Dershowitz... said he is well-suited for the role “if they were looking for a loudmouth New Yorker. Of course I would do it if asked — I think I could do a pretty good Donald Trump impression....”It's not like casting the role for a movie! I should think the key would be making the kinds of statements and arguments that might come up. I suppose part of it is creating the feeling of the opponent's presence, especially if there was concern that your candidate could be intimidated or provoked. But I have the feeling Hillary Clinton is so used to standing her ground and making her points and keeping her standard expression that imitating Trump's bluster is not very important.
And it could even backfire. Let's say you take somebody — Dershowitz, perhaps — who hates Trump and is disgusted by him. Now, he thinks he can embody that object of his contempt. Is he really going to create the effect that the real Trump will present on stage at that debate or will he give Hillary a false sense of her opponent as someone who can be fought in ways that won't look right when the real event happens? She might get the idea that tilting her head back and smirking and occasionally shaking her head or laughing will get us viewers on her side. But he's going to have a fake Hillary to practice with and he'll have worked out some strategies. Can Dershowitz — through the fog of contempt — perceive what these will be and provide her with an opportunity to work out an effective style?
A couple days ago, I said "Watch out for Nice Trump. What will Hillary do if Nice Trump arrives on the scene?" And in the comments Left Bank of the Charles said: "As for Hillary, I'm sure she'd love it if Nice Trump shows up for the debates. But I'd advise her to expect the rope-a-dope."
So... she might prepare for the blustery jackass of the Trump hater's fever dreams, then be surprised by a kinder, gentler Trump. But if Nice Trump arrives on the debate set, it may be a trick to lure her into debating the wrong way, and late in the debate — perhaps when she's tired (or getting too comfortable) — he may surprise her in some unpredictable way.
On CNN's "State of the Union" yesterday, Hillary Clinton's campaign manager Robby Mook said they haven't come up with someone to play Donald Trump in the mock debates. The moderator Dana Bash tried to get him to talk about the "incredibly delicate task" — which I think referred to confronting Hillary with very negative material, such as her lying and her husband's treatment of women. But Mook just used the question as an opportunity to attack Trump:
It's very hard to find someone to mimic the reckless temperament and the hateful instincts and divisive instincts of Donald Trump.... The challenge is finding someone who -- who can recreate the kind of reckless temperament, the kind of hateful language and divisive language that's become Trump's hallmark.But it's funny that Dershowitz is eagerly waving his hand and saying me! me!
Dershowitz has a new book, "Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for Unaroused Voters." And if you enjoy that pun, let me guess: You are over 70 and not a woman. But if you are under 50 and a Hillary supporter, it might be just the thing to trigger you into thinking yes, this is the jerk who can play Trump.
ADDED: There's no reason to do a mock debate with someone acting like the Trump people won't like. If that's the Trump who shows up for the real thing, he'll hurt himself. Imagine the best Trump, the one who can win the election. That's what he's trying to do right now. You don't want to get caught flat-footed, like Obama in the first debate in 2012.
पोस्ट्स
६२ टिप्पण्या:
You are over 70 and not a woman. Wrong on both counts.
I have yet to hear Trump use "hateful" language. Another big lie on the part of the libs. Oh, I've heard him say unkind but true things, but never something I would call hateful. But then, I'm not politically correct.
Mook:
It's very hard to find someone to mimic the reckless temperament and the hateful instincts and divisive instincts of Donald Trump.... The challenge is finding someone who -- who can recreate the kind of reckless temperament, the kind of hateful language and divisive language that's become Trump's hallmark.
So kids, our words of the day are reckless hateful divisive repeat after me reckless hateful divisive.
1. No it is NOT hard to do that. Obama is reckless hateful divisive all the time. Use him.
2. Wouldn't be so quick to mark Dersh down as anti-Trump.
3. Weiner would do it and do it well, but there's the question of his wife's career should he go too hard on the lying, scheming part of Hillary he (no doubt) knows too much about.
My takeaway from this article is that they are unable to adequately prep for Trump! Mook, between the lines, said to me "analysis paralysis" because -- as Althouse pointed out -- Mook doesn't know which Trump will show up or dominate. He comes across as a "happy warrior" at his best. He's a pro when it comes to being on TV. She's awkward even at her best, and unlikeable much of the time.
I married a woman who thinks thats at least a bit funny.
Imus always says erection for election in interviews. Everybody on the show thinks it's stupid, as does his audience.
But then the show hasn't been funny since nappy headed ho's.
Braying. Jackass. Democrat.
But, seriously, how does setting up straw clowns for Clinton to knock down help to overcome her diverse deficits?
Both the DNC and Clinton's ulterior motives were revealed in an extra-judicial information request a la Climate-gate, Abortion-gate, ISIS-gate (e.g. Libya-ISIS Affair), Kosovo-gate, etc.
People can say hateful and reckless Trump rhetoric are in a virtual reality world.
Premature evacuation - A precursor to terrorist crises
If you can disregard PC then you can talk about solving the problems we actually have. Otherwise, not.
Hateful and reckless is the reply.
So, there claim is that they can't find someone who can play the straw man version of Trump they are already campaigning against? Maybe they should try and find someone who can adequately mimic they real candidate.
The debates will tell us - beyond a doubt - whether Trump is in this thing to win or hand it to her (as I think)...
Where will they hold the prep? Orgy Island?
New Trump? Read his twitter feed this morning. Of course Trumpistas won't even recognize it as a problem. But the voters he's trying to reach will be pushed away.
Clinton will at some point in one of the debates bait him enough to bring out the crazy that has earned him 60 per cent very unfavorable rating in polls.
You want to prepare for any eventuality. You want to prepare against ignorant buffoon Donald as well as actually knows some shit Donald. You want to prepare for Donald the Insult Dog as well as a courteous and respectful Donald (even though that is highly improbable).
Hillary can expect at least two of these Donalds to show up at the debates and never the same two.
Since Hillary will need a Russian interpreter to be sure she understands Putin's Puppet, that will slow down the debate. Trump will probably demand to know how many Rubles Hillary gets so he is not being paid less than her.
Rumor has it that Joseph McCarthy from Wisconsin is the agreed Moderator.
Seriously, Dershowitz would call Hillary's hand on her many efforts to destroy Israel. She will never let him inside the tent.
You're writing a book about the problems of American electoral politics and you're going to put a penis joke in your title. First, it's an old joke. I feel like Bill Maher made it on his show a quarter century ago. But for another, you're not a standup comedian with an audience who's self-selected for tolerance for that kind of thing. I don't see how that's a good title. Why distract us with a penis? A malfunctioning penis. Who likes that?!
Will Ferrell. He's got the height, he's a good impersonator, and he's loud. I think he's a leftist, too, though I may be wrong.
Hillary has no realistic sparring partner. It would be impolite to say the least if the Trump stand in were to start going on about her criminality and treason.
Trump is so unpredictable that Hillary will need to have her facts straight and be able to call upon her core principles. Which will be tough, because she doesn't have any.
Robby Mook sounds more than a little unhinged to me. I am surprised at Clinton, Inc. presenting him as its campaign manager.
"Hillary Clinton is considering having multiple people play the role of Donald Trump in debate prep..."
I like that literal idea. Get Will Ferrell, Alay Grayson, and Chuck Schumer all behind one podium, playing a three-actor Trump act. Maybe throw in Dennis Rodman just to make it snappy. They'd all argue with each other the way Trump argues with his own self a week ago every week.
Obama had backup in the first debate against Romney. that is, candy. wait until Hillary is onstage. Hillary can do whatever she wants at the debate. trump will lose no matter what because the media is her backup. including SNL, local broadcasts, comedy central, discovery channel, espn, etc. trump will be the loser regardless.
The Trump who will show up for the debates won't be the Trump doing the throwaway promo on Twitter or at supporter rallies. He'll be the Trump recognizing he's now at the closing table, and that the most significant thing in his future is becoming forever known as the man who lost to Hillary Clinton.
The most alien concept to a Type A personality is the feeling of entitlement, the one thing that most weakens Hillary Clinton.
He'll be warm, winsome, affable, handsomely blonde for 70, and underneath will be Ramsay Bolton's dogs, sniffing for opportunities to unpredictably strike terror and helplessness into his opponent, then feed at will.
The mention of the 2012 debates reminded me: Who's going to play Candy Crowley to bail Hillary! out if (when?) she gets in trouble?
I believe Darrell Hammond does the SNL Trump impersonations.
He also does a killer Bill Clinton.
Their biggest trouble may be they will prepare Hillary! to defend against their image of Trump, but then quite another Trump shows up and attacks from an unexpected quarter, or maybe just let her stand there and stridently shadow box by herself.
She has to be careful to avoid the multiple people talking at once so that they don't trigger a seizure.
"But I have the feeling Hillary Clinton is so used to standing her ground . . ."
At 210 lbs that's pretty easy to do.
Well he'd better not walk over and ask her to sign a pledge. That would be an assault&battery too far on the poor little disabled granny.
the only way Ma Barker of the Clinton crime family lands any blows is if its a repeat of the candy cruller tag team match that was pulled on mittens
Women are supposed to be repelled when they see or hear of a penis, at least in public. It's one of those PC truths.
It's a social convention for women to prove that they're better than something.
For a phallocentric world, we don't have many public displays of it.
Hillary's campaign doesn't know how to anticipate Trump. Hillary is as predictable as a football interview. Explains why her foreign policy judgment is so bad. She is predictable and can't anticipate what our adversaries will do.
Whatever the other merits and demerits, Trump for a long time now has been an intense and successful competitor in the (very public) private sector, competing against others who at any time could use his face as a steppingstone for their own success-driven cleats.
Hillary, by contrast, began as the sympathetic residue of a very popular liberal president and has only succeeded by playing the entitled woman within the very shadowy realm of pay-for-play liberal politics. Except for Barack Obama, she has never truly known any sort of competition, private sector or political. Even against Bernie the fix was in.
The pillows she demands at appearances might as well be a metaphor for her personal competitive abilities, i.e., she's always depended on the kindness of strangers.
Why distract us with a penis? A malfunctioning penis. Who likes that?!
Because Sex Sells! Everything is really about sex! Didn't you learn that growing up? I sure did, from our enlightened elders who knew so much more than I did about Life.
It is just difficult when you don't have any core belief to argue from, but have to be pre-programmed to answer anticipated questions.
Perhaps the Democrats will conclude that debates are too chancey and find some excuse to refuse to participate.
Howard Stern would be more appropriate than Dershowitz.
maybe this question might come up,
http://www.weaselzippers.us/290868-breaking-fbi-finds-15000-undisclosed-emails-on-hillary-clintons-private-email-server/
rhetorical, the moderators will be trained to look at trump, the unperson,
AA says "She might get the idea that tilting her head back and smirking and occasionally shaking her head or laughing will get us viewers on her side."
Makes me wonder how much influence camera selection will have on viewing audience. Focus generally on Hillary's reaction as Trump speaks, focus on Hillary when she speaks. Camera cuts away from Trumps incredulous or mocking expressions as Hillary lies about something?
I expect Trump to ignore detailed answers and specific rebuttals and to use every answer to attack Hillary's character and maybe her health (in a condescending, caring way).
All assuming Clinton actually shows up for debates, of course.
Too much emphasis on who plays opponent. Debate is a joint press conference. The questions from moderators are much more important, especially when Trump's forensic skills are limited. She can handle all his substantive points after two presidential primaries against Obama and Sanders. She can pick and choose which ad hominem attacks to address or ignore. But she won't be able to duck so easily tough panel questions. And this is new for Trump, who could spend long periods in the primaries watching his many rivals go after one another and jump in to talk about his polls and building a wall and taking the oil and taking China's bonds when he wanted.
Who is playing the Candy Crowley role, they need to be synchronized again.
Clinton sat through 11 hours of grilling in the Benghazi hearing and her inquisitors came out of it looking like fools. I have no doubt she'll do the same to Trump and in short order IF he shows up.
I think its still 70% country headed in wrong direction and 80 some years since a party held the white house 12 years GHWB. don't think first female president enough ballast to carry HRC and her stupendous load of baggage into oval office.
not over yet the fools still have another turn at bat. Lying to congress 8 -10 years in prison
Hillary needs lots and lots of advice.
I'm glad there are so many kind and gentle folks trying to help her avoid letting that evil mean trumpsterm take advantage of her obvious weakness.
In response to questions asked about ISIS, Clinton will take approach of" We recaptured these cities, killed so and so-big leader- decimated all these training camps, ISIS is done for.
Trump will say, "What about the six men boiled in oil, what about the innocent Swedish/German/French/Swiss girls sexually assaulted last week? What about the homosexuals and Christians murdered by your Muslim donors?"
Clinton full of facts and figures, true or not. Trump full of emotional argument.
The Trump people only need to make sure the stage is set so there is something like a lamp or an ashtray handy for Hillary to chuck at him.
It will tough for Clinton to find a stand-in for several reasons, but here are the two most important:
(1) Trump is as unpredictable a candidate as I have seen in my lifetime. He makes Ross Perot look downright standard as a candidate. I don't think any stand-in can legitimately claim to act like Trump because it is literally an unknown.
(2) I think progressives in general have a harder time passing the so-called political Turing Test- I think conservatives have an easier time mimicking liberal/progressive arguments and behaviors, and I think that is most because they have a bit more common sense and have spent their lives immersed in the liberal-dominated media environment. Even though Trump isn't the common conservative, he is something even more different from a liberal than that. Even his Republican opponents couldn't figure out how to deal with him, and they had more in common than Clinton does with Trump.
Why distract us with a penis? A malfunctioning penis. Who likes that?!
Pfizer?
thank God for Perot or HRC would be baking cookies in Little Rock and we would be
at a loss for topics to shoot the breeze about.
The interesting part will be whether HRC goes "all girly" during the debate, as she did when she was running for the NY senate seat. She pulled the girl card on her opponent and he was toast either way and HRC knew it. Had he gone for the throat the New York Times, et al would have pilloried him for being "mean", and when he turtled, he was pilloried for falling for the oldest trick in the book. HRC is about as soft and girly as a Venus Fly Trap.
Trump should do a similar thing with Louise Fletcher (reprising her Oscar winning "Nurse Ratched" from ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST) standing in for the Dowager Empress of Chappaqua.
It should be Don Rickles! At 110%
Given her inability to see herself in an honest light, I don't see how debate prep will work for her in the first place.
She REALLY believes she's done nothing wrong ever and it's all just conservative h8rs.
AReasonableMan said...
Howard Stern would be more appropriate than Dershowitz.
it would certainly be entertaining, but don't count on Stern to be a knee jerk liberal. He's more of a libertarian.
Wonder if Hil' will have a hairstyle to cover the in ear monitor being fed by slack jawed Bubba. Though that might be a good idea for Orange Crush.
we were talking about reality show earlier,
http://abc7.com/politics/hillary-clinton-visits-socal-for-jimmy-kimmel-taping-fundraisers/1479631/
@Rex said...
I have yet to hear Trump use "hateful" language. Another big lie on the part of the libs. Oh, I've heard him say unkind but true things, but never something I would call hateful. But then, I'm not politically correct.
I suppose we hear what we want to hear and see what we want to see. T-Rump hate is everywhere and he does it like this:
I refuse to call Megyn Kelly a bimbo, because that would not be politically correct. Instead I will only call her a lightweight reporter!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 27, 2016
Is Dershowitz trying to get back in the good graces after wandering off the plantation over the past decade? Or subterfuge?
I refuse to call Megyn Kelly a bimbo, because that would not be politically correct. Instead I will only call her a lightweight reporter!
This is hate? Are you saying Trump hates bimbos? BTW, Kelly is a lightweight reporter.
"She might get the idea that tilting her head back and smirking and occasionally shaking her head or laughing will get us viewers on her side.""
Already does that. As a witness in Congressional hearings no less. And iy gets worse in private, I hear tell.
Donald Trump wouldn't commit to becoming Nice Trump in his interview with Bill O'Reilly last night. O'Reilly doesn't like Mean Trump. His new campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, got a nice grilling right after that on the The Kelly File. She's nice in a nonlecturing way (Kellyanne, that is), maybe some of that niceness will rub off.
I think the latest version of Trump just wants to be Trump, or Just Trump. How do you prepare for a debate with Just Trump, whose over-the-top pronouncements are being magically transformed into reasonable-sounding polices?
Democratic debating 101 would be try to get the moderator to bait him. We know from the January 2013 Benghazi hearing that Hillary Clinton can be baited too. And we also know that Trump took the bait from moderator Megyn Kelly in the August 2015 debate, and won the debate and the primary anyway.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा