She needs to still show up as scheduled, say that just because trump won't make time for the American people doesn't mean she will ignore them
Either he takes the bait and shows up, or she dominates the news cycle now, before the debate, during the debate, and after it
The whole time trump won't be able to talk about anything besides the debate and how it's not "fair".
It's the common sense move, so I'll be surprised to see it, but I hope they do.
Make it a town hall. We really do need to hear questions and answers of serious topics now that the clown has left the big top.
This is a far better option. Holding a debate without the other candidate is fodder for Trump to do the same on ONN or Fox News. But holding a town hall and inviting Trump as an optional attendee would create engagement, and either Trump will ignore it, join the same one, or hold his own and most likely screw up his own.
Win, win, win.
He'd hold his own to a "town" of handpicked shills.
"Mr. Trump, people are saying immigrants are flooding across our borders to eat our pets before receiving sexual reassignment surgery in prison. Do you have a concept of a plan how to deal with this?"
It looks like he already had at least one called a town hall coordinated with FOX News a week ago. It looks like he only answered questions from Hannity and not the audience full of supporters, so they couldn't even pull off the handpicked shills pretend town hall format.
The moderator should also ask the empty podium the same question they just asked Harris, with a brief pause to emphasize that he is a no-show.
Nah, I'm tired of modern Dems acting like Republicans from a decade ago...
Most of the commenters calling for Harris to do this were probably in elementary school 10 years ago🤣
it's not like the filming of empty podiums is ahistorical.
Just treat the debate as normal, but they just swap to the empty podium where Trump should have been.
After the debate they say Trump showed a marked improvement this time.
Clint Eastwood tried that and it was cringey as fuck
Talking to a chair awkwardly is not at all what's being suggested here
She needs to still show up as scheduled, say that just because trump won't make time for the American people doesn't mean she will ignore them
That reminds of the 2020 presidential election in Poland when both candidates did exactly what you describe - they debated at the same time but in separate studios. And the story how it came to that is wild.
This was after the first round of the elections (where two candidates are selected for the second round), which involved things like last-minute rescheduling of the elections, last-minute candidate swap and effectively throwing away 20 million dollars of public money. Currently there are several criminal investigations conducted against people involved in organisation of that first round. And of course it was all in the middle of the pandemic. So the political chaos was at its absolute peak.
The two candidates were the country's president representing then ruling party and capital city's mayor representing then biggest opposition party. Both of course wanted the debate. The issue was that then ruling party turned the public broadcaster into a party propaganda machine compared by experts to that created by Goebbels. And the core of that propaganda was that the second biggest (private) broadcaster in Poland (owned by Discovery Group) is anti-Polish and cannot be trusted.
Both broadcasters offered they can organise the debate. The private one I believe was also willing to jointly host it. But the ruling party candidate couldn't agree to a debate hosted by the private broadcaster because that would significantly impact the propaganda and expose his many wrongdoings to the manipulated ruling party voters.
On the other hand, the opposition candidate couldn't agree for the debate hosted only by the public broadcaster because that would effectively be 2 hours of him trying to deny lies spread by hosts and the other candidate.
The 2nd round was coming close and no compromise has been found. So on the same day the two broadcasters prepared their studios for two candidates with audience. Ruling party candidate went to public broadcaster, opposition candidate to private one. Both declared the other as a "no-show" and proceeded to have a "debate" with hosts and audience.
Few days later the opposition candidate lost by a small margin.
What a clown show
Just bait him more by attacking his ego
I agree. Trump did a townhall when Harris didn't show up to the first proposed the debate, she should do a townhall to replace the next one if Trump ultimately does not show. It'd be a great way to quell complaints that she is afraid of speaking to the media or press as well.
To qualify as a proposed debate it would have to be a proposal that a reasonable bystander would take seriously.
Reminder.
Back before the 2016 Conventions Trump challenged Bernie Sanders to a debate. Bernie jumped at the chance and Cadet Bonespurs had to run away from his own challenge.
Trump is on tape telling people in the room that the only person he's afraid of is Sanders.
Fast forward to now and he's apparently added Harris to that list. It's beautiful.
Bernie can control a room on power of pure charisma, force of personality and personal authority in a way few people are capable of. Just watch his Fox News town hall.
That’s a weird way to spell “objectively good policy.”
His policies are obviously great, we all know this. But you can't go into a hostile environment like a Fox News Town Hall and completely dominate proceedings on policy alone.
Brave Sir Donald ran away.
Bravely ran away away!
I didn't! You're lying!
When danger reared its ugly head, he cravenly turned his tail and fled
Yes, brave Sir Donald turned about
and gallantly, he chickened out.
His head smashed in
And his heart cut out
And his liver removed
And his bowels unplugged
And his nostrils raped
And his bottom burnt off
And his Toad...
"Rejects"
Retreats in fear
Brave sir Donald
Brave Sir Donald ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Donald turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Donald!
I've watched that movie too many times. I was about to comment "The line is supposed to be 'Tommy' since he's talking to Tommy, The Tit"... Oh wait, it says Donny because Trump... Yeah.
with Harris’ team unsuccessfully pushing for both candidates’ microphones to stay on even when it was not their turn to answer.
Wait a minute, Harris' team was the one pushing for always-on mics? That's actually such a flex lol.
Not really. It was always her tactic to make him go nuts. Provoking him into shouting over her would have gone along with that and just made him look bad.
Therein lies the flex - it shows how predictable and manipulatable trump is.
Yep lol. That is the flex.
I think it would have been a smart choice. The rationale behind muting was trying to force both parties to having a nice, civil discussion, to force decorum upon the proceedings that formerly was just a given, but generally not respected by Trump, by his nature.
However one part of the first debate was that the muting might have saved Trump from his own worst impulses. To be sure, Biden made his own problems that were far far worse, but part of Trump looking relatively reasonable in his conduct that night was being forced only to speak in turn.
Slam dunk is if you let him put his unhinged nature and unreasonable behavior on full display, while also managing to manage him so that you are still heard.
I would not be surprised if a career in the courtroom dealing with all manner of hard to deal with people is the best prep anyone could ask for to deal with a personality like Trump.
Yeah, I imagine that was the strategy, more or less. It's a bold one.
Why are you sending us a cock pic?
The jowls are more similar?
If the joke is supposed to be chicken, you posted the wrong image.
A male chicken is still a chicken
Frank Costanza:
Let me understand, you got the hen, the chicken and the rooster. The rooster goes with the chicken. So, who's having sex with the hen?
George Costanza:
Why don't we talk about it another time.
Frank Costanza:
But you see my point here? You only hear of a hen, a rooster and a chicken. Something's missing!
Mrs. Ross:
Something's missing all right.
Mr. Ross:
They're all chickens. The rooster has sex with all of them.
Yes you are right, just some language confusions there.
In Danish to be called Chicken is "Kylling", Which is the non adult bird, and the species is called Høne which sounds like Hen, but in English is the female bird.
Also in Danish when you eat Chicken it is Kylling, which is definitely not the adult bird, where the meat is dry and tough.
So when in English the meat you eat is called chicken, it either sucks or is in reality Pullet.
So why the word pullet isn't more common, or something else describing the non adult female chicken IDK. When in 90% of cases that seems to be what is understood by "Chicken".
But I'm pretty sure when people are called chicken, it is not supposed to mean the male cock.
But I’m pretty sure when people are called chicken, it is not supposed to mean the male cock.
"Chicken" has no gender, so either a rooster or hen makes the most sense depending on the gender of whoever you're insulting.
Pullet is obscure but poultry is a common way to refer to chicken as a food. Gotta love those multiple borrowings from Norman French.
We call them broilers if we're taking about the animal. They're slaughtered before sexual maturity. That suffices for both male and female.
Since there’s not enough time left for him to recover from this brutal ego bruise, I predict he’ll only do rallies from now on, or appearances on far-right media, because he’ll retreat to his snowglobe for reassurance for a while. He’ll avoid addressing Kamala directly, but he’ll ramp up his own network and rile up his mob. His team will struggle to rein him in, and some appearances might be cancelled.
e: once he gets tired of being reassured, he’ll double-down on the unhinged scale
This would be a good time for Kamala to keep asking for a debate and challenging him. Maybe even agree to do it on Fox to show how weak he is. Even if he accepted, I don’t think Fox would save him from another bad performance. We’ll see how polling works out I guess.
"We invited him but he was too... busy to show up." - Kamala Harris, hopefully
No surprise, she played him like a fiddle.
He also has a habit of rewatching things like that, and I suspect it has made him bitter. Well, more bitter.
Bawk! Bawk bawk! Bawk!
Coo coo ca cha!
Cha-chee cha-chee cha-chee
Has any of you ever SEEN a chicken?
A coodle doodle doo! A doodle doo!
Must be a Brazilian chicken or something
Happy Cakeday! 🍰🎂
I heard he is trying to come up with a good nickname for Kamala.
Maybe he should try “Daddy”?
Trump’s campaign manager, using Trump’s phone: “yes this is definitely Donald Trump bigly president please cancel my appointment of debate thank you bye”
I see why he misses Biden so much. He got cooked in that debate.
Coward
Someone needs to build a huge projection screen outside his rat infested shithole in Florida, and every night he's there, replay the debate for him.
I would donate towards this.
Project chickens onto Trump tower. It'll hit the news, he'll see it, and it'll push him into another debate. His people can't control him. The might be able to manipulate him to some extent (e.g., "you don't need to debate again, you won. What else is there to say/do? All you could do is lose. Leave it on the W."). So, if you goad him enough, hell agree to another one.
I will chip in if someone sets up a GoFundMe to do exactly this
Like, how much could it possibly cost to hire someone in NYC to do this for a few hours some night? Surely this is a crowdfundable amount.
I’m not saying to release a bunch of chickens in Mar-a-Lago and let them go feral like Ybor city. But then again, I’m also not saying not to.
Full coward mode now. LOL
Trump's advisors were reaching for any reason to convince him he won, because they know how disastrous another debate would be.
Not to worry, we will be entertained by the Walz-Vance faceoff, though I'll admit giving TFG the talking to he's deserved since forever ago was immensely gratifying.
Oh hell...please let Walz begin some statement with, "Son..."
Nah, he won't do it, he's a nice guy. But it would be glorious.
He went from orange to yellow.
Couldn't even commit to the "concepts of a plan" for a second debate
His plan is to run like a coward. Remember when in the first election there were hints that he was "trying to lose" to not even be president? Now that is completely gone and it's wild.
I don't think Trump even wants to be president. He just wants to stay out of prison.
Though the guy is so amazingly self centered and delusional, I'm convinced that we could do a Truman Show thing and tell him he won and build a White House set for him and have him "be" president.
That's fair. I agree for the most part. He can also just leave the country.
cowards gonna cowar
Well, as he said, he certainly won the first one. I don't know why he wouldn't wanna keep racking up wins. Unless, maybe he's embarrassed to have been manipulated right… the fuck over… by… a… woman.
Nothing says, "normal" and, "sane" like typing up a long rant in ALL CAPS declaring, "I WON!" while your opponent holds the gold.
Has there been a more fitting place for the "uncouth medalist biting medal" meme?
Schadenfreude isn't my typical genre, but I could watch a debate a week til the election.
I think a debate schedule like that would give Trump an aneurysm
Hold onto your butts. Already seeing tons of comments about it's Kamala who is refusing debates. Man, the spin is so crazy
We should find a way to harness all that spin to generate electricity. We'd solve global warming climate change in 5 years
But he just said he won, why would he back out from such an easy victory? 🫠😂
BAHAHAHAHA
If he debates again he’ll get destroyed but if he doesn’t he looks weak. His debates have zero impact on his base.
At least he's smart enough not to get his ass handed to him twice until election day.
He's not smart, his ego just can't handle everyone, everywhere seeing what a loser he is.
Get fucked, Donald.
I say this is the best outcome. Keep the absolute disaster of a debate the biggest thing people think about when they compare the two candidates for as long as possible.
That's fine. We're tired of all the winning anyway.
She hurt his feelings that fucking bad yo.
If Harris pulls away in the polls, he'll come crawling back.
What about a vice-presidential debate—is that still in the works?
Oh, this fffff...... former president... /s
Lol. What a chicken shit.
That's hilarious. What a pathetic weakling running home with his tail between his legs 😂😂😂
Still the Vance-Walz debate Oct 1 for some potential change for either candidacy. Voters think they know both VP picks but we won't really know who we're dealing with til they go head to head.
Good. Less his mouth opens the better. Harris wins by default.
Also this is pretty old news by now
🐣🐥🐤🐔🍗
::: spoiler CNBC - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for CNBC:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America Wikipedia about this source
:::
Smart. I'm voting for the guy but he's doing worse and worse in each debate.
Honest question, not bait: why?
Mostly the economy, foreign affairs, and national security.
Let's start with foreign affairs, because from my perspective he isn't too good at getting along with other world leaders (or anyone) unless they praise him. How do you suppose foreign affairs would improve?
I think we'd see an ease in tensions in certain parts of the world, especially in Israel and Palestine. Trump can't end the Israel-Hamas War, but he'd probably push to limit funding to Iran like he did before, limiting their ability to fund Hamas' and Hezbollah's activities. He'd also probably pressure countries to stop sending as many migrants into America.
Well, I think you're definitely correct that he'd crack down on immigration via as many means as are available to him, that seems to be a major talking point for him and was a theme for his first term. His platform pledges "peace in Europe and in the Middle East" but doesn't go into any detail, so I won't speculate on that. I won't argue against your positions, because that's not the point. Thanks for actually outlining some policy positions you agree with him on, it's a better answer than I usually get.
I don't think it's a secret that he's a bit of a loose cannon, though, and I think it's pretty apparent from the debate that he's prone to personal attacks and easily baited into pointless arguments about things that don't matter for the country (though they matter to his ego, evidently). I am of the opinion that, policy aside, his first four years were marked by this tendency to double down against any perceived personal slight, to the detriment of his duties as president. He does not appear to be more in control of his outbursts now. Is that concerning for you?
With transparency, I'm a trans person, and Trump/MAGA have made it clear that they intend to demonize me and people like me. I'm aware of the argument that Trump only wishes to restrict trans healthcare for minors, though he's said that he would work to prevent any agency from promoting "the concept of sex and gender transition at any age." Regardless of whether this policy factually seeks to erase all transgender people, the rhetoric surrounding this issue has created, and continues to create, an environment that is harmful for me and people like me. For that reason if for no other, I cannot vote for him. I consider it self-defense. I hope that you can appreciate that position.
I definitely get that position and understand why trans people would vote against Trump, especially since a lot of people in Trump's cabinet and inner circle support or have worked on Project 2025. I have a trans friend myself who will be voting for Kamala.
I agree with you on Trump's rhetoric as well, I'm almost 100% an issues and policy voter though and try to ignore the rhetoric. If rhetoric factored into my decision I probably wouldn't be voting for him, I pretty much loathe how Trump has carried himself on Truth Social for most of the campaign. I don't think that that'll affect how he runs the country though, as he was saying similarly vindictive things when running in 2016 like talking about putting Hillary Clinton in jail or opening up the libel laws to go after MSM outlets that lied about him and none of that ever happened.
I agree that his bark is worse than his bite; whether that's because reality doesn't agree with his rhetoric, or because the power to unilaterally imprison an opponent is outside the scope of presidential powers, or because he was only bloviating and never meant any of it.
I have always said that my main concern isn't Trump himself. I don't think he's evil incarnate or a would-be dictator, largely because I personally don't think he's smart enough to be a supervillain. My main concern is that rhetoric like that whips up reactionary anger; it certainly motivates voters, which is almost certainly why he continues to do it (an angry mob is a force), but it's also worsened an already deep political divide and created a situation where conservatives and liberals (I'm neither, for the record, I'm pretty far to the left of both) don't even really see or hear each other anymore, they only see the masks that have been placed there by their own conditioning.
Feel free to respond again if you wish, I'm happy to let you have the last word since you were so kind as to engage civilly. I've enjoyed the interaction; thank you..
You want to go back to not knowing where your next roll of toilet paper is coming from? Because that's where we ended up under Trump.
What's trump got to do with toilet paper? I don't like the fucker, but I live halfway across the world and we had the exact same issue here, people bought up all the toilet paper readily available in stores.
If that's what I wanted I'd be advocating for expanding the NIH and giving it more money.
Why do you want a worse economy, for the US to become a pariah state, and for all our state secrets to be sold to personally enrich Trump? I mean, all the things you mentioned are reasons to vote against Trump, not for him!
I don't really see how he would be better on national security, given that most, if not all, of our national security agencies regard Trump as a threat. He frequently gives out secrets to foreign powers (whether this is accidental or purposeful is debatable), has a distinct disregard for the military, (including doing nothing about Russia putting bounties on US soldiers, instituting a trans ban in the military against the advice of the military, calling captured soldiers losers, etc.), and he also tried to overturn an election he consistently called fraudulent in spite of no evidence found to support that conclusion and loads of evidence to conclude that the election was fair through a number of methods (fake slates of electors, organizing a mod and several senators and representatives to delay certification of the election, getting Pence to not certify).
If you meant border security, then why did he help kill a bill that would have fixed many of the things he's complaining about?
If you meant border security, then why did he help kill a bill that would have fixed many of the things he’s complaining about?
What most Republicans took issue with the bill was that it actually somewhat ties the president's hands and limits how long the border can be shut down:
The bill includes a new emergency authority that would allow the Department of Homeland Security to, as Biden has put it, “shut down” the border if there are too many migrants trying to cross.
DHS could close the border if Border Patrol encountered 4,000 or more migrants on average over seven days. The border would have to be shut down if those encounters reached a seven-day average of 5,000 or if they exceeded 8,500 in a single day.
The border couldn’t be shut down under this authority for more than 270 days in the first year. And the bill would give the president the power to suspend a border closure “on an emergency basis for up to 45 days if it is in the national interest.”
During an emergency closure, Border Patrol would still need to process a minimum of 1,400 migrants who try to enter the U.S. legally through ports of entry. Only unaccompanied minors would be able to cross between ports of entry. And any migrant who tried to cross illegally two or more times during a border emergency would be barred from the U.S. for a year.
Don't Republicans support doing something now and then fixing things later? They treated fixing healthcare like that by trying to repeal the ACA without a future plan, so it seems odd that they would treat this situation different, no?
Yeah that's fair, and I do think the bill would have been a step in the right direction. I don't like absolutist advocacy, I see this in the pro life movement also. If I was in Congress I would have voted for this bill even though I'm a Republican.
She needs to still show up as scheduled, say that just because trump won't make time for the American people doesn't mean she will ignore them
Either he takes the bait and shows up, or she dominates the news cycle now, before the debate, during the debate, and after it
The whole time trump won't be able to talk about anything besides the debate and how it's not "fair".
It's the common sense move, so I'll be surprised to see it, but I hope they do.
Make it a town hall. We really do need to hear questions and answers of serious topics now that the clown has left the big top.
This is a far better option. Holding a debate without the other candidate is fodder for Trump to do the same on ONN or Fox News. But holding a town hall and inviting Trump as an optional attendee would create engagement, and either Trump will ignore it, join the same one, or hold his own and most likely screw up his own.
Win, win, win.
He'd hold his own to a "town" of handpicked shills.
"Mr. Trump, people are saying immigrants are flooding across our borders to eat our pets before receiving sexual reassignment surgery in prison. Do you have a concept of a plan how to deal with this?"
It looks like he already had at least one called a town hall coordinated with FOX News a week ago. It looks like he only answered questions from Hannity and not the audience full of supporters, so they couldn't even pull off the handpicked shills pretend town hall format.
The moderator should also ask the empty podium the same question they just asked Harris, with a brief pause to emphasize that he is a no-show.
Nah, I'm tired of modern Dems acting like Republicans from a decade ago...
https://i.huffpost.com/gen/1167376/images/o-CLINT-EASTWOOD-EMPTY-CHAIR-facebook.jpg
Most of the commenters calling for Harris to do this were probably in elementary school 10 years ago🤣
it's not like the filming of empty podiums is ahistorical.
Just treat the debate as normal, but they just swap to the empty podium where Trump should have been.
After the debate they say Trump showed a marked improvement this time.
Clint Eastwood tried that and it was cringey as fuck
Talking to a chair awkwardly is not at all what's being suggested here
That reminds of the 2020 presidential election in Poland when both candidates did exactly what you describe - they debated at the same time but in separate studios. And the story how it came to that is wild.
This was after the first round of the elections (where two candidates are selected for the second round), which involved things like last-minute rescheduling of the elections, last-minute candidate swap and effectively throwing away 20 million dollars of public money. Currently there are several criminal investigations conducted against people involved in organisation of that first round. And of course it was all in the middle of the pandemic. So the political chaos was at its absolute peak.
The two candidates were the country's president representing then ruling party and capital city's mayor representing then biggest opposition party. Both of course wanted the debate. The issue was that then ruling party turned the public broadcaster into a party propaganda machine compared by experts to that created by Goebbels. And the core of that propaganda was that the second biggest (private) broadcaster in Poland (owned by Discovery Group) is anti-Polish and cannot be trusted.
Both broadcasters offered they can organise the debate. The private one I believe was also willing to jointly host it. But the ruling party candidate couldn't agree to a debate hosted by the private broadcaster because that would significantly impact the propaganda and expose his many wrongdoings to the manipulated ruling party voters.
On the other hand, the opposition candidate couldn't agree for the debate hosted only by the public broadcaster because that would effectively be 2 hours of him trying to deny lies spread by hosts and the other candidate.
The 2nd round was coming close and no compromise has been found. So on the same day the two broadcasters prepared their studios for two candidates with audience. Ruling party candidate went to public broadcaster, opposition candidate to private one. Both declared the other as a "no-show" and proceeded to have a "debate" with hosts and audience.
Few days later the opposition candidate lost by a small margin.
What a clown show
Just bait him more by attacking his ego
I agree. Trump did a townhall when Harris didn't show up to the first proposed the debate, she should do a townhall to replace the next one if Trump ultimately does not show. It'd be a great way to quell complaints that she is afraid of speaking to the media or press as well.
To qualify as a proposed debate it would have to be a proposal that a reasonable bystander would take seriously.
Reminder.
Back before the 2016 Conventions Trump challenged Bernie Sanders to a debate. Bernie jumped at the chance and Cadet Bonespurs had to run away from his own challenge.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/no-show-trump-now-says-debate-sanders-would-be-inappropriate-n581826
Trump is on tape telling people in the room that the only person he's afraid of is Sanders.
Fast forward to now and he's apparently added Harris to that list. It's beautiful.
Bernie can control a room on power of pure charisma, force of personality and personal authority in a way few people are capable of. Just watch his Fox News town hall.
That’s a weird way to spell “objectively good policy.”
His policies are obviously great, we all know this. But you can't go into a hostile environment like a Fox News Town Hall and completely dominate proceedings on policy alone.
Brave Sir Donald ran away. Bravely ran away away!
I didn't! You're lying!
When danger reared its ugly head, he cravenly turned his tail and fled
Yes, brave Sir Donald turned about and gallantly, he chickened out.
His head smashed in
And his heart cut out
And his liver removed
And his bowels unplugged
And his nostrils raped
And his bottom burnt off
And his Toad...
"Rejects"
Retreats in fear
Brave sir Donald
Brave Sir Donald ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Donald turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Donald!
All lies!
Panda express...
Because he's an orange chicken
I get use this image nearly daily.
Thanks I read that in jathom’s voice
I've watched that movie too many times. I was about to comment "The line is supposed to be 'Tommy' since he's talking to Tommy, The Tit"... Oh wait, it says Donny because Trump... Yeah.
Wait a minute, Harris' team was the one pushing for always-on mics? That's actually such a flex lol.
Not really. It was always her tactic to make him go nuts. Provoking him into shouting over her would have gone along with that and just made him look bad.
Therein lies the flex - it shows how predictable and manipulatable trump is.
Yep lol. That is the flex.
I think it would have been a smart choice. The rationale behind muting was trying to force both parties to having a nice, civil discussion, to force decorum upon the proceedings that formerly was just a given, but generally not respected by Trump, by his nature.
However one part of the first debate was that the muting might have saved Trump from his own worst impulses. To be sure, Biden made his own problems that were far far worse, but part of Trump looking relatively reasonable in his conduct that night was being forced only to speak in turn.
Slam dunk is if you let him put his unhinged nature and unreasonable behavior on full display, while also managing to manage him so that you are still heard.
I would not be surprised if a career in the courtroom dealing with all manner of hard to deal with people is the best prep anyone could ask for to deal with a personality like Trump.
Yeah, I imagine that was the strategy, more or less. It's a bold one.
Why are you sending us a cock pic?
The jowls are more similar?
If the joke is supposed to be chicken, you posted the wrong image.
A male chicken is still a chicken
Frank Costanza: Let me understand, you got the hen, the chicken and the rooster. The rooster goes with the chicken. So, who's having sex with the hen?
George Costanza: Why don't we talk about it another time.
Frank Costanza: But you see my point here? You only hear of a hen, a rooster and a chicken. Something's missing!
Mrs. Ross: Something's missing all right.
Mr. Ross: They're all chickens. The rooster has sex with all of them.
Frank Costanza: That's perverse.
https://www.quotes.net/mquote/847561
And Trump is still a big ol’ cock
More like a tiny, insignificant one
Touché
Yes you are right, just some language confusions there.
In Danish to be called Chicken is "Kylling", Which is the non adult bird, and the species is called Høne which sounds like Hen, but in English is the female bird.
Also in Danish when you eat Chicken it is Kylling, which is definitely not the adult bird, where the meat is dry and tough.
So when in English the meat you eat is called chicken, it either sucks or is in reality Pullet.
So why the word pullet isn't more common, or something else describing the non adult female chicken IDK. When in 90% of cases that seems to be what is understood by "Chicken".
But I'm pretty sure when people are called chicken, it is not supposed to mean the male cock.
"Chicken" has no gender, so either a rooster or hen makes the most sense depending on the gender of whoever you're insulting.
Pullet is obscure but poultry is a common way to refer to chicken as a food. Gotta love those multiple borrowings from Norman French.
We call them broilers if we're taking about the animal. They're slaughtered before sexual maturity. That suffices for both male and female.
Ok
I gotchu
Calling it now:
Since there’s not enough time left for him to recover from this brutal ego bruise, I predict he’ll only do rallies from now on, or appearances on far-right media, because he’ll retreat to his snowglobe for reassurance for a while. He’ll avoid addressing Kamala directly, but he’ll ramp up his own network and rile up his mob. His team will struggle to rein him in, and some appearances might be cancelled.
e: once he gets tired of being reassured, he’ll double-down on the unhinged scale
This would be a good time for Kamala to keep asking for a debate and challenging him. Maybe even agree to do it on Fox to show how weak he is. Even if he accepted, I don’t think Fox would save him from another bad performance. We’ll see how polling works out I guess.
"We invited him but he was too... busy to show up." - Kamala Harris, hopefully
No surprise, she played him like a fiddle.
He also has a habit of rewatching things like that, and I suspect it has made him bitter. Well, more bitter.
Bawk! Bawk bawk! Bawk!
Coo coo ca cha!
Cha-chee cha-chee cha-chee
Has any of you ever SEEN a chicken?
A coodle doodle doo! A doodle doo!
Must be a Brazilian chicken or something
Happy Cakeday! 🍰🎂
I heard he is trying to come up with a good nickname for Kamala.
Maybe he should try “Daddy”?
Trump’s campaign manager, using Trump’s phone: “yes this is definitely Donald Trump bigly president please cancel my appointment of debate thank you bye”
I see why he misses Biden so much. He got cooked in that debate.
Coward
Someone needs to build a huge projection screen outside his rat infested shithole in Florida, and every night he's there, replay the debate for him.
I would donate towards this.
Project chickens onto Trump tower. It'll hit the news, he'll see it, and it'll push him into another debate. His people can't control him. The might be able to manipulate him to some extent (e.g., "you don't need to debate again, you won. What else is there to say/do? All you could do is lose. Leave it on the W."). So, if you goad him enough, hell agree to another one.
I will chip in if someone sets up a GoFundMe to do exactly this
Like, how much could it possibly cost to hire someone in NYC to do this for a few hours some night? Surely this is a crowdfundable amount.
I’m not saying to release a bunch of chickens in Mar-a-Lago and let them go feral like Ybor city. But then again, I’m also not saying not to.
Full coward mode now. LOL
Trump's advisors were reaching for any reason to convince him he won, because they know how disastrous another debate would be.
Not to worry, we will be entertained by the Walz-Vance faceoff, though I'll admit giving TFG the talking to he's deserved since forever ago was immensely gratifying.
Oh hell...please let Walz begin some statement with, "Son..."
Nah, he won't do it, he's a nice guy. But it would be glorious.
He went from orange to yellow.
Couldn't even commit to the "concepts of a plan" for a second debate
His plan is to run like a coward. Remember when in the first election there were hints that he was "trying to lose" to not even be president? Now that is completely gone and it's wild.
I don't think Trump even wants to be president. He just wants to stay out of prison.
Though the guy is so amazingly self centered and delusional, I'm convinced that we could do a Truman Show thing and tell him he won and build a White House set for him and have him "be" president.
That's fair. I agree for the most part. He can also just leave the country.
cowards gonna cowar
Well, as he said, he certainly won the first one. I don't know why he wouldn't wanna keep racking up wins. Unless, maybe he's embarrassed to have been manipulated right… the fuck over… by… a… woman.
Nothing says, "normal" and, "sane" like typing up a long rant in ALL CAPS declaring, "I WON!" while your opponent holds the gold.
Has there been a more fitting place for the "uncouth medalist biting medal" meme?
Schadenfreude isn't my typical genre, but I could watch a debate a week til the election.
I think a debate schedule like that would give Trump an aneurysm
Hold onto your butts. Already seeing tons of comments about it's Kamala who is refusing debates. Man, the spin is so crazy
We should find a way to harness all that spin to generate electricity. We'd solve
global warmingclimate change in 5 yearsBut he just said he won, why would he back out from such an easy victory? 🫠😂
BAHAHAHAHA
If he debates again he’ll get destroyed but if he doesn’t he looks weak. His debates have zero impact on his base.
At least he's smart enough not to get his ass handed to him twice until election day.
He's not smart, his ego just can't handle everyone, everywhere seeing what a loser he is.
Get fucked, Donald.
I say this is the best outcome. Keep the absolute disaster of a debate the biggest thing people think about when they compare the two candidates for as long as possible.
That's fine. We're tired of all the winning anyway.
She hurt his feelings that fucking bad yo.
If Harris pulls away in the polls, he'll come crawling back.
What about a vice-presidential debate—is that still in the works?
Oh, this fffff...... former president... /s
Lol. What a chicken shit.
That's hilarious. What a pathetic weakling running home with his tail between his legs 😂😂😂
Still the Vance-Walz debate Oct 1 for some potential change for either candidacy. Voters think they know both VP picks but we won't really know who we're dealing with til they go head to head.
Good. Less his mouth opens the better. Harris wins by default.
Also this is pretty old news by now
🐣🐥🐤🐔🍗
::: spoiler CNBC - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report) Information for CNBC:
::: spoiler Search topics on Ground.News https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/12/trump-rejects-second-harris-debate.html ::: Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
Smart. I'm voting for the guy but he's doing worse and worse in each debate.
Honest question, not bait: why?
Mostly the economy, foreign affairs, and national security.
Let's start with foreign affairs, because from my perspective he isn't too good at getting along with other world leaders (or anyone) unless they praise him. How do you suppose foreign affairs would improve?
I think we'd see an ease in tensions in certain parts of the world, especially in Israel and Palestine. Trump can't end the Israel-Hamas War, but he'd probably push to limit funding to Iran like he did before, limiting their ability to fund Hamas' and Hezbollah's activities. He'd also probably pressure countries to stop sending as many migrants into America.
Well, I think you're definitely correct that he'd crack down on immigration via as many means as are available to him, that seems to be a major talking point for him and was a theme for his first term. His platform pledges "peace in Europe and in the Middle East" but doesn't go into any detail, so I won't speculate on that. I won't argue against your positions, because that's not the point. Thanks for actually outlining some policy positions you agree with him on, it's a better answer than I usually get.
I don't think it's a secret that he's a bit of a loose cannon, though, and I think it's pretty apparent from the debate that he's prone to personal attacks and easily baited into pointless arguments about things that don't matter for the country (though they matter to his ego, evidently). I am of the opinion that, policy aside, his first four years were marked by this tendency to double down against any perceived personal slight, to the detriment of his duties as president. He does not appear to be more in control of his outbursts now. Is that concerning for you?
With transparency, I'm a trans person, and Trump/MAGA have made it clear that they intend to demonize me and people like me. I'm aware of the argument that Trump only wishes to restrict trans healthcare for minors, though he's said that he would work to prevent any agency from promoting "the concept of sex and gender transition at any age." Regardless of whether this policy factually seeks to erase all transgender people, the rhetoric surrounding this issue has created, and continues to create, an environment that is harmful for me and people like me. For that reason if for no other, I cannot vote for him. I consider it self-defense. I hope that you can appreciate that position.
I definitely get that position and understand why trans people would vote against Trump, especially since a lot of people in Trump's cabinet and inner circle support or have worked on Project 2025. I have a trans friend myself who will be voting for Kamala.
I agree with you on Trump's rhetoric as well, I'm almost 100% an issues and policy voter though and try to ignore the rhetoric. If rhetoric factored into my decision I probably wouldn't be voting for him, I pretty much loathe how Trump has carried himself on Truth Social for most of the campaign. I don't think that that'll affect how he runs the country though, as he was saying similarly vindictive things when running in 2016 like talking about putting Hillary Clinton in jail or opening up the libel laws to go after MSM outlets that lied about him and none of that ever happened.
I agree that his bark is worse than his bite; whether that's because reality doesn't agree with his rhetoric, or because the power to unilaterally imprison an opponent is outside the scope of presidential powers, or because he was only bloviating and never meant any of it.
I have always said that my main concern isn't Trump himself. I don't think he's evil incarnate or a would-be dictator, largely because I personally don't think he's smart enough to be a supervillain. My main concern is that rhetoric like that whips up reactionary anger; it certainly motivates voters, which is almost certainly why he continues to do it (an angry mob is a force), but it's also worsened an already deep political divide and created a situation where conservatives and liberals (I'm neither, for the record, I'm pretty far to the left of both) don't even really see or hear each other anymore, they only see the masks that have been placed there by their own conditioning.
Feel free to respond again if you wish, I'm happy to let you have the last word since you were so kind as to engage civilly. I've enjoyed the interaction; thank you..
You want to go back to not knowing where your next roll of toilet paper is coming from? Because that's where we ended up under Trump.
What's trump got to do with toilet paper? I don't like the fucker, but I live halfway across the world and we had the exact same issue here, people bought up all the toilet paper readily available in stores.
If that's what I wanted I'd be advocating for expanding the NIH and giving it more money.
Why do you want a worse economy, for the US to become a pariah state, and for all our state secrets to be sold to personally enrich Trump? I mean, all the things you mentioned are reasons to vote against Trump, not for him!
I don't really see how he would be better on national security, given that most, if not all, of our national security agencies regard Trump as a threat. He frequently gives out secrets to foreign powers (whether this is accidental or purposeful is debatable), has a distinct disregard for the military, (including doing nothing about Russia putting bounties on US soldiers, instituting a trans ban in the military against the advice of the military, calling captured soldiers losers, etc.), and he also tried to overturn an election he consistently called fraudulent in spite of no evidence found to support that conclusion and loads of evidence to conclude that the election was fair through a number of methods (fake slates of electors, organizing a mod and several senators and representatives to delay certification of the election, getting Pence to not certify).
If you meant border security, then why did he help kill a bill that would have fixed many of the things he's complaining about?
What most Republicans took issue with the bill was that it actually somewhat ties the president's hands and limits how long the border can be shut down:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/new-immigration-asylum-reform-bill-released-senate-text-rcna136602
Don't Republicans support doing something now and then fixing things later? They treated fixing healthcare like that by trying to repeal the ACA without a future plan, so it seems odd that they would treat this situation different, no?
Yeah that's fair, and I do think the bill would have been a step in the right direction. I don't like absolutist advocacy, I see this in the pro life movement also. If I was in Congress I would have voted for this bill even though I'm a Republican.