. Let me be clear, I'm not making excuses for Biden or am certain he doesn't have issues. I don't have a problem with people wanting questions answered and assurances.

I just have a problem with people who are already making Biden a bed in ready for him in the nursing home just off how they felt about the debate and without any regard for the realities of how difficult it will be to switch candidates and win or what polling actually shows. I don't see you as one of those people.

 

[brandon]

It does register with the right. I wasn't talking about that election. Obama's skin color policies made it possible for someone like Trump to be a candidate and win the nomination.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I guess we need to have grammar classes on this board.

Give me your interpretation word by word of this sentence.

Both candidates owe whatever test you want to put them to, in terms of their mental acuity and their health — both of them.

We don't need a less in grammar. What we need is a lesson in subtext and knowing the moves the political players like to make.

Do you not see that she said "both candidates?" Do you not know how Pelosi rolls? She's clearly saying, yeah, let's give both of these guys (Biden and Trump) a cognitive and physical health test. This is classic Nancy. She's setting the stage to turn these questions about mental capacaity right back in Trump's face.

Do you think Nancy would say that if she thought Biden would fail, but Trump would pass? She's also setting up the refutation of, Trump takes the same tests or no one does and if the press doesn't pressure Trump about it too and Trump won't take the test, then you can all shut the hell up about it. Republicans hate Pelosi, because she's been handing them their arses for decades and she's about to to do it again. Just watch and see.

You insulted a poster earlier for not understanding 4D chess. Get a mirror, dude.

 

[LA - L.A.]

IIRC, 44 out of 47 Cabinet members, including his VP, refuse to vote for Trump this time. It’s safe to say that all of them voted for Trump in 2016, they’re all Republicans, every last one of them.

And we collectively as a nation are simply ignoring that fact. It’s unprecedented.

And everyone in the Biden administration is going to vote for Biden if he's on the ballot and none of them have come out on the record saying Biden shouldn't run. Not a single one of them. That may happen, but it has not happened yet.

 

[DaveXA]

Harris Newsom is probably the best possible combination. I'll explain based on general societal views and not my personal views and that it's really to create the a ticket with people who have the least objections from the voting public.

Keep in mind that all of these people are in a dead heat according to polling, so none of them offer a real polling advantage. I haven't seen any polling on Shapiro, so he seems like too much of a risk at this time. That could change with polling.

Harris has to be at the top of the ticket for financial and demographic reasons. People have been saying Biden is losing the black vote, without any objective, definitive data to support it. Same thing with young votes. If you want to do your best to lose black and young voters, then by all means make her take a seat at the back or just leave her out completely.

Harris is a non-white woman, that's a double barrelled obstacle for her to overcome. It shouldn't be, but it is. So Whitmer's out. Two women turns a double barrel challenge into a Howitzer problem.

Buttigieg is out, because his homosexuality poses extra challenges as well.

That leaves Newsom as the least objectionable and as a VP any "skeletons" he has want be as damaging. He just has the accetpable time of person to the most voters, and unfortuantely white straight Christian male fits that better than the other options who poll as well as Biden and as Harris does. Here's the rub, Newsom is very sincere when he says he's not getting into the mix. He'll have to be persuaded first and it may be easier to persuade him if Biden voluntarily steps down and Newsom isn't replacing Biden directly.

I think Harris would be able to make herself more acceptable to a majority of voters than Trump, even though she's a non-white woman. I think having Newsom would help her with that. I think Harris would make Trump look like a fool in any debate format and Newsom would do the same with whoever Trump picks as his VP. Harris can legally use the money Biden has already raised and would likely retain all of the current campaign staffers and volunteers which is critical already. Newsom is a also a strong fundraiser.

The sneaky advantage I think Harris has that polls have been whiffing on since Dobbs overturned Roe, is women and young voters. They are voting at higher rates than polls have picked up on and they are a large voting block. Harris is liked by both groups. Harris has also been attacked some by Trump's camp and she's weathered it well. We don't know how any of the other options will hold up to Trump's attacks and it's a big risk to go into that without a clue.

If Biden is replaced, I thimk Harris-Newsom gives the only viable chance of winning. Despite what people think, a presidential campaign is not simply just a popularty contest. Popularity will get you nowhere with out the money that's need to execute the collasal logitstical undertaking that a presidential campaign is.

I pretty much agree with all of this. The only thing I worry or am concerned about is I'd be surprised if Newsom is willing to serve as VP.

I'm thinking he is angling for 2028. I wouldn't blame him for thinking that.

I've said it since before primary voting started that Biden needed to step aside and the Democrats go with a younger, more energetic candidate. Now, it's very possibly too late and the Democratic party could very well find themselves in a no win situation if they're not careful.

I don't think the debate performance for Biden was a anomaly and I think he's going to struggle to beat Trump. It's gonna be a toss-up on election day and we're gonna have to hope people don't want Trump more than they don't want Biden.

Ultimately, I can't see Biden stepping down unless he croaks, and I really hope that doesn't happen because Trump will win the election and the Democrats will be blamed for trying to hide Biden’s health issues, whether deserved or not.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Am I or, you and Sam?

It's you. It's clearly and most definitely you that is gaslighting yourself and us.

I wouldn't normally say fully supporting a candidate would be publicly stating they should take a cognitive test.

Nancy does fully support Biden, that's why she boldly says she does and that's why she didn't call for Biden to take a cognitive test. What she said was both candidates should do it, both candidates, not just Biden. It's like you can't see the actual words you quote.

 

[DaveXA]

How many points better. For example, doing 1% better is numerically better, but it's as statistically irrelevant difference. It's considered a dead heat or neck and neck.

Even if it's only a dead heat, that's still gotta be concerning. Biden being the incumbent ordinarily should have a substantial lead in his own party's polling. That it's a dead heat means a lot of people are questioning Biden’s ability to serve another 4 years as President.

Ultimately, I think the best odds lie with Biden proving to the public that the debate was simply a poor performance for him and that he's fine health-wise. Anything else and the outcomes are much less certain.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I pretty much agree with all of this. The only thing I worry or am concerned about is I'd be surprised if Newsom is willing to serve as VP.

I'm thinking he is angling for 2028. I wouldn't blame him for thinking that.

I've said it since before primary voting started that Biden needed to step aside and the Democrats go with a younger, more energetic candidate. Now, it's very possibly too late and the Democratic party could very well find themselves in a no win situation if they're not careful.

I don't think the debate performance for Biden was a anomaly and I think he's going to struggle to beat Trump. It's gonna be a toss-up on election day and we're gonna have to hope people don't want Trump more than they don't want Biden.

Ultimately, I can't see Biden stepping down unless he croaks, and I really hope that doesn't happen because Trump will win the election and the Democrats will be blamed for trying to hide Biden’s health issues, whether deserved or not.

70% of Americans don't want or like Biden and Trump, so I believe that this election will not really be about them. It will be about democracy versus tyranny and oppression.

When it was Clinton vs Trump, both were unknowns and people were naive about Trump. I'm confident Trump destroyed that naivety for 70% of the voters and know that they can at least trust Biden not to impose tyranny.

We are in a situation no one alive has ever been in before and I think people are mostly going to vote in a way they've never voted before. I think people are going to vote principles and the vision of America that they want over the actual candidates or their checkbooks. Only time will tell if that's what happens. It's only what I think might happen. It's not a prediction.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Even if it's only a dead heat, that's still gotta be concerning. Biden being the incumbent ordinarily should have a substantial lead in his own party's polling. That it's a dead heat means a lot of people are questioning Biden’s ability to serve another 4 years as President.

Everything about this election is concerning, including that. It's more than concerning, it's unnerving.

Ultimately, I think the best odds lie with Biden proving to the public that the debate was simply a poor performance for him and that he's fine health-wise. Anything else and the outcomes are much less certain.

I agree. If Biden comes out firing through to election day, I think he wins comfortably, not by a landslide, but comfortably.

Hope it happens, but have no clue what the chances are it does.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Video should start at about where all of this was covered:

Man that first question she asked at the time code you linked would make Bobby Hebert proud.

 

[LA - L.A.]

She is withholding support. She could have said "Bad debate nights happen. I fully support Joe, and his ability to lead the country."

She didn't say that though.

I'm not sure what we are debating here.

You guys live in a fantasy land.

For all the talk about perspective clouding how I interpret words, pot meet kettle.

Did you not hear her repeatedly sincerely say she trusts Biden's judgment?

You're seeing ghosts, dude.

 

[bird]

Sure. You know the debate was on the TV and a lot of people watched it, correct? We all saw what you saw, we can just admit it.

And yet afterwards that didn’t seem to be true. One wonders why that is. Perhaps it was because he felt ill. But I am sure you are capable of diagnosing someone you never met simply because you dislike their politics. Trump, on the other hand, rambles, talks about fictional characters as though they were real, confuses Haley with Pelosi etc.