Yeah I know — the big deal was who was going to “win” the debate.
Or as the press wanted to frame it — could Harris prove she was presidential material? Would she provide all the detailed plans the press has been demanding — in 2 minute answers spaced over 90 minutes? Could she keep from being steamrollered by the convicted felon? Could she make a case that would appeal to voters who (still!) aren’t sure who she is and can’t make up their minds between her and the sexual predator/con man?
(That last one has been compared to offering someone the choice of a maggot-infested dead rat for dinner, or chicken — and their question is “How is the chicken cooked?” UPDATE: non acquiescer has what is the original quote. Here is the article in The New Yorker where it appeared — in 2008 when the choice was between Obama and McCain.)
Funny how the convicted felon wasn’t being held to any kind of expectations like that.
Well, I think we know who won the debate — even though this guy can’t admit it.
Fine.
But there’s another way of looking at the debate between Harris and the criminal defendant. Think of it like a job interview.
Normally candidates for a job are interviewed one at a time, usually after resumes and references are checked. In a sane world that would have left only one person on that stage.
The other candidate’s paperwork would never have survived review. He has multiple negative references from people who have worked for and with him. He has a criminal background that should rule him out. His prior performance in the job he is seeking again was beyond terrible. His multiple health issues are a red flag.
Not only would he have gotten a rejection letter instead of an interview, he would have been lucky not to get an order of protection to stay away.
But never mind that. He got the opportunity to make a case for himself. We all got to see how that turned out.
If you look at his performance as a job interview instead of a sporting event and just focus on how he responded to questions, it was a disaster, and not just from the times he took the bait Harris kept throwing at him.
He couldn’t provide coherent answers about what he would do on things he should have been prepared to talk about. (“Well I have concepts of a plan.”) He lied about his record over and over again. He kept repeating bogus accusations over and over, including some that were completely bizarre. His body language was saying things that were not good.
It would be interesting to see an edited version of the debate that just included the questions directed to him and just his responses to them, without the bits where he was trying to respond to Harris.
Looking at the debate like a job interview, it’s hard to imagine anyone being hired after a performance like his. It’s something that might lead to Security being called to escort him from the building…
The fact that a good chunk of the voters, a major political party, a bunch of wealthy sociopathic backers, and the media somehow still think he is a legitimate candidate for the highest office in the land is a great puzzlement.
