lunes, 10 de octubre de 2016

MercatorNet: Trump and Clinton’s second debate: American politics in the gutter

MercatorNet: Trump and Clinton’s second debate: American politics in the gutter

Trump and Clinton’s second debate: American politics in the gutter

Trump and Clinton’s second debate: American politics in the gutter

An anticipated knockout for Clinton turned into a draw
Liam Kennedy | Oct 10 2016 | comment 1 

The second US presidential election debate was widely billed as a heavyweight bout. In the event it was a score draw – but the clear loser was the American political process.
This election continues to be a rollercoaster ride, with the American electorate by turns gripped and nauseated as events unfold. The two days leading up to the debate alone threw up more drama than most election cycles manage to generate in two years, with the media and pundit class near-hysterical in their excitement.
Normal political discourse was fully abandoned little more than 48 hours before the debate began, when a video emerged of Trump describing how stardom empowered him to sexually assault women with impunity. The ensuing political and media storm reached a fever pitch just an hour before the debate, when Trump staged a press conference with three women who claim to have been sexually molested by Bill Clinton. Trump then brought them to the debate with him. Forget the boxing metaphors; this was presidential debate as reality television.
The debate used a so-called “town hall” format discussion, meaning the candidates answered questions directly from the audience and were free to move around the stage as they did so. But whereas this format was perhaps intended to keep the debate more moderate, what actually ensued was a nasty and noxious spectacle from the start. The candidates even declined to shake hands when they took the stage.
Keeping a grip    
Clinton was at her strongest on the opening questions about Trump’s attitude to women. Trump was asked repeatedly by Cooper if he was advocating or had carried out sexual assault. He didn’t answer at first, repeatedly saying it was “locker-room talk” and oddly deflecting this by repeating that he would attack Islamic State. Eventually, asked again if he’d ever sexually attacked women, he said “No, I have not”. Hardly an apology, then.
After Trump doubled down, saying “There’s never been anybody in the history of politics in this nation that’s been so abusive to women” as Bill Clinton (who was after all in the room), his opponent replied with a carefully prepared commentary, saying that unlike any prior Republican candidate she had encountered, Trump was not fit to serve. She also made sure to note that besides women, he had also attacked many minorities – Muslims, Mexicans, prisoners of war, and on and on.
But by his own admittedly low standards, Trump was relatively disciplined. Refusing to take the sort of bait that threw him off at the two candidates’ first encounter, he rallied by picking up a mantra he repeated throughout the debate: “It’s just words, folks”.
He repeatedly insisted that Clinton has had 30 years in politics to do much of what she’s now campaigning to do as president, and that she’s so far failed. It was a strong tactic, and it helped him calmly swerve around issues that were dangerous for him. On non-payment of his taxes, he simply said he only does what Clinton’s elite friends and donors do themselves.
He came out with a few decent enough lines (“Lincoln never lied, unlike you”) and crucially, kept it simple (“Clinton is raising your taxes and I am lowering your taxes”).
Never mind the truth     
Clinton seemed close to exasperated at times as Trump sniped at her supposed 30 years of inaction, and she eventually put forward a list of her achievements as senator and secretary of state, particularly on children’s health and women’s rights. She noted she had her name on 400 pieces of legislation, and stressed her ability to do hard political work on a bipartisan basis.
Clearly she had her own prepared formulas. On many occasions she began her responses to Trump’s comments by saying “much of that is not right”, and repeatedly implored people to fact-check Trump’s statements (many of which have already been judged misleading or downright untrue). At one point she recalled how Michelle Obama advised us all that “when they go low, we go high”. She was evidently trying to do this herself by generally not interrupting Trump, who (as in the first debate) repeatedly chipped in.
Trump’s approach was certainly hectoring – “When I am president we will have a special prosecutor to look into Hillary” – frequently chiding Clinton and ad-libbing erratically as she spoke, at other points prowling the stage and hovering menacingly behind her. But he never quite disintegrated into incoherence as he did in round one, and as the debate went on Clinton seemed to be more and more on the back foot.
The American media was itching for a decisive or dramatic result, keen to promote one of two narratives: that Trump has hit rock bottom at last, or that he has staged an amazing comeback. In truth (what’s left of it, anyway), neither narrative is believable.
Trump lives to fight another day, but he probably did nothing to attract the fresh voters he needs to win. In the meantime, he’ll have to hope no more revelations of sexual predation emerge, and that the current scandal hanging over him somehow loses potency.
Still, Republican leaders are clearly worried the scandal could contaminate candidates further down the ballot and put their congressional majorities at risk. Many such candidates havedisavowed Trump since the tape of his misogynistic bragging was leaked, and more may yet leave the ship if things don’t improve.
On paper, this looks dire for Trump – but then again, the events of this election have violated almost every tenet of conventional wisdom about how American politics works. We are living in what increasingly appears to be a “post-factual” age in which scandals roll on without accountability and facts are trumped by ideology. As Trump would say: “It’s just words, folks.”
Liam Kennedy, Professor of American Studies, University College Dublin. This article was originally published on The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.


The debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was one of the most dispiriting events I have ever seen. Mrs Clinton had a bucket of foetid garbage ready for her opponent and she used it to full effect. Mr Trump retaliated, in spades, threatening to jail her if he wins the election. This is the man who said, only a few days ago, “The Clintons are the sordid past. We will be the very bright and clean future.”
What did Americans do to deserve this? They have spent around US$5 billion on this election and instead of listening to a debate about policy, they ended up watching a domestic. Zac Alstin has some very pertinent observations in our lead story. 

Michael Cook

Democracy and providence: does political participation trump religious faith?
By Zac Alstin
Holding your nose might not be enough.
Read the full article
Trump and Clinton’s second debate: American politics in the gutter
By Liam Kennedy
An anticipated knockout for Clinton turned into a draw
Read the full article
Hormonal contraception linked to depression
By Tamara El-Rahi
A huge study finds that users face higher risks to their mental health.
Read the full article
Anonymous sperm donor opponent answers her critics
By Stephanie Raeymaekers
A Belgian woman describes some of the practices in the industry
Read the full article
Authors escape war with important manuscripts
By Jennifer Minicus
A biography about the creators of a beloved monkey
Read the full article
‘Deepwater Horizon’ honors oil rig workers but oversimplifies the blowout
By Eric van Oort
The film is a reminder that we must remain vigilant to prevent a repeat of the human and ecological disaster
Read the full article
A social care crisis
By Shannon Roberts
What does it mean to care?
Read the full article
A world without Down’s?
By Carolyn Moynihan
A British actress subverts the ‘arms race’ against people with this disability.
Read the full article
British youth: worn down, worried and in ‘suspended adulthood’
By Marcus Roberts
Worrying results from a new UK poll.
Read the full article
‘It’s all about me, me, me!’ Why children are spending less time doing household chores
By Shi Li
Give your child the gift of hard, tedious obligations.
Read the full article
Let me try to explain the strange spectacle of an American election
By James Schall SJ
For Australians and other parliamentary democracies
Read the full article
How Christianity created the free society
By Samuel Gregg
The Christian roots of modern liberalism.
Read the full article
Helping children understand dementia
By Jane Fagan
A picture book about memory loss and ageing
Read the full article
Abortion protests mark a black day for Poland
By Carolyn Moynihan
Furious young women throng the streets to reject an abortion ban.
Read the full article

MERCATORNET | New Media Foundation
Suite 12A, Level 2, 5 George Street, North Strathfied NSW 2137, Australia

Designed by elleston

New Media Foundation | Suite 12A, Level 2, 5 George St | North Strathfield NSW 2137 | AUSTRALIA | +61 2 8005 8605 

No hay comentarios: