Bernie v Joe, Who do you like?

[Josquius]

Trump has political skills - and I agree, from my perspective, about his style. But it's worth watching a bit of the re-gendered debate I mentioned to Yi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yC7-JsR2Fk&feature=emb_title

The Guardian piece on it:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/29/clinton-trump-gender-swap-play-her-opponent

Because he is effective and I missed it.

Flipside is I think we focus so much on the negative media Biden's got and his fumbles that we forget he's a serious political operator too - and surprisingly wonkish underneath the persona. I think him against Palin and Ryan showed different skills, but he can pitch it right which is impressive.

Weird article. What I get most from the video is how rude Trump is.

[garbon]

Trump has political skills - and I agree, from my perspective, about his style. But it's worth watching a bit of the re-gendered debate I mentioned to Yi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yC7-JsR2Fk&feature=emb_title

The Guardian piece on it:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/29/clinton-trump-gender-swap-play-her-opponent

Because he is effective and I missed it.

Flipside is I think we focus so much on the negative media Biden's got and his fumbles that we forget he's a serious political operator too - and surprisingly wonkish underneath the persona. I think him against Palin and Ryan showed different skills, but he can pitch it right which is impressive.

Weird article. What I get most from the video is how rude Trump is.

Indeed. Trump still seems awful.

Also, I don't think it is a shocker to anyone who paid attention that Clinton had a tough road to walk in what manner to speak as a female candidate.

[The Minsky Moment]

The only thing I saw in that clip was the part about the TPP, which is one of HRC's worst debate moments since she had clearly flipped for purely political reasons. 

So yes - if you cherry pick out her worst moments in the debate, and flip genders, or change to black-and-white, or dub it into Romanian and use English subtitles, or a add a laugh track, or have it done by kids, it will still look bad. 

[Sheilbh]

Fine - that's one clip the Guardian had as a good example. Newsnight did a longer section with multiple clips.

This ran in Brooklyn and the academic behind it was basically testing the thesis that a woman could not be as rude as Trump.

What she found from her own perspective, which I find from when I've seen it, but from the feedback of New Yorkers who overwhelmingly voted Clinton was that wasn't the case. The two stand-outs was that Trump was more effective, on-point and direct than they realised or seen when they watched the actual debate. Also that the way women are sort-of socially required to present themselves - artificial smiles etc - are weird on men because there's no social pressure on men to smile and appear non-threatening.

There's a more detailed piece here:
https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2017/march/trump-clinton-debates-gender-reversal.html

Salvatore says he and Guadalupe began the project assuming that the gender inversion would confirm what they'd each suspected watching the real-life debates: that Trump's aggression—his tendency to interrupt and attack—would never be tolerated in a woman, and that Clinton's competence and preparedness would seem even more convincing coming from a man.

But the lessons about gender that emerged in rehearsal turned out to be much less tidy. What was Jonathan Gordon smiling about all the time? And didn't he seem a little stiff, tethered to rehearsed statements at the podium, while Brenda King, plainspoken and confident, freely roamed the stage? Which one would audiences find more likeable? [...]

Many were shocked to find that they couldn't seem to find in Jonathan Gordon what they had admired in Hillary Clinton—or that Brenda King's clever tactics seemed to shine in moments where they'd remembered Donald Trump flailing or lashing out. For those Clinton voters trying to make sense of the loss, it was by turns bewildering and instructive, raising as many questions about gender performance and effects of sexism as it answered. [...]

Based on the conversations after the performances, it sounded like audience members had their beliefs rattled in a similar way. What were some themes that emerged from their responses?
We heard a lot of "now I understand how this happened"—meaning how Trump won the election. People got upset. There was a guy two rows in front of me who was literally holding his head in his hands, and the person with him was rubbing his back. The simplicity of Trump's message became easier for people to hear when it was coming from a woman—that was a theme. One person said, "I'm just so struck by how precise Trump's technique is." Another—a musical theater composer, actually—said that Trump created "hummable lyrics," while Clinton talked a lot, and everything she was was true and factual, but there was no "hook" to it. Another theme was about not liking either candidate—you know, "I wouldn't vote for either one." Someone said that Jonathan Gordon [the male Hillary Clinton] was "really punchable" because of all the smiling. And a lot of people were just very surprised by the way it upended their expectations about what they thought they would feel or experience. There was someone who described Brenda King [the female Donald Trump] as his Jewish aunt who would take care of him, even though he might not like his aunt. Someone else described her as the middle school principal who you don't like, but you know is doing good things for you.

What did you find most surprising?
I was particularly struck by the post-performance discussions about effeminacy. People felt that the male version of Clinton was feminine, and that that was bad. As a gay man who worked really hard, especially when I was younger, to erase femininity from my body—for better or worse—I found myself feeling really upset hearing those things. Daryl [the actor playing Jonathan Gordon, the male Clinton] and I have talked about this multiple times since the performances. Never once in rehearsal did we say, "play this more feminine." So I think it was mostly the smiling piece—so many women have told me that they're taught to smile through things that are uncomfortable. It's been really powerful to hear women talk about that, and a learning experience for me. I was surprised by how critical I was seeing [Clinton] on a man's body, and also by the fact that I didn't find Trump's behavior on a woman to be off-putting. I remember turning to Maria at one point in the rehearsals and saying, "I kind of want to have a beer with her!" The majority of my extended family voted for Trump. In some ways, I developed empathy for people who voted for him by doing this project, which is not what I was expecting. I expected it to make me more angry at them, but it gave me an understanding of what they might have heard or experienced when he spoke.

I agree with the audience members and the director - I remember watching this on the news and a penny dropping. Clearly you all here are having a different experience.

I worry about Biden's candidacy for resasons about him, but I also worry that the Democrats haven't evolved in terms of their critique of Trump since 2016 especially if we're still relying on Trump's ineloquence or rudeness or some other trap to catch him (Russia, Ukraine, coronavirus, kids in cages). It feels like there's a risk of doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

[Legbiter]

Yeah male Clinton is an incredibly off-putting shitweasel, even down to the pinched facial expressions. Well done I must say. 

[Oexmelin]

I worry about Biden's candidacy for resasons about him, but I also worry that the Democrats haven't evolved in terms of their critique of Trump since 2016 especially if we're still relying on Trump's ineloquence or rudeness or some other trap to catch him (Russia, Ukraine, coronavirus, kids in cages). It feels like there's a risk of doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

Yep. Hence the whole « Biden will kill them with kindness and relatability  » strikes me as unlikely. I also fear the whole « Biden is corrupt » narrative has taken a firmer root than we may think, while «Trump is corrupt » has been drowned in the whole impeachment/Muller procedural nothingness.

[Legbiter]

Yeah Trump crushes him with a modified 2016 strategy. Biden will wander around lost calling the customers dog-faced pony soldiers and forgetting where he is. And that will be that.

[FunkMonk]

I think the main reason why people believe Biden should be the nominee is that he will bring in the same suburban voters the Democrats won in 2018 to give them the House majority. Locking them up will make the party more robust in swing states, potentially at the cost of losing super liberal voters in California or New York or wherever else is less competitive.

Donald's campaign will probably be to raise the corruption charge repeatedly, call Joe a crypto-communist, and call him Mr. Magoo or whatever else they can think of to stem the losses among suburban voters.

That's the calculus to my mind.

[Caliga]

Donald's campaign will probably be to raise the corruption charge repeatedly

You're probably right though.

[grumbler]

Sleepy Joe is clearly somewhat senile, but Trump is clearly massively senile.  Those who, like Legbiter, are hoping their hero can repeat 2016 haven't been paying attention to his clear mental decline.  While he was a doddering fool in 2016, he looks more like a drooling doddering fool now.  Joe is still just doddering.

Plus, of course, Biden's campaign will have a full three+ years or Trump corruption to play with.  The fact that he's just the leader of a family of grifters feeding from the public trough won't go down well.  Add to that the chance that Trump doesn't get his wish and all of his shit economic decisions come crashing down on him before the election, and I'd not put a lot of money on Trump.

The Democrats should by rights be assured of winning in 2020, because the 55% of the population who disapproves of his job performance includes a fair number of Republicans.  But, no, they have to choose the two candidates with the least amount of charisma as their standard bearers.  That probably drops their chances of winning the presidency from 95% to about 80%.

The Senate races will be interesting.  I have to wonder how the whole republican "let's vote to avoid finding out the truth because we'd have to do the right thing if we allow ourselves to see the facts" vote will go over when people go to the ballot boxes.

[DGuller]

I'm hoping that Bloomberg's media artillery will be able to make up for the chronic inability of Democrats to make GOP pay political price for their cynical dirty games.

[Valmy]

I'm hoping that Bloomberg's media artillery will be able to make up for the chronic inability of Democrats to make GOP pay political price for their cynical dirty games.

It is indeed my main hope for victory. The President has been preparing to destroy Joe Biden for months, if not years, so I am anticipating a pretty stressful and painful election now that he is probably the nominee.

Thank Obama-Jesus for Mike Bloomberg's personal hatred for Donald.

[Josquius]

You just know trump will score points from Ukraine. Somehow.

Fine - that's one clip the Guardian had as a good example. Newsnight did a longer section with multiple clips.

This ran in Brooklyn and the academic behind it was basically testing the thesis that a woman could not be as rude as Trump.

What she

Snip

I'd agree it shows Clinton's slime a lot more. Going on about how awesome his cv is the whole time. But I don't think it makes trump any better.

One thing I'm curious about watching this is I note its a fairly young man and woman they've got there. It's not just a gender switch but an age switch. That alters the dynamic too.

[alfred russel]

The President has been preparing to destroy Joe Biden for months, if not years, so I am anticipating a pretty stressful and painful election now that he is probably the nominee.

Probably but the president is also very easily distracted, as is demonstrated by incoherent 3am tweeting, so I'm doubting his preparation was focused.

[Admiral Yi]

Donald's campaign will probably be to raise the corruption charge repeatedly

You're probably right though.

Why wouldn't they?  No one has bothered to rebut it.