Trump ordered to pay $350 million for fraudulent business practices in New York

[tstorm823]

Yes. Without any qualifiers. Did you see the debate? It was bad enough that not only was Trump rambling semi-coherently, he was never rambling semi-coherently about the question being asked.

Yeah, he fixated on things they weren't asking questions about. That's not incoherent. It's not a good debate performance to basically ignore the questions, but it's not incoherent.

Can you point out to me where Harris did something like reply to a question about US manufacturing by rambling about World War III?

Every single day, there are posts online about "incoherent word salads" by Kamala Harris. Some of those criticisms are fair, though most are just partisan circlejerking like you guys do here.

If you want a specific example, Harris was asked in the debate what she'd do different than Biden on immigration, and half her answer was about how Trump rallies are boring.

I have. Biden wasn't, but Harris is many orders of magnitude more coherent. He can barely string a sentence. He recently told a news show it should bring back a presenter 20 years dead.

Also: "She had the other interview with the other guy who was a nice guy I think from Philadelphia from Pennsylvania, he was a nice guy, he was asking her all these — the daily take — they don’t take like I do! Anybody wants to go, go what the hell differences they make — they have — and how dishonest was ABC..."

For every time people on the internet put up something like this for Trump, there is equally one for Kamala. Neither of them have any unique difficulty stringing a sentence together, every human being has moments where they start, stop, and reset in the middle of sentences that will fail to make sense in a vacuum.

They're both worse speakers than Trump was 8 years ago, that I can guarantee. Who is worse now basically depends on the day.

 

[Schadrach]

Yeah, he fixated on things they weren't asking questions about. That's not incoherent. It's not a good debate performance to basically ignore the questions, but it's not incoherent.

Right, but he was both fixated on anything but the topic at hand, and not completely coherent. He was probably the most consistent and coherent in repeating the bullshit "Haitian immigrants are eating pets in Springfield, OH" bit.

and half her answer was about how Trump rallies are boring.

She did a lot of this, and every bit of it was to bait Trump. And he fell for it over and over. When she wasn't actively baiting Trump, she was at least on topic.

 

[tstorm823]

Right, but he was both fixated on anything but the topic at hand, and not completely coherent. He was probably the most consistent and coherent in repeating the bullshit "Haitian immigrants are eating pets in Springfield, OH" bit.

She did a lot of this, and every bit of it was to bait Trump. And he fell for it over and over. When she wasn't actively baiting Trump, she was at least on topic.

Have you considered the likely situation that the topics Trump was deflecting to were planned attacks to hurt Kamala in exactly the same way she was baiting Trump?

Presidential candidates almost never speak actually off the cuff at these debates, they prepare statements in advance for the questions they expect and the points they want to hit, and then fit them in as best they can. Trump does go totally off the cuff sometimes, but even he is almost certainly regurgitating practiced statements, just instead of trying to match the questions as best he can to make it seem like an answer, he treats the questions with disdain and then says whatever the hell he feels like.

This is why Hillary having the questions in advance of the debate with Bernie was such a big deal. People say, and it's true, that anybody should know roughly what the questions are going to be, but roughly and precisely are very different, as knowing precisely what the questions are allows fully prepared statements to look like you can think very deeply on the fly. Someone without the questions is going to have a prepared answer for "what will you do to keep inflation low", but giving that general answer to "what will you do to bring down specifically the cost of cars" is going to come off inauthentic.

 

[Schadrach]

Have you considered the likely situation that the topics Trump was deflecting to were planned attacks to hurt Kamala in exactly the same way she was baiting Trump?

Then he was hilariously bad at doing so. Like the closest he came was with the pet eating Haitians thing, where he got a WTF? sort of reaction because I don't think anyone saw that coming.

 

[Silvanus]

For every time people on the internet put up something like this for Trump, there is equally one for Kamala. Neither of them have any unique difficulty stringing a sentence together, every human being has moments where they start, stop, and reset in the middle of sentences that will fail to make sense in a vacuum.

But he never 'resets'; he'll get fully distracted by whatever tangent has popped into his head, and then another and another. There's no 'reset' to the original topic, or even an attempt to relate his answer to it, because he evidently forgets what he was asked a minute ago or what he was talking about. Similarly these things aren't just nonsensical out-of-context or in a vaccuum-- the entire answers are meaningless word salads.

Let's have a look at one for Kamala. Find the most egregious, nonsense answer you can find.