As usual and as expected (for me anyway), I pulled up Abdul – Jabbar to get his perspective on the first presidential debate between cough-cough x-president trump . . . a proven liar and President Joe Biden. I read the other blog sites and substacks that want me to pay to read them plus an ability to comment. They are all clanging a 4-alarm fire. And why would I pay to comment there when I can do so at Angry Bear? Just some commentary between us all including the unsupported remarks. Not all of the pundits, but many are suggesting Biden is done, done after producing the best economy over 4 years given two years of a pandemic. Kareem suggests we vote based upon their records and what they have done over 4 years and not decide based upon 60 or
Topics:
Bill Haskell considers the following as important: history, politics, US EConomics
This could be interesting, too:
Bill Haskell writes From the Middle Out and Bottom Up
Joel Eissenberg writes The business model of modern universities
Bill Haskell writes The Economics of Killing Medicaid . . .
Angry Bear writes Healthcare in the United States
As usual and as expected (for me anyway), I pulled up Abdul – Jabbar to get his perspective on the first presidential debate between cough-cough x-president trump . . . a proven liar and President Joe Biden. I read the other blog sites and substacks that want me to pay to read them plus an ability to comment.
They are all clanging a 4-alarm fire. And why would I pay to comment there when I can do so at Angry Bear? Just some commentary between us all including the unsupported remarks.
Not all of the pundits, but many are suggesting Biden is done, done after producing the best economy over 4 years given two years of a pandemic. Kareem suggests we vote based upon their records and what they have done over 4 years and not decide based upon 60 or so minutes of an uncontrolled TV WWDebate lacking the necessary referring to smack down the lies and not answering questions. What we had was 60 plus minutes of truth versus the lies.
~~~~~~~
I tend to lean towards the truth all the time . . .
Why I Hate Presidential Debates
A presidential debate can gather 80 million or more watchers. That is sad news. Nothing of substance ever happens during a debate. Candidates bluster, insult, throw around dubious statistics, virtue signal, and even outright lie. But nothing new is learned at a debate that should influence a voter one way or the other. The important information is already out there: what have they done, what plans have they made to solve our problems and what do the experts say about the viability of those plans? Both men have been president and their records are all the evidence required. Anyone who makes up their mind about a candidate based on debates is the worst kind of voter: delusional that they have some special power to see into a person’s heart just by watching them on a stage. It’s lazy, insulting to democracy, and detrimental to the country.
In general, those who support a candidate always believe their candidate “won” the debate. But it doesn’t matter either way. The person who wins the debate isn’t necessarily a better candidate for president, they’re just better at debates, which is not a skill necessary to be a good president. It reminds me of Black Panther when M’Baku challenges T’Challa to be the leader of their country. What people would choose their leader based on hand-to-hand combat, the most useless skill for a modern leader? Fun in a movie, but dumb in real life.
What does it say about us as a society that we insist on this form of ritualized verbal combat that is nothing more than strutting and fretting their hour on the stage filled with sound and fury—signifying nothing?
If you watched just for the entertainment value of two codgers arguing in Real Housewives style, then that’s legit. Grab the popcorn and enjoy. If you’re watching to help make up your mind about which candidate to support, you don’t understand the responsibilities of democracy.