220
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

Let's say she did have an earpiece in. Why should I be mad about it? Every speech a president ever gives is going to be read from a teleprompter and written by a staffer.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Theoretically, debates are supposed to be off-the-cuff. But like I said to someone else, even if beneath the podium, Frank Oz was controlling her because she's really a Muppet... that didn't force him to say anything about immigrants eating dogs and he knows because he saw it on TV.

[-] Mirshe@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Exactly this. Kamala Harris didn't necessarily WIN, so much as Donald Trump wadded the whole debate up and threw it in the fireplace. She made some arguably-innocuous jabs and Trump got INCREDIBLY bent out of shape about it, and looked incredibly unprofessional and non-presidential yelling about how immigrants were eating dogs and Democrats were executing babies in the ER.

[-] eldoom@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

wadded the whole debate up and ~~threw it in the fireplace~~ tried to flush it down the toilet

load more comments (2 replies)
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
220 points (96.2% liked)

Skeptic

1290 readers
1 users here now

A community for Scientific Skepticism:

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism, sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence.

Do not confuse this with General Skepticism, Philosophical Skepticism, or Denialism.

Things we like:

Things we don't like:

Other communities of interest:

"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence." -David Hume

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS