Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
![]()
![]()
Maybe somebody misplaced the translated transcript.
Edited by DrunkenNordmann on Sep 30th 2020 at 4:15:41 PM
We learn from history that we do not learn from historyDid the Dutch commentators register Trump's open white nationalism and threats of violence to suppress voting, at all or was it just about how awesome he did against Biden?
[No personal attacks, Hodor -Septimus Heap]
Edited by SeptimusHeap on Sep 30th 2020 at 6:15:11 PM
Actually, the debate was subtitled. I cannot vouch for its quality because I did not read it, but I did note the subtitles basically skipped some of the more chaotic moments, including a rather important argument where the subtitles just said "next subject" (in Dutch, naturally).
Yes they did, and now you are just strawmanning.
Edited by Redmess on Sep 30th 2020 at 4:18:08 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesTo be honest redmess, I get your points but you aren't making them very well. There seems to be a big gap in perception in general.
E.g trump did dominate the debate (he did most of the talking and ignored others) but some seem to take it to mean that he won or commanded respect. Which is sometimes used as a meaning, but not the intense meaning here.
Yes, thank you. I'm sorry I don't always come across clearly.
He dominated the debate, but not in a respectable way, nor did he win because of it. But it did make it tough for Biden to really shine here.
I think Biden won marginally, but not convincingly.
Edited by Redmess on Sep 30th 2020 at 4:23:17 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesNO, DUTCH COMMENTATORS ARE NOT PRO TRUMP! ANYTHING BUT!
And if anything, Dutch commentators have been pushing back hard on the shoddy masking policy here.
That is not at all what I said. Stop twisting my words.
Edited by Redmess on Sep 30th 2020 at 4:35:32 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesCan we chill a bit, please? I like a good pile-on as much as the next forum participant but this is a bit much. Redmess is allowed to have his opinions.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"This has already been mentioned and I'm kinda late to this, but since it got brought up, I just want to stress the point that while excitement might matter, many people don't seem to be aware that negative feelings towards the other candidate is just a strong, if not stronger, a motivator for who people vote for. Like this is something that has been observed empirically even outside of politics, it's a basic part of human psychology that we often frame things in terms of avoiding negative outcomes over pursuing positive ones.
Point being, in a sense it's reasonable to point out biden isn't necessarily the most charismatic or exciting candidate, but (and not that anyone here has said this, but it's something that comes up sometimes) that doesn't automatically mean he is going to do poorly against trump, precisely because that many people dislike trump that stopping him is a strong motivator on its own.
Edited by Draghinazzo on Sep 30th 2020 at 11:42:32 AM
The thing about Biden...he's likable, he's folksy and he's funny. Most people don't seem to want a charismatic firebrand right now. Elections aren't won by landing perfect dunks and zingers.
Most people like even keels, especially in leaders. He’s a normal guy at the end of a four-year era dominated by whackjobs
Not great, not terrible. Biden convinced almost a third.
Yeah, a lot of people just prefer to avoid conflict and don't want to take a side in a big political.controversy because if they accept trump is bad, they might also have to accept a lot of other things about themselves or other people. "Nearly half the country is ok with someone who promotes white supremacy and domestic terrorism openly on tv" is not an easy pill to swallow.
Like Red, I am also someone from outside the U.S, and the papers and articles I get about the debate yesterday seem to simplify the debate as a whole "Nobody won" thing.
Major accusation seemed to be about Trump being particularly grumpy about not getting his chin wiped enough by his nanny and needing a nap.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesre: Trump going after Biden's son. I'm reminded of the 2008 vice presidential debate where Sarah Palin also made disparaging remarks about Biden's late son, and Biden literally cried on camera. By conventional wisdom, Biden literally crying during a debate should have made him seem weak and pathetic, but the overwhelming actual response was that Palin was completely out of line and Biden was humanized to a vast swathe of the audience.

Edited by Heatth on Sep 30th 2020 at 11:15:47 AM