ERROR: The request could not be satisfied
www.salon.com

I don’t know what was wrong with Joe Biden. It’s hard to imagine that they ever would have asked for a debate if this was the way he is normally. We’ve seen him recently holding press conferences and giving speeches and he seemed to be fine. They said he had a cold so maybe he really was on drugs — Nyquil or Mucinex or something that made him seem so shaky and frail. Whatever it was, it was a terrible debate for him and if he does stay in the race (which is almost certain in my opinion) the campaign is going to have a lot of work to do to dig out of the hole that was dug last night. The media smells blood and they are circling like a bunch of starved piranhas.

. . . For some odd reason, moderator Jake Tapper told Trump in the beginning that he didn’t need to answer the questions and that he could use the time however he wanted. Trump ran with that, essentially giving a rally speech whenever he had the floor and was unresponsive to the vast majority of the questions. He made faces and insulted Biden to his face, at one point calling him a criminal and a Manchurian candidate. If anyone had said 10 years ago that this would happen at a presidential debate they would have been laughed out of the room.

After the debate when most of the country had turned off cable news or gone to bed, CNN aired its fact check. And it’s a doozy:

It sure would have been good if even some of that epic litany of lies could have been checked while people were still watching. The decision to have the moderators sit like a couple of potted plants woodenly asking questions about child care while Trump responded with irrelevant lies was inexplicable. Why did they even bother to ask questions at all? They could have just run the timer and let the candidates talk for two minutes each about anything they wanted. It probably would have been more enlightening.

    • bloodfart
      45·
      6 months ago

      Don’t bring Perot 92 up if you really want to believe in spoilers. After everyone freaked out and made that accusation his campaign was shown to have only decreased Clinton’s margin of victory in the electoral college.

      It seems counterintuitive but remember that Clinton ran conservative to scoop up republicans who were mad hw bush lied about taxes.

      Perot 92 also refutes the idea that third parties can only act as spoilers because perots nafta platform drug Clinton and hw bush’s positions on the trade agreement into the public view kicking and screaming. It’s the reason there was no argument from anyone that we’d need to replace it after it expired before Clinton’s first term was even over.

      Political parties aren’t stupid. They have people whose whole education and job is all about knowing how to pick up just enough votes in particular districts in order to win. If you always vote for them no matter what then why would they adopt your platform and policies when they could tack right on the border and pick up a district in Pennsylvania?

      You went out of your way to describe third party votes in a lot of flowery language, let me describe third party votes in concrete language:

      Third party votes, like all votes, are a record of exactly what positions a party needs to take in order to win each district. If you vote for a candidate who is imprisoning people at the border and funding and denying a genocide, you are telling all the political parties that will spend years poring over the recorded votes “you can lock migrants up and supply and deny a genocide and I’ll still vote for you”.

      Stop doing that.

      Vote for a candidate from a party with a platform that reflects your values and politics and reap the real documented benefits of it instead of throwing your support behind your abusers.

      It’s not a “fuck you”, it’s not a middle finger, it’s telling politicians in the literal only language they listen to what they have to do to get your support.

        • bloodfart
          24·
          6 months ago

          Lincoln’s second term was a third party victory running under the Union party.

          It’s also a great example of a third party causing a major party to change its position for the better because it represents creating a new, broad coalition including a bunch of extant parties that popped up to capitalize on new identities and platforms that sprang into being in the lead up to the civil war and during it.

          You know, it’s almost like if you think we’re headed for another civil war then there’s a lesson there…

          Of course if you wanna stick with recent stuff, Perot 92, like I said, had a positive effect on both parties because his campaign forced them to talk about nafta instead of glossing over the fact that both Clinton and hw bush held the same incredibly anti-worker positions and neither was interested in wrestling with the details of how the trade agreement would impact American lives.

          In this very moment both Biden and trump are trying to bring back (or recreate!) the American jobs lost to nafta.

          It’s almost like there’s a lesson there…

          Another great example of a third party causing one of the two major parties to change their platform was Nader 2000, who literally ran on the platform of pushing the democrats left and suddenly, as if like a bolt from the blue, the democrats ran more left campaigns in 04 and 08.

          Surely there’s no lesson there…

          I already detailed explicitly why and how your description of third party votes as protest votes is wrong and represents a fundamentally flawed understanding of the American electoral process, so instead of rehashing that, I’ll talk about the Simpsons.

          There’s a funny bit where two tentacled space aliens with big sharp teeth are campaigning to get American votes on different platforms that both boil down to killing and eating their constituents in slightly different ways. A guy pipes up and says “I don’t like any of this killing and eating business, I’m gonna vote third party!” And one of the aliens says “go ahead, throw your vote away!” And the guy takes on a sheepish expression and sits back down.

          It’s very funny.

          Not because voting third party is throwing your vote away, the conceit of the bit is that voting for either the democrat or republican monster would be throwing your vote away because they intend to kill and eat you, but because the person who steps out and voices an alternative is so afraid of the possibility losing that he can’t continue to speak out against the explicit guarantee of losing.

          As I said before, your vote is the only way you can force politicians to listen to you. Don’t throw it away telling them that you’ll stand with them even when they commit atrocities, make it clear that if they need your vote they have to take up your platform.

          If you do anything but vote third party you’re literally, not figuratively, literally, explicitly, in writing, expressing support for the democrats and republicans genocide.

          Don’t do that.