我在看昨天的辯論之前,留下這段話,以免我看後瞎評論:“在今晚矚目的首場總統辯論前說些話,根據心理學的期望值或Expectation, 如果拜登今天表現正常,沒有說老年癡呆的話,他就贏了今天的辯論。因為各方輿論都在預料他出醜,川普也灼灼逼人,一副必勝的勢頭。這讓我回想到小布什和John Kerry的辯論前,媒體把Kerry標榜成神辯手,還去耶魯采訪他的教授,教授對Kerry美譽有加,問教授對小布什怎麽看,答曰不記得有這位學生。結果首場辯論下來,小布什的表現not bad at all, 實質上小布什贏了辯論。Lowering your explanations is crucial here[Chuckle]”
我當過很多年的美國高中辯論裁判,川普這德行,我中場就判他輸。 Chris Wallace昨天對川普也太nice了,完全就應該強行教訓川普懂得基本做人的規矩,甚至不惜中斷辯論都是可以理解的。Chris Wallace為哈佛校友,父親Mike是美國傳奇的電視節目《60分鍾》的主持人,Chris可以說學業和教養都深厚。況且Chris Wallace是美國著名保守派電視Fox的主播,他的問題再怎麽也看不出是專門幫自由派拜登的。但是Wallace對川普根本沒有辦法,因為川普完全我行我素,這是他們的實際對話:
Wallace在辯論中專門對川普說: “The country would be better served if we allowed both people to speak with fewer interruptions,”; “I’m appealing to you, sir, to do that.” (大意:“如果我們雙方都不怎麽打斷對方, 我們將會更好地為美國服務”;“先生,我特別期望你這樣做”)
川普反擊:“Well, and him, too,” (“但是,他,也應該”)
Wallace: “Well, frankly, you’ve been doing more interrupting,” (“直率地說,你打斷得更多”)。
川普說:“But he does plenty,” (“但是他也做了不少”)
Wallace總結道:“No, less than you have,” (“不對,比你做得少”)
幾乎在每次的二分鍾不允許打斷的陳述中,川普都打斷拜登,很多次根本不可能讓拜登說完話,拜登急了就用了個:“It's hard to get any word in with this clown,"(“麵對這個小醜很難插進任何字”)。這樣弄成Wallace成了沒帶武器的警察,川普不是講Law and Order嗎?他在公共場合都視規章為兒戲,誰還聽得進他作為總統所說的法製?即使Wallace去努力執行規則,川普的瘋狂支持者們還稱Wallace參與了辯論。
我覺得還好,他被兩個無賴激怒了,如果更冷靜就更好了.真正沒有底線的是另兩位。尤其chris wallace, 辱沒了他爹 mike wallace的英名。chris wallace是一辯,白等是二辯,對方辯手川普一個,沒有moderator
nasdaq100 發表評論於
川普就是個垃圾
BananaeEggs 發表評論於
川普是真小人,而習假博則是偽君子。
lucky101 發表評論於
哈佛畢業的, 耶魯家長。總聽樓主說這亇。精英就絕對正確,哈哈哈!
nightrider 發表評論於
回複 'cng' 的評論 :
"這以後,還會有外國留學生願意來美國留學嗎?
這就是所謂的軟實力的流失吧。"
With charlatans like you claiming expertise in crystallography yet ignorant of basic trigonometry filling up fourth rate US colleges, who wants to pay to be conned?
nightrider 發表評論於
回複 '金玉屋' 的評論 :
Bravo! Well said!
nightrider 發表評論於
回複 'jeffthetiger' 的評論 :
It is not just about physical protection. By the way, viral infection is physical harm too, only that you cannot see the harm coming with your naked eyes. You are saying the fact that the US presidents are under the tightest security on the planet alone leads to they are safer than anyone else on the planet. I am saying your logic is wrong. There are two factors working against each other. Attack and protection. It is an arms race. President Ronald Reagan was shot in point blank range through the lung.
My previous counterexample has already refuted your argument: Someone who is a nobody living in the middle of nowhere on an island can easily stay unmolested by the corona virus and is safer than the President of the US.
Drawing a definitive conclusion from one factor alone like you did is ludicrous.
More specifically regarding the protection from the viral infection, it seems you are claiming intimate knowledge of how the Secret Service's procedures. Why don't you enlighten us of the protocols and let us see if they are water tight or riddled with holes?
what the Secret Service "does"!
......Secret Service only protects ......
算了,懶得指出了.
回複 'jeffthetiger' 的評論 :
......what the Secret Service do.
......Secret Service only protect ......
jeffthetiger 發表評論於
【nightrider 發表評論於 2020-10-02 14:31:57 How much can "保安" do to a virus? 】
Seems you understand English but do not understand what security means and what the Secret Service do. Maybe you believe the Secret Service only protect the president from physical harm in which case you should go back and check again.
The US President is the biggest target in the world for all sorts of attacks, true. But this is true for the last 80 years or so. When was the last time a US President being attacked, and when was an ordinary American being attacked?
Give me a break!
路邊的蒲公英 發表評論於
應該設計成桌子上有按鈕,輪到誰講話,按下按鈕,另外一方話筒就沒聲音了。
nightrider 發表評論於
How much can "保安" do to a virus? The US President is the biggest target in the world for all sorts of attacks and has the highest degree of contact with other human beings. Someone who is a nobody living in the middle of nowhere on an island can easily stay unmolested by the corona virus. How do you ever deduce "如果美國總統能中招,還有誰不能?" What ludicrosity!
"川普在辯論時完全就是個土匪的形象,根本不像是美國總統,連個有教養的人都夠不上". Right, sir, speaking like a virtue signaling coward and ingrate. Instead of standing your own ground to protect your own family and properties like a real man as the McCloskey's and President Trump, you would prefer to act out your ideal of a well educated person and kneel like Biden to the invading 土匪 watching them pillaging through your home ravishing your family members.
Is this what you instill in the students you consult for Ivy League admissions and in your own son, cowardice and capitulation to vile intimidation and downright invasion of private properties? This must be your ideal model of a well bred and well educated elite personality https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMqnbxs7Pf4
Excuse me, sir. 土匪? Who are the 土匪's? You must be having amnesia, sir. Have you forgotten the 土匪 who invaded your own neighbourhood? It was your neighbour the McCloskey's stood up against the 土匪 and protected you and your neighbours with their bravery and the threat of violent resistance. Would you have the guts to do the same even if the 土匪 physically barge into your house and harass even harm your wife and children? You probably t;hink the McCloskey's appearance resembles 土匪 more than the real 土匪 do? Are you going to accuse them too?
You did not even have the courage to call the true invading 土匪 土匪. In all your articles recounting the McCloskey's you never called BLM 土匪. You call President Trump 土匪 only because you will bear no adverse consequences.
So far I have not seen you showed any gratitude towards the McCloskey's. Maybe you have expressed it to them in private that you have not disclosed here. You had better do that. If you have not the courage to protect your own family and properties, the least you can do is to thank others who sacrifice their gentlemanly appearance doing it for you.
Biden is advocating for the 土匪's while Trump is fighting for you, sir! Let us have a sense of priority and a sense of right and wrong and show some gratitude, please.
You can tell that Trump indeed had bad night based on all the angry comments left by Trump supporters and all the excuses they found for their master....
Normally I would encourage my kids to watch presidential debate, but this year. will catch the VP debate though.
拜登不斷罵川普是騙子、小醜、叫他閉嘴, 川普完全沒有口出惡言,甚至沒叫他sleepy Joe;
拜登率先在第三個問題時打斷川普三次,he started it;
主持人多次讓拜登超時發言,卻在川普兩分鍾沒到時打斷他,甚至代拜登發言,so unfair;
整場辯論聽不到拜登具體的執政計劃,在很多問題上語無倫次,自相矛盾。What has he done in past 47 years, and what will he do in future?
美國人民一定不會選一個懦弱無能又自私腐敗的總統,period.
看了辯論,天呐,我居然堅持了下來。實話說,我是帶著一個問題參加的。整場辯論,川普多少次提到了中國,多於6.5次,還是少於6.5次?結果,在國內政策的第一場辯論中,他一共7次提到中國。
Yes, I win! Thank you, president:)
就事論事^*^ 發表評論於
他就是一個流氓、惡棍
誠信 發表評論於
大家中秋愉快!
今天過我們族的節日, 不必為這件事爭吵。
jqz88 發表評論於
To Jason 311. 咱們看事實說話,五月以來的打砸燒搶絕大部份發生在民主黨控製的城市,而且當初暴亂份子用自製燃燒彈等攻擊白宮,燒了白宮旁的教堂,媒體當時還幸災樂禍說川普躲入白宮地下室。這才發生不久拜登就敢在debate 裏臉都不紅的說哪是peaceful protest, 以為全國人民都同他一樣隻有very short memory?
事實證明拜登及民主黨才真的沒有law and order. Chris 問拜登你有沒有給西雅圖和波特蘭的民主黨市長打電話讓他們製止騷亂,拜登說 I don’t hold public position. 他不是民主黨總統候選人人嗎,至少可以表明態度不支持打砸燒搶,民主黨在九月前都沒明確表態遣責打砸燒搶,為了贏的選舉這個黨派做事極其無底線,試問我們敢讓這樣的人和黨派來領導這個國家嗎?