Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary will win because of debates...Hillary will win because she is a great debater.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
cloud75 Donating Member (737 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:48 PM
Original message
Hillary will win because of debates...Hillary will win because she is a great debater.
  Hillary is very smart and will surround herself with great
people to give her the information she needs for debates. 
Also the only way a person can win a debate these days is to
make the other person look foolish.  For example dick cheney
ran circles around Edwards during the VP debate he bullied
him.  Have you ever tried to bully a woman during a debate
like with you wife you never win.  Hillary will be off limits
to bullying and swift boating it will be an issues based
election and she wins on issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
aceman2373 Donating Member (90 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. yup, she is a master debater
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
19. My, but aren't you the cunning linguist?
Enough of this punishment!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. Hmmm, if I recall Kerry wiped the stage with georgie-boy all three debates
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. And chimp was getting help through an earpiece.
Yet the media refused to declare Kerry the winner. Back in 2000 Gore clearly won, but the media honed in on a sigh he had let escape - probably over some egregious Bush falsehood - and came to the conclusion that Gore was stiff and wooden while chimp did "better than expected" and was therefore the "winner." Chimp could have stood up there and drooled and the media would have found a way to turn it into a positive.

The public's perception of who "wins" the debates will be largely determined by who the media tells them did better - and will have little, if any, basis in reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. sad, isn't it?
I get sad at the state of the nation around election time :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SanCristobal Donating Member (303 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #11
29. I disagree about the debate results.
Gore made himself look BAD the first and second time around, and I'll only give Kerry the first two debates. Cheney's daughter and Bush's wood company managed to give Bush the slight edge the last time around.

Other then that, you are spot on. Debates are 90% style over substance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. I look forward to the debates.
Our field is shaping up to be formidable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. And, that's going to be a problem ... picking just ONE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Isn't that effin brilliant?!!
Something Dems really need after the last six years in a ditch, upside-down, on fire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
4. Uh-huh. She is such an excellent speaker....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Dunham Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. McCain stinks as a debater. Even W beat him soundly in 2000 primary debates
Hillary could whip McCain in any debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. Obama , Hillary and Edwards in a three way debate would be a delight.
All three have plenty of class and would keep it civil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:55 PM
Response to Original message
7. Winning debates does not guarantee moving into the White House
Just ask Al Gore about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Perot was certainly right about NAFTA. He lost support when he exited,
then re-entered, the race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #7
21. winning a majority of the votes doesn't either, aparently...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Velveteen Ocelot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 10:59 PM
Response to Original message
9. Not so much. First of all, the primary "debates" are a joke.
Edited on Sat Jan-20-07 11:14 PM by ocelot
The candidates (maybe as many as ten of them, as in 2004) stand on a stage and are asked bogus questions with maybe 30 seconds to answer and no meaningful rebuttal. Then a bunch of talking head MSM pundits decide who "won," based on criteria like who they think is the most interesting candidate that week, or who was wearing the snappiest outfit.

Second, Hillary is by no means the best debater of the bunch. Clark (if he runs) is very good, as are Biden and Obama. Any of them could hold his own quite capably against Hillary, and without putting her down or seeming to bully her. And any of them could take on any of the likely Republickers, especially a mental midget like Brownback.

Furthermore, Hillary has a rather annoying, preachy-sounding oratory style. It sometimes sounds like she is lecturing her audience.

And nobody -- I mean NOBODY -- is immune from swiftboating. She's already been on the receiving end of a lot of it, in case you don't remember what happened when she was First Lady. She was accused of all sorts of terrible things, including the murder of Vince Foster. The Republickers will swiftboat any Dem candidate. That's what they do.

Finally, she doesn't win on issues. Especially Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Yeah, I Agree. What Are We Gonna Have? 21 People In A Debate?
Yeah, that might be extreme, but what thay had 10 in a primary debate last time, it was a joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hardrada Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 02:37 AM
Response to Reply #12
38. This stuff is going to involve the entire staff of Saturday Night Live
and then a few former cast members called up again!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
countmyvote4real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #9
23. Ditto.
Thank you for the rundown. You saved me so much time and said it better than I could have. However, I must quote your big finish.

"Finally, she doesn't win on issues. Especially Iraq."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
14. Off limits? Republicans would swiftboat their grandmothers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. I am wondering how well that swiftboating business will work on her?
I hope the Republicans try it on her and she kicks their ass good.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
17. Debates, schmebates. Amy P. on SNL tonight had HRC dead-on.
Mirthless, war flip-flopper, pedantic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G Hawes Donating Member (440 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. It would be a big mistake to put Hillary forward as the Democratic
Edited on Sat Jan-20-07 11:36 PM by G Hawes
presidential candidate and doing so would only ensure a Republican win in 2008. And God knows, that's the last thing we want or need. We need a strong candidate who is actually electable, and Hillary isn't it.

Edit - I meant to post this in response to the OP but messed it up. oh well, i'll leave it here anyway.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
countmyvote4real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. Tonight's SNL open nailed HRC. I'm surprised there's no dedicated thread.
The "I'm half black." bit had many levels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
22. Who has she ever debated?
That guy she ran against in NY after Rudy dropped out? Can anybody even remember his name?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wisteria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #22
26. Good point! She never had a tough Senate race in either of her
Edited on Sun Jan-21-07 01:02 AM by wisteria
two runs, so who has she debated who has been worth anything?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #26
31. Where do people get there ideas?
She had a VERY tight race against Ric Lazio in 2000.

It was a statistical dead heat from the summer right up until the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. Yeah that Ric Lazio is a real force to be reckoned with.
Not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. which has nothing to do
with what I said, which is that the contest was a statistical tie leading right up to the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #31
36. The Lazio debate provides an example of what the OP is talking about
IIRC, Lazio tried to intimidate her during the debate by walking over and waving papers in her face and he came off looking like a jerk.

As a poster above pointed out, republicans would swiftboat their own grandmothers, and I don't think Clinton will have an easy time in the debates (I don't think anybody will).

But, although Clinton's not my candidate, I think she'll do fine. She's not the most charismatic person running, but nobody will be better prepared than she is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. Yes
I think that was what did Lazio in. But to claim that Sen. Clinton had some sort of walk-away victory in 2000 is mis-remembering history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 12:50 AM
Response to Original message
25. Hillary would be Pillaried
"Hillary is very smart and will surround herself with great people to give her the information she needs for debates....
Have you ever tried to bully a woman during a debate like with you wife you never win. Hillary will be off limits to bullying and swift boating it will be an issues based election and she wins on issues".

Well, wouldn't we assume that no matter who is the Democratic nominee they are gonna have great people there to give them information they need to debate? Be real!

Secondly, Hillary is the MOST likely candidate of any we can possibly dream of to be PILLARIED by the Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. pilloried.
Edited on Sun Jan-21-07 01:05 AM by kath
As in pillory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hardrada Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #27
39. I want a new word; "Hillaried!"
Pilloried out of office. Hillaried into office.
vis a vis
Mustered out of the militia. Custered out of the Cavalry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:10 AM
Response to Original message
28. "issues based election" - when was the last time we had such a thing in this country?
Sadly, the Murkan sheeple (by and large) seem to be way too stoopid and shallow to try to understand issues to any depth. They tend to vote on looks, "charisma", how the candidates spouse looks, "who they'd rather have a beer with" and other stupid shit. Add in the "fear card" and anti-intellectualism and real issues don't come in to play at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. 1860 was a good year for substantive debates on issues.
Alas, Lincoln and Douglas both would be considered "unelectable" because they were "too intellectual".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. LOL, it may well have been that long ago,
or nearly so. Not only were they both WAY "too intellectual", but no fokkin' way in hell would Americans, with their microscopic attention spans (and poor command of the language) be able to listen to a real debate that went on for hours.
And what we call a "debate" today (in the context of those televised, artificial Q&A sessions that are broadcast before elections) is actually no such thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 01:19 AM
Response to Original message
32. Hillary will win? - I believe Hillary will cause Obama & Edwards to simply tweek!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 02nd 2014, 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC