{"id":97965,"date":"2016-06-02T09:23:32","date_gmt":"2016-06-02T17:23:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=97965"},"modified":"2016-06-02T12:54:18","modified_gmt":"2016-06-02T20:54:18","slug":"is-trump-a-strong-debater","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=97965","title":{"rendered":"Is Trump A Strong Debater?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Steve Sailer writes<\/a>: I hear a lot about how Trump will crush Hillary in their debates. But is there much evidence that Trump is a strong debater? He mostly seemed to scrape by in the GOP debates, and then flourish the rest of the week when he was alone on stage or in interviews.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s kind of thinking-out-loud isn\u2019t well-suited to debates. A lot of people like how Trump takes them through his thought processes. It\u2019s kind of a democratic way of leading \u2014 the campaign staff doesn\u2019t have his researchers feed focus groups findings to his speechwriters. Instead, he just gets up there and starts talking about what\u2019s on people\u2019s minds \u2014 for example, note Trump thinking out loud, and pretty successfully, about that poor gorilla. And the audience can hear him trying out ideas and work his way through them in real time.<\/p>\n

But all that requires a leisurely pace, which is not found in Presidential debates.<\/p>\n

COMMENTS:<\/p>\n

* Don\u2019t go wobbly Steve.<\/p>\n

Trump has won every battle to this point, so lets remain optimistic. He doesn\u2019t even need to win on the debates, he just needs to have Hilary look old and tired onstage and have America listen to her shrill Midwest nasal dental drill of a voice.<\/p>\n

I think all the debates, campaign stops, TV ads etc. are irrelevant at this point. Everyone on our side had seen what the establishment has in store for us if they win. This election is really about these issues, not the frippery surrounding it.<\/p>\n

* I think that you are asking this question from your own perspective, Steve, as a former debater. How the average American swing voter views who won a so-called debate is a very different thing from how someone like you would judge it, according to the principles that you were trained in, back in the day. I believe that the unwashed masses, on the Internet, viewed Trump to have won almost all of the Republican debates, even though journalists and political pundits almost always thought otherwise. Scott Adams, the \u201cDilbert\u201d creator and persuasion expert, believes that Trump has been playing on a whole different level from all of his competitors.<\/p>\n

* All the liberals at my job think Hillary is a great debater and will demolish Trump in debates, nipping his fascist campaign for fascist walls in the fascist bud.<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t have any idea how it will fall out. Certainly, presidential debates are not high quality. They are a far cry from the Oxford Union, IQ2, or such. Borderline ridiculous.<\/p>\n

My guess is that Trump can\u2019t get up to speed on the issues fast enough because he isn\u2019t interested enough. On the other hand, Clinton is likely to be unable to capitalize on this due to the fact that she\u2019s relatively weak, interpersonally and intellectually. Her goal, whether she knows it or not, has to be to not turn off the entire electorate. So, as long as Trump can deflate\/deflect the gotcha questions they will throw at him, it will be a wash.<\/p>\n

* It\u2019s really all about the zingers and quips. Trump treated the debates as competitive roasts only there to judge who got the best zingers in- which he was totally right about. It wasn\u2019t a traditional collegiate or H.S. debate with rules\u2014it was more akin to that black National Debate team\u2019s \u201cdebates.\u201d And this will be, too.<\/p>\n

Trump gets that decorum and stuffy old rules are out. It\u2019s not a win-on-points thing. Because this is a street fight. This is TV in primetime. This is his wheelhouse.<\/p>\n

The audience will be salivating for him to do it to Crooked Hillary\u2014even her supporters will be hyperventilating looking for his quips. Hillary obviously thinks he will do it to her\u2013and she\u2019s probably ( and stupidly) either lining up her own \u201czingers\u201d (which will fall flat\u2014like Rubio\u2019s did), or else going to play the \u201cTrump is a mean mean bully card\u201d (also will fail\u2014in one of her first debates when she first ran for Senate in NY, the token Republican dude came over and got in her personal space, and her campaign said it was something about \u201cmale domination\u201d and it fell flat as an attack).<\/p>\n

Look, his opening lines are potentially mic-dropping in its hilarity and its truth:<\/p>\n

\u201cSee this woman over here? I paid her to come to my son\u2019s wedding. And she came. She does what her paymasters tell her. Me? I can\u2019t be bought. I\u2019m worth billions; she\u2019s worth whatever access you buy with her. You can have a crooked, bought candidate, or you can have a guy who can\u2019t be bought, and who wins. And America loves a winner.\u201d<\/p>\n

BOOM.<\/p>\n

P.S. it\u2019s also gonna be great when he interrupts her and talks over her. She\u2019s got a rep as a person who gets very angry when she gets ambushed or has to go off script. She\u2019s used to total deference from her staff. Trump is probably planning on interrupting her at key moments to set her off. She\u2019ll either get visibly angry\u2013at which case he\u2019ll harp on her temperament\u2013or do some fake laughing bit to cover her anger, which will be endlessly mocked by Trump\u2019s guys. And if she\u2019s drinking before the debate\u2014as she is a rumored heavy drinker\u2026..<\/p>\n

* Hillary has time, money, and experts to think about how to get under Trump\u2019s skin.<\/p>\n

* The same \u201cexperts\u201d who brought us \u201cDangerous Donald\u201d?<\/p>\n

* Really? This is the insight from a former cog in the wheel of a marketing business. Trump probably laughs at this kind of peon perspective. He laughs at little men. Trump has spent his life locking horns with fellow titans and the aggressive cognitive elites of NYC. I\u2019m sure he will do very well against Hillary. In fact, I think it\u2019ll be a live demonstration on how to systematically dismantle a political opponent.<\/p>\n

The late Christopher Hitchens on Hillary Clinton:<\/p>\n

\u201cEverything about this campaign, and everything about this candidate, was rotten from the very start. Mrs. Clinton has the most unappetizing combination of qualities to be met in many days\u2019 march: she is a tyrant and a bully when she can dare to be, and an ingratiating populist when that will serve. She will sometimes appear in the guise of a \u2018strong woman\u2019 and sometimes in the softer garb of a winsome and vulnerable female. She is entirely un-self-critical and quite devoid of reflective capacity, and has never found that any of her numerous misfortunes or embarrassments are her own fault, because the fault invariably lies with others. And, speaking of where things lie, she can in a close contest keep up with her husband for mendacity. Like him, she is not just a liar but a lie; a phony construct of shreds and patches and hysterical, self-pitying, demagogic improvisations.\u201d (No One Left to Lie To, p. 123)<\/p>\n

* Ted Cruz is probably the best debater of them all, didn\u2019t effect much. As with W people judge a debate on more than academic and policy point scoring, that said Trump could do with preparing and have some of the policy details nailed down, even if he intends his Presidency to be one of delegation.<\/p>\n

* 1) You\u2019re quite correct and Cruz was underwhelming but it is still true that Trump is not a great debater. Trump succeed at debates because he is ideologically different and can stress the big picture points. If you think the Iraq war a big mistake then Trump\u2019s inelegant ramblings on it are great since the other candidates are on the opposite side. So Trump\u2019s ability to win debates is due to his positions being far closer to the voters broadly speaking. The second reason he won debates is that Republican base knows he is on their side and therefore instinctively side with him over all the others including the media. If Trump can highlight the big issues where he differs drastically from Hillary then he should be good.<\/p>\n

2) “As with W people judge a debate on more than academic and policy point scoring”<\/p>\n

True but having a minimum of policy acquittance assures voters that a candidate is \u201ccapable enough\u201d. Trump can\u2019t meet those standards based on what we have seen. On details he is very sketchy. From what I recall he got the nuclear trident question wrong on two occasions despite being publicly humiliated the first time on tv. The question isn\u2019t super important per se but the fact that he didn\u2019t swallow his pride and read up on it, to avoid the same embarrassment, is. This is by far his biggest weakness and shouldn\u2019t be hard to correct yet he is astoundingly lazy,intellectually speaking, so who knows.<\/p>\n

3) Trump was smart to avoid a 1 v 1 debate with Cruz because it would have inevitably exposed him on the details. He won\u2019t escape this fate against Clinton and nor will be able to run down the clock as much. So be prepared for some embarrassing moments. Furthermore, the sort of people who follow Trump through thick and thin are already mostly on his side. The rest of country won\u2019t be as loyal. And nor will be able to use his wit as much as the 1 v 1 debates are more formal and less open to retorts.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s advantage?
\n1) As so many times already Trump\u2019s strength is the ability to fight the match according to his rules. If Hillary tries to come up with smart lines zinging Trump she will be devastated by him. Because he is good at that and she is not quick on her feet. And when faced up against awkward lines and questions she retreats to a snarly and snarky attitude which is a put-off. She does this at debates and with interviewers.<\/p>\n

2)One of his best cards was to stake out a position that is broadly popular but non-establishment, which forces other candidates to look weak or me-too(like Cruz on immigration). So he should always make clear that Hillary won\u2019t say \u201cislamic extremism\u201d and goad her into it for example. Force her to triangulate between his position and Obama\u2019s on one big issue after another. Before and\/or after each debate I would hold a (re)statement on some big issue which would shape the newscycle on the media and on her. She hates speaking to the press so he should force her to and if not she cedes the landscape to him.<\/p>\n

* Steve, you\u2019ve been losing so long that you\u2019ve forgotten how to win. You\u2019ve got to get used to winning again.<\/p>\n

* She\u2019s also got a morally confused, devious and paranoid homosexual (David Brock), Muslim lesbian lady-in-waiting (Huma Weiner) and hordes of brainwashed feminists all across the fruited plain.<\/p>\n

* He should just work on insults and one liners. He a master troll and he really needs to keep offending. If he can make Hillary cry preferably during a debate, that would be the best thing. On the other hand if his people think he hasn\u2019t got their back or that he\u2019s going to back down and apologize, he\u2019s done. Trump isn\u2019t a great debater and his policy flubs are embarrassing, but that doesn\u2019t make any difference. This is the first election where whites will be voting in their interests as something like a bloc group. They are now effectively just another minority. They don\u2019t have the vocabulary or the courage to make that explicit, but they know that Hillary and a continuation of Republican\/Democrat policy positions are poison to them. When one candidate is advocating WW3 abroad and demographic displacement\/voluntary self abnegation and impoverishment at home, it\u2019s easy to ignore wonk stuff and vote for the guy who\u2019s counter signalling against that.<\/p>\n

It helps a lot that Hillary is a very weak candidate with negative charisma and no real appeal to anyone. I won\u2019t be surprised if they pull the nomination out from her again like they did 8 years ago. Her shtick is that it\u2019s her turn. That didn\u2019t work 20 years ago for Dole or 8 years ago for her against Obama, and it\u2019s weak sauce now.<\/p>\n

* This team won the college debate championship. Trump should emulate their style for laughs.<\/p>\n