"Would you . . . ?" Part Two: Scum and Stammerer. (Presidential Debate Thread)

[EnglishEdward]

There used to be a cartoon sketch called Celebrity death match.

 

[amadeus]

Energy bars:

DnldTrmp: ██████████
JoeBiden: ██████████
Jeb-Bush: ██

 

[Gori the Grey]

Gori, answer honestly. It Biden were your pops would you be comfortable with him managing his own medications?

Not one moment's hesitation. He forgot one detail. He remembered hundreds. You talk on a variety of complex topics for your share of 90 minutes and tell me you won't forget one detail.

I'd be way more concerned if my dad were the Trump in this picture. "Did you take your pills this morning dad?" "Oh, I took them. They were beautiful pills. Some people are saying they're the most beautiful pills ever. Not those people released from prisons and mental asylums who are pouring over our border. They're killing and raping. The world doesn't respect us any more. They've weaponized the Justice Department. It's like a third world country."

"Did your dad take his pills this morning?" "How the hell can I know?"

Watch the stretch from 1:00 to 1:10. I don't want to watch the whole thing and do a tally, so I picked a random spot. Count how many facts Biden has command over vs how many Trump does.

Biden just needs to take the W here and try not to gloat.

 

[Narz]

Biden just needs to take the W here and try not to gloat.

A commanding performance, millions of times better than Trump's, or was that trillions, either way my son was a hero goddamnit!

 

[Gori the Grey]

Nah, then he would just be parroting Trumps own schtick.

"I believe that if anyone looks carefully at the answers each of us gave in the debate, in terms of the evidence they give as to each of our abilities to process information, they will find that I have considerably greater capacity in that area, an ability crucial to success in the role of President."

He could add. "If, on the contrary, you believe loud bellowing about imaginary grievances is a key skill for a president, you have your man."

 

[Gori the Grey]

I am going to take a day to reflect on all of my assumptions just to ensure I am not deluded.

Spend that day the way I propose. Watch the debate again with a pad of paper and pencil in hand. Take note of every time either candidate makes a piece of information bear on an assertion.

Note how precise the information is (e.g. "millions and millions" vs "24%"), whether it is sourced and the logical connector words that spell out the connection between the fact and the claim it is used to support or illustrate.

To do this exercise, you will have to bracket your own agreement or disagreement with the assertion in question.

Remember my very focused concern is what evidence as to cognitive ability is available to us from Thursday's performance.

And remember it's not your assumptions that you need to challenge, exactly. Or at least that wouldn't be my word for it. It is the degree to which you have his cognitive limitations already baked into the cake with Trump. Maybe "assumption" can be the right word. If your assumption about Trump is "of course he won't reference facts," then revisit your understanding of what makes for a good president and ask where on the list "willingness and ability to use facts to discern problems and devise solutions for our nation's problems" falls Why have you set aside that expectation in the case of this particular individual? That seems "clinical" to me, TDS in the opposite direction.

Treat each of his lies not as moral failings, but as cognitive ones: this man's assertions about reality do not match up to reality. Remember one of my early questions: if in a 45 minute conversation, a person said to you 30 things that were not correct, what would you make of their cognitive abilities?"

I think I may be the only sane person in America, because I'm the only one asking the same question of both participants.

I'll look forward to talking with you on Tuesday, and seeing what kind of results you got. The willingness to challenge one's own assumptions is healthy. It was only once I stopped treating Trump's false claims as lies, and considered them instead as evidence as to cognitive ability that this view of the debate opened up to me.

 

[Narz]

Gori you're thinking like a forum nerd, or like a school teacher. Where every wrong answer counts against you and where specifics count (trying to remember 35 million instead of many millions).

But that's not how most people judge.

The reason people go for Trump is the same reason people go for prayer, homeopathy and crystals to heal disease.

You could point to 100 baseless claims that people who stand by faith healing or homeopathy make and you'd be right but in people's minds one big lie can overpower a bunch of small ones.

A big lie like "the medical system cares about you". People lose moms and dads to diseases or all kinds, they see treatments not only fail to help but do harm, they are patronized by professionals, told to take a few pills and go away.

And in this analogy one could even argue they're right. Many modern drugs barely best placebo (aka : faith) anyway and faith doesn't have side effects (unless it doesn't work and you die but at least you feel in control).

Trump makes (some) people feel in control. Those people are dumb and gullible, Trump ain't their friendly father, he's like the crook promising to protect you for the other crooks.

Biden represents the status quo (as did H Clinton before him). He's kept the Titanic afloat four more years now but people aren't happy, anxiety is up even if unemployment by be low.

Trump had his chance and it's not like anything fundamentally changed under him (for the better) so I'm not sure how he's still branding himself as a radical but Biden... he's just not the competent leader we need at this 11th hour. He can sting enough sentences together to win, what a C+ in your book (with Trump getting an F)?

But we need a tidal wave of a man (or woman) at this moment in time and nothing-will-fundamentally-change&at-least-Im-not-lying Biden ain't it.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Gori you're thinking like a forum nerd, or like a school teacher.

I am approaching this exactly like a school teacher.

But that's not how most people judge.

I'm not interested in "how people judge." I know how people have judged this debate. They have judged Trump to be the winner of it.

I am (and I'm telling you this for the third or fourth time) not making an assessment of who won the debate or who people thought won the debate (despite my joke about the W).

Because of Biden's poor performance, people are calling into question his cognitive ability.

So I am posing as a school teacher charged with making an assessment of the cognitive ability of two students who just engaged in, let's call it a "classroom exercise" (since it pains me to call what I witnessed a debate).

What a school teacher looks for, as evidence for a student's cognitive ability, is how that student puts thoughts together. Does the student understand how to support claims with information or illustrate general claims with concrete examples. Trump gets a D (and I'm being generous, so that he won't get discouraged). Biden gets a B.

Trump has almost no instances where he engages in the simplest form of logical connection: because of X, Y. He simply screams his Ys. This IS this way. This IS this way. The claims are often, in their own right, incorrect. In other classes, where he is being judged on getting the correct answer, he would also get a generous D. I am judging only how he connects thoughts, and what I'm telling you is that he almost never does do so. (That he simply spouts made-up "facts" is actually also a cognitive failing: not understanding standards of evidence.) Multiple times, he loses sight of the question he is asked. If someone asked you, "what is your idea for fixing X, a car engine, say, and their answer never referenced car engines, what judgment would you make of that person's mental capacity?" Why did he not answer when asked about opioids, child care. Because he was too busy responding to something Biden had just said. He's that easily distracted. He can't focus his thoughts on the task at hand. That's a cognitive debility.

I offer this analysis only because Biden's mental capacity has been called into question. I'm just applying the question to both individuals rather than only one.

 

[Narz]

May be less that Trump "can't" answer the question (altho probably often he can't) that he prefers to pivot to where he feels stronger.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I have acknowledged that possibility. I think in many cases he was pivoting. That is a fine debate strategy.

But he also forgot the questions. I pointed to the leftward eye roll when the moderators put the question of the debt back to Biden. That is it occurring to Trump "oh, the question was about the debt."

There's also the case where, as he starts off on his digression, he promises that what he means to say will bear on the question he has been asked, and he never does make it bear, but rather forgets the question. 1:11 for child care. 1:17 for fentanyl. 1:19 for the spot where he promises that what he has to say will address fentanyl and he ends up talking about the ransom for a WSJ reporter in Russia.

 

[Voidwalkin]

I am approaching this exactly like a school teacher.

It's the age of the jeering ass who thinks school is a joke.

Trump has almost no instances where he engages in the simplest form of logical connection: because of X, Y. He simply screams his Ys. This IS this way. This IS this way. The claims are often, in their own right, incorrect. In other classes, where he is being judged on getting the correct answer, he would also get a generous D. I am judging only how he connects thoughts, and what I'm telling you is that he almost never does do so

I disagree; the logical connection is the grievance. Imaginary or not, his voters believe them to be real, and they love it.

The interruptions, the belligerence, they see strength, the guy who seems most likely to storm the bastions of the institutions they feel are immoral.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I disagree; the logical connection is the grievance. Imaginary or not, his voters believe them to be real, and they love it.

That's not a logical connection. That's an emotional connection.

Emotional appeals are a part of a debate. Yes, Trump makes the two appeals you have mentioned to his followers.

Trump's followers think he won the debate. It is because he made emotional appeals

I. am. taking. up. a. more. focused. question. Cognitive ability. Because that is what has come into question re: Biden after the debate. (So evidently our "age" cares about the matter to at least that extent.) I am simply bothering to ask the same question of both candidates. On that point, and that point alone, Biden displayed more advanced cognitive abilities.

Considerably more. Every time I re-watch a segment (as I did to get the time markers for Trump forgetting questions), I am more and more impressed.

 

[Voidwalkin]

That's not a logical connection. That's an emotional connection.

Emotional appeals are a part of a debate. Yes, Trump makes the two appeals you have mentioned to his followers.

Trump's followers think he won the debate. It is because he made emotional appeals

I. am. taking. up. a. more. focused. question. Cognitive ability. Because that is what has come into question re: Biden after the debate. On that point, and that point alone, Biden displayed more advanced cognitive abilities.

I think you misunderstand me - it is logical to make an emotional appeal, because today, grievance is the greater part of politics. Emotional appeal is money in the bank.

Can Biden sit and discuss the ideal role of the transatlantic alliance with greater acuity than Trump? Yes. Nobody cares, though, so therefore it would not be logical for him to do that.

I touched on this earlier but the social issues are politics now. There's a widening morality gap; call the emergent and ascendant morals of academic left being resisted by the right, potentially through use of state power.

It involves more people and so takes the air out of the room of any other subject. Those suffocate. Few voters know or care about the role of the transatlantic alliance. Far more care about how society should treat Trans people. So they lock shoulders with their team, and push the other team in a giant scrum.

It's totally logical to care about grievance in this environment, about the perception of strength. You're leading the scrum.

 

[Gori the Grey]

All of that is true but has nothing to do with Biden's supposed cognitive impairment.

 

[Voidwalkin]

All of that is true but has nothing to do with Biden's supposed cognitive impairment.

if it's true to say Trump lacks the intelligence to understand the big issues regardless of dementia, it's equally true to say Biden's lacks the intelligence in understanding what's moving people today regardless of dementia

 

[Gori the Grey]

That's well formulated. I had jumped on to add a crack to my last post: "I'm dropping your grade to a B."

But now you're back up to an A.

Maybe an A minus, because you're still framing things in terms of debate performance, not ability to be president.

)Oh and I'll add a emoji because I don't know if you've been on long enough to have picked up my deadpan)

His debate performance has raised issues about his cognitive ability to operate as president. It is that second issue I am taking up.

Thursday's debate provides ample evidence that Biden has cognitive ability better suited to the challenges of the presidency than does Trump.

In fact, the school metaphor might help us. I'm sure there's some professor out there who has developed a rubric for evaluating critical reasoning skills.

Biden's performance in the debate would score better on that rubric than Trump's

Now to take up your point. Biden can perhaps be faulted for his debate strategy, including the intelligence or logic of his debate strategy, misjudging the kind of "age" we live in. 1) I'm a little skeptical that your characterization applies broadly. It's certainly true of the right right now. I'm not sure it's as true of the left or of undecideds. 2) debate strategy is partly on his team, not him alone.

I think it's tough. You have to make your own points. You have to be prepared to fact-check him (the moderators didn't). You have to be prepared for his roundhouses, to ignore most of them, parry some, and jab back a few times.

Biden actually did better on this count than he is being given credit for, I think. Trump's failure to answer questions was in each case because of something Biden said that got under his skin. That only counts against Trump to the extent that people wanted to hear questions answered, of course. But any voter who did care about fentanyl might have walked away positively pissed that Trump used his time on that question to talk about a captured WSJ reporter instead.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Well now, there is conscious reasoning skills and intuition.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I think it's the former that they test when they are concerned someone might have dementia. I don't know that there's a test for how strong someone's intuition is.

By the way, is there evidence yet that Trump did well? Biden performed poorly (not, to repeat, cognitively, but . . . performatively). But did Trump do something that drew undecided voters to him? His debate strategy seemed designed to appeal to the people he already has locked in. And continue alienating the kinds of people who don't like him. Isn't winning some new people over part of the debate-strategy-jenius that we're crediting Trump with?

 

[Voidwalkin]

His debate performance has raised issues about his cognitive ability to operate as president. It is that second issue I am taking up.

Thursday's debate provides ample evidence that Biden has cognitive ability better suited to the challenges of the presidency than does Trump.

That's true. Even if the man is half out of it by year 3 that's still 50% more than Trump demonstrated. Provided one agrees the grievances Trumps base love are less important than foreign policy or domestic reform. You and I would. They would not.

It can be accurately said, then, that capability is perceived differently among the two bases, thus the candidates have different goals heading in.

Trump was what his base recognizes as capable of pursuing their wants; Biden didn't perform equivalently well. He stumbled, demoralizing his base to the extent that an NYT article called for him to stand aside.

I'm a little skeptical that your characterization applies broadly. It's certainly true of the right right now. I'm not sure it's as true of the left or of undecided

1. Could you imagine anyone on the left not being repulsed by Trump's "they're sending rapists" comment? He was, is and remains anathema to the left precisely because of social issues.

In right wing spaces, the morality of the left is similarly leperous.

2. Undecided voters... mostly the disconnected, the apathetic, or the pretentious. They have pre-existing leanings in moral preferences and will drift towards one camp or the other based on those, not a zinger regarding capability in governance.

That only counts against Trump to the extent that people wanted to hear questions answered, of course. But any voter who did care about fentanyl might have walked away positively pissed that Trump used his time on that question to talk about a captured WSJ reporter instead.

I suspect voters on both sides already know where Trump stands. Punish the addicts. Send em to jail. If he were to say anything else, everyone would be stunned. He argues ceasely and belligerently for harshness and cruelty against those who the left consensus says are vulnerable, and those who the right consensus says are immoral nonconformists.

That belligerence was there on display again, so I suspect people presume to know his position, anyway. It comes down to whether you agree with those sensibilities or not.

 

[Gori the Grey]

an NYT article called for him to stand aside

And a Philadelphia Inquirer editorial has called on Trump to do so! Ha ha. Good on them.

I only wish I'd been on the board. I'd have urged them cast in the terms I'm advancing here: the debate showed that you do not possess the cognitive abilities to serve as president.