Posted on 08/20/2016 8:09:20 AM PDT by chopperman
Trump should throw a monkey wrench in the networks' plans to shlong him in the debates. He should announce that accepting gotcha questions while Hillary gets pre-planned softballs aren't going to happen this time. He should announce that he will choose the questions for Hillary and then she can choose the questions for him. It won't change the questions he gets, but it'll change the questions she gets. He should also announce the first debate to be about the Global Warming fraud.
It won’t take any time for him to memorize the facts of what has been going on.
He will not only destroy her with the open minded independents, but elevate Stein with the brainwashed who weren’t going to vote for him anyhow.
I seriously doubt there will even be a debate. If there is one, I’d guess it would be more of a remote satellite connection with Hillary somewhere and Trump in the venue. Her questions will be scripted beforehand and the answers recorded and spaced between naps. Trump would catch every underhanded, low blow question would imagine.
He’d STILL win.
My proposal will prevent her from receiving scripted questions.
Understood. And that is why I think there won’t be any debate.
Then we go to the next step. He debates Stein.
If Trump does not handle it/her with kid gloves, she will cry "Bully!" and of course that will stick like glue and be replayed on the news a million times.
If it were me and she wouldn’t debate for one reason or another, I’d put a walker with the golf ball feet on the dais and debate it. :0)
I always wondered who these are people that at this point base their vote, or maybe even if they will vote at all, on presidential debates. I’ve never met anyone who admitted they were swayed that way, but for sure supposedly the opinion polls change based on the results of the debate or at least what the talking heads say about the debate.
Also I’m not sure what being a good president and leader has to do with debate technique. I mean what if someone is a tongue tied boob in a debate but could be a really good president? Or the other way where someone is really slick at the tricks of public speaking and debate, but would be an awful leader.
Freegards
"You have said X, Y and Z. Aren't you an idiot, and how can you ask anyone to support you?"
Question for Hillary: "Will your vast experience be helpful to you in solving all of the world's problems?"
I like that
I like that
I think Lazio was going to lose anyway, but he didn’t help himself by looking like a deer in the headlights when he was getting hit for walking across a stage. He could have defended himself better, but he did the usual GOP thing of rolling over and playing dead when under a false attack.
My proposal: Allow Trump to choose two moderators. Allow Hillary to choose two moderators.
I think Reagan reassured a lot of people who were concerned about what they had heard about him in the 1980 debate. He showed he was not the caricature the media was portraying. The media is trying to do the same thing to Trump, even with the same issues (nuclear codes). A good debate can get some of those dumbass people who are easily swayed by the constant MSM drumbeat to see that they agree with what Trump is saying, and he’s not an ogre.
Also, making the first debate about the Global Warming fraud is a subject the libs not only always avoid debating, they cannot serve him gotchas.
Will Candy Crowley be one of the moderators?
The Trump team better make darn sure that the debates aren’t stacked with biased leftist moderators who try to sabotage him with ridiculous questions while giving Clinton softball questions.
Great idea. Alzo, it would be much clearer and fairer to give the same questions to both.
Trump should get Mark Levin as one of his moderators and maybe Hannity or Judge Jeanine Pirro as the other.
Are you crazy? Mark Levin is a #NeverTrumper! But Judge Jeanine would be ok.
I don’t know, like I said I’ve never met anyone who said a debate swayed them one way or another or convinced them to vote or not to vote. Especially at this point in the election process.
But the opinion polls do show a swing based on a perceived winner or loser, based on either personal observation or what the talking heads say about it.
Like you say it must simply be for the dumbest voters who don’t realize they are that dumb. That’s actually pretty bleak when you think about it, like kabuki theatre for mouth breathers.
Freegards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.