Presidential debate October 18th Las Vegas

[Mr Quatro]

This thread is not about the election ... it is just about the Presidential debate in Lad Vegas Wednesday night October 18th.

Just a poll of sorts ... mods can close it after the debate.

Do you think this last debate will increase the point gap Hillary has or decrease the point gap? or will it put Donald Trump in the lead or will it stay about the same which is 47% Hillary to 43% Trump by ABC polls and even 11 point difference in the NBC polls

or make the two even closer to an already crazy national election?

[Takeda Shingen]

Might want to remake the poll so that you can only select one option.

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Two Bears

Might want to remake the poll so that you can only select one option.

I don't know how to do that, but your right ... can Steve or Jim do that?

[Oberon]

I think Trump will close the gap, providing he's able to dodge any more disastrous past mistakes coming up to haunt him before it does. But it's probably not going to be enough, if he was going to turn this ship around it would have to have been done in the last debate, and he made an effort but it just wasn't enough. I mean, I have to give him his due in the last debate, he didn't flip out, but he did drop enough soundbites to be used against him, promising to jail Hillary for example, which coupled with the Make America Grope Again campaign, it was enough to give the point to Hillary, especially when a great deal of his own party were deserting him, and he threw his own running mate under the bus as well. I maintain that if he had gone worse that debate then Pence would have handed in the towel, but he managed to see it through, and land some good solid hits on Hillary, so Pence stayed clinging to the mast.
So unless he wins this debate by an absolute blinder, or Hillary gets a slight cold, then I don't think it'll matter, but...again...Dewey vs Truman, so, who can be sure.

[Torplexed]

Will Donald even show up if Hillary doesn't take the pre-debate drug test he demanded? Apparently, the drugs work in conjunction with the Parkinson-suppressing, back-straightening, cough-fixing, quick answer-giving apparatus she wears under her pantsuit, so she certainly needs them.

[Catfish]

I keep asking myself the same questions again and again.

- Why is there no other candidate than those two?
- How is it possible that an obviously crazy candidate even gets so far - in a "democracy"?
(then thinking of Bush senior and Bush junior ... were there no other candidates, so that just of all the son of a forner president becomes the new one ?? This looks more like a royal descendence, than an election)
- Why is H. Clinton so absolutely hated (apart from the republicans who automatically hate everything democratic), i mean there are other US presidents who got away with much worse stuff
- Is this even a democracy or is it not like the good old middle-ages-feudal "election" system, where the nobles/rich elected their leader -> "Kurfuersten"-system
- So there are only two parties, which now even have become one fraction?
- Is there no rational reasonable person who can do better, as a new president for America?
- Why do republicans (but maybe not only) always talk of tyranny, accusing the president of not leaving when the period is over - not one president in the US has ever remained in place, after the period he was elected for.

?

Apart from that i think (personal opinion) that Obama has been the most reasonable and intelligent president of the US, since a long time. I still wonder how it was possible that he was elected.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

I don't know how to do that, but your right ... can Steve or Jim do that?

I've been into the edit function and don't see a way of changing the poll voting criteria. It may be the case that said criteria can't be changed.

You could always PM Neal.

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by Catfish

I keep asking myself the same questions again and again.

- Why is there no other candidate than those two?

This question has been asked a number of times in various political arenas. Former Minnesota Governor, Jesse Ventura has said that there really is no democratic process if your choices are limited to one of these two parties.

One could argue the Libertarian party is a viable 3rd party. However, They can't be a viable 3rd party if not invited to the presidential candidate debates.

[August]

Originally Posted by Oberon

promising to jail Hillary for example

He didn't promise to jail her. That's just the corporate medias pro-hillary spin on it. He said he would have his AG appoint an independent council to look into it. The "You'd be in jail" comment was referring to the fact that it's pretty obvious to anyone not already drinking the Democrats Koolaid that had Obama administration not put the fix in she quite likely would be prosecuted and jailed for mishandling classified material like everybody else does.

[August]

Originally Posted by Catfish

I keep asking myself the same questions again and again.

Why do republicans (but maybe not only) always talk of tyranny, accusing the president of not leaving when the period is over - not one president in the US has ever remained in place, after the period he was elected for.

Democrats made the same accusations at the end of both Bush presidencies and Reagan's before that. Remember you can find somebody to make any outlandish claim. It's the corporate media who decides which claims see the light of day and since they favor the left it's only the right's crazies who make the "news".

Apart from that i think (personal opinion) that Obama has been the most reasonable and intelligent president of the US, since a long time. I still wonder how it was possible that he was elected.

Reasonable has not been a word i'd use to describe him. Obama had a chance to bring both sides together but instead chose to exacerbate and deepen the divide among Americans. Significant numbers of Americans believe race relations have gotten worse under this reasonable and intelligent president.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...er-obama-poll/

Why is there no other candidate than those two?

Actually there are two other candidates in the election. The one i'm voting for, the Libertarian parties candidate Gary Johnson, and the Green party candidate Jill Stein. Gary is currently polling around 7-9% and Stein around 3%. But to both the Dems and the Republicans i'm "throwing my vote away".

[AVGWarhawk]

It's gonna be great! I got people. Amazing, totally amazing. Crooked Hillary!

It is my belief Trump will unleash because he has nothing to lose. Hillary will do her best to make the viewing audience believe the world is full of rainbow farting unicorns that live in the land of money trees. The rich will pay for it all!! She will go to win the debate with vomiting out the same crap we hear every 4 years. We have a plan(no we don't) to make us stronger together...vomit...

I think I will be watching re-runs of Thomas the Tank Train instead.

[Catfish]

Ok, thanks for the explanations (and i mean it!).

Regarding (as failing to find a better word) "racial unrest", i wonder why this happened, especially "under" Obama?

On one hand you can blame it on Obama, because as a president he is to be held responsible. On the other hand, i do not think he told the police to engage more in scrapping or shooting coloured people – or did he actively or passively fail to get coloured people, or the police, under control?

You could say so, but for me it looks like the physical presence of a black president either gave the coloured people a reason to go strong/crow? (sry), or it was a defiance reaction from some racist police officers because of this very black president.

I really don't know but some of the events happening around cop-coloured interaction looked nothing else than racist. Yes i know there are a lot of coloured police officers, too, but i speak about those events we all saw in the media.
I fail to see how a president can influence people being in denial, or in plain aggressive opposition..

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by August

Actually there are two other candidates in the election. The one i'm voting for, the Libertarian parties candidate Gary Johnson, and the Green party candidate Jill Stein. Gary is currently polling around 7-9% and Stein around 3%. But to both the Dems and the Republicans i'm "throwing my vote away".

What your really saying in effect is that the loser can blame the parties you speak of ... due to the 4 to 5% margin of error. The loser of the POTUS can blame these third party candidates or the winner can thank the third party persons for their participation.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by August

He didn't promise to jail her. That's just the corporate medias pro-hillary spin on it. He said he would have his AG appoint an independent council to look into it. The "You'd be in jail" comment was referring to the fact that it's pretty obvious to anyone not already drinking the Democrats Koolaid that had Obama administration not put the fix in she quite likely would be prosecuted and jailed for mishandling classified material like everybody else does.

There's a lot of kool-aid being drunk around here, and it's not just democrats drinking it.
Quite frankly, if you're having to decipher and put in special clauses to what a candidate is saying then the candidate should not be saying it. Trump is a gold mine to spin, and you can blame the 'liberal media' and all the other Alex Jones boogey-men if you like, but at the end of the day Donald Trump is a very poor candidate for President, even more so than Hillary Clinton, to the point where the party that he's running for is regretting deeply everything that has happened. Now, you can say that this is exactly what you want to happen, that you want the 'establishment'™ to be shaken up, but quite frankly the only thing it has shaken up has been the Republican Party and it's damn near broken it. If you wanted to make the GOP even more toxic, then congratulations, electing Donald Trump to be its representative for President has done it.

[August]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

What your really saying in effect is that the loser can blame the parties you speak of ... due to the 4 to 5% margin of error. The loser of the POTUS can blame these third party candidates or the winner can thank the third party persons for their participation.

Yeah it all depends on which of the two big parties the third party draws the most votes away from.

Ross Perot for example definitely cost George Bush 41 his reelection in 1992 as Perots supporters were mostly drawn from the Republican base. Ralph Nader did pretty much the same to the Democrats in the 2000 election.