Thursday, September 22, 2016

Does it matter who “wins” upcoming debates? We’ll think what we want

The first debate between the two major presidential candidates won’t take place until Monday. Yet I already can hear the rantings and ragings taking place in my mind over the event’s results.
A classic boxing match

The kind of people inclined to take seriously the presidential bid of Donald Trump are going to vehemently insist he won! They'll make the argument that he wiped the floor with that ugly hag’s face and gave her the smackdown that society should have given her years ago.

IT WON’T MATTER what actually happens. They’re going to want to perceive a victory, no matter what reality says. Heck, Trump could probably make a major gaffe, and his backers will claim it’s really a significant blow to the Clinton campaign.

Likewise, other people are going to see Trump and hear what he says that day when Trump and Hillary Clinton face off, and they’re going to look for every stupid bit of babble that comes from Donald’s mouth.

They’re going to leap all over every tidbit they can find to make the man out to be a complete moron!

Hillary already is the winner, in their minds. The fact is that nothing will change this perception.

ALL OF WHICH is my way of saying that I’m not exactly looking forward to the presidential debates – the first of which takes place next week at Hofstra University in upstate New York.
Worthy of the hype?

If anything, I’m actually more intrigued by the potential for the one vice-presidential debate set for Oct. 4 at Longwood University in Virginia. I don’t expect a repeat of the 1988 V-P sparring match when Democrat Lloyd Bentsen tagged Republican Dan Quayle with the line (“You’re no ‘Jack Kennedy’”) that many people most remember about him.

That, and the bit about using the obsolete spelling (“potatoe”) for the starchy vegetable.

But back to the debates. The Vice Presidential brawl could wind up being the national introduction for both Tim Kaine (a Virginia senator) and Mike Pence (an Indiana governor).

IT COULD GIVE us the lasting impression we carry of both men as they try to create the impression that we could trust them to be president, should it wind up that the person we actually voted for dies or is otherwise incapacitated while in office.

That could be particularly important for Pence, since there are many people who are grudgingly saying they’ll vote for Trump because they’re trusting he’ll surround himself with people who are actually qualified to do the posts for which he’s picking them.

While many Clinton backers are supporting her merely because they’re too appalled by the thought of someone as gaudy as Trump being put in a position of authority.

While for Trump, I’m sure his interest in being president isn’t so much that he wants the office as much as he figures he’s cutting out the middle-man, so to speak.

HE’S A BUSINESS executive who likely has had to deal with countless government officials throughout the years, and probably thinks they just get in the way of allowing him to operate as he’d truly like to.

This may well be the attitude he tries to convey during his three debate appearances. Even though Trump himself has publicly complained about the fact that debates will have moderators. He’d rather have a free-for-all with Clinton, because a moderator (it will be one-time Chicago newsman Lester Holt for the first debate) might actually call him out publicly on nonsense he spews.
Would it matter if Trump did worse than Quayle?

Although I suspect that his followers won’t care. They’ll be prepared to buy the nonsense as fact, or else will be so confused that it won’t matter.

And everybody is most likely to be willing to go along with the spin being spewed following the debates by the political pontificators; all of whom will try to convince you that your preferred candidate is “da winnah, and still champeen!”


No comments: