• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Hillary Clinton to use larger podium ...

Gimmesometruth

Pick & Roll is Back!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
32,844
Reaction score
8,011
Location
US Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Hillary Clinton to use larger podium than Donald Trump at first debate to make up for height disadvantage: report



Wrong, it is to compensate for his small hands.

Everyone knows that.
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
13,808
Reaction score
10,714
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
No, it's not wrong. You sourced the article written by Adam Edelman and you quoted one of his lines. If you need to be shown evidence of that, refer to the first post in the thread.

I simply do not understand why you cannot admit to the truth.

So stop with your lying bs.
Says the person repeatedly posting things which are not true, even when presented with their own words.

Absurd reply to what was quoted.
No, it's not. YOU posted the article, I didn't. Do you regularly post articles and quote specific lines in them and tacitly agree to them when you don't agree with them? If so, please point me to other examples of you doing that, I'd be very interested.

More lying spin.
It is your own words.

I provided evidence.
You have not provided any credible evidence. Just like I said.

The amount of falsehoods in your posts is astounding and I simply do not understand why you continue posting things which can so easily be proven untrue. You didn't quote Crosby, you quoted Edelman. You didn't source Crosby, you sourced Edelman. You said, "Exactly" when I said you are going to criticize Clinton no matter which podium was used. You have provided ZERO evidence (dubious or otherwise) Clinton requested a special podium to "skew optics", as opposed to comfortable debate, and your only evidence Clinton even requested one (as opposed to the commission simply providing a podium of appropriate height) is the article you sourced which turned out to be wrong and a "report" from a nakedly partisan website which provided no source for their "report".

I get why you likely feel embarrassed for believing something which turned out not to be true. But a person with integrity would simply say, "Well, they got me" and not lie about it. I suggest you just admit "Well, they got me" and move on. But I am quite through with responding to outright denials of reality.
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
40,394
Reaction score
9,053
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
No, it's not wrong. You sourced the article written by Adam Edelman and you quoted one of his lines. If you need to be shown evidence of that, refer to the first post in the thread.
iLOL
You are still absurdly conflating issues in an attempt to deflect from being wrong.
Figures.

Rita Crosby is the source of the information period, not the article. What the author said was his mistaken opinion based on the previous report and what Rita Crosby provided.


I simply do not understand why you cannot admit to the truth.
iLOL
Your spin is not truth, it is dishonesty.

Even though you have been corrected on your made up false beliefs you still absurdly continue to believe that which you made up to believe.
That is all your own fault. Not mine.
And as already pointed out that isn't likely to change.


Says the person repeatedly posting things which are not true, even when presented with their own words.
iLOL
As already pointed out, it is you who are posting things that are not true.


No, it's not. YOU posted the article, I didn't.
Another absurd reply to what was quoted. Figures, that is clearly all you have.
Again.

You don't believe she would be getting the larger lectern just as I didn't think so either. And even though I pointed that out by question, you still can't accept the reality of that. Or the fact that using a different sized lectern is skewing the optics. Figures.

Do you regularly post articles and quote specific lines in them and tacitly agree to them when you don't agree with them? If so, please point me to other examples of you doing that, I'd be very interested.
Tacitly agree? iLOL
As I said. You are making things up to believe.

The post was about the information provided in the article which camer from Rita Crosby. Not the authors mistaken belief.
My later question shows that I was in disbelief of the authors stated beliefs.
Sorry you can't accept reality, but those are the facts here, not what you want to make up to believe.


It is your own words.
iLOL
You have already been corrected on this. Your made up belief is spin.
Again.
You have been trying to use this to claim partisanship, that is an absurdly ridiculous argument.

Pointing out that I would criticize anyone using a different size lectern, means anyone, not just Clinton, which does not show the partisanship you you made up to believe.


You have not provided any credible evidence. Just like I said.
There was no reason to disbelieve said report nor have you provided one. Did her campaign deny the report? Did the Committee deny the report? What was that? They didn't? Go figure.
And yet you want to sit there and claim it wasn't credible absent evidence that it wasn't.
Hilarious.

The fact alone that Hillary did indeed use the smaller lectern is just further conformation of the report. Do you really not understand that?
You can continue to be wrong all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Hillary used a smaller lectern which does skew the optics.


The amount of falsehoods in your posts is astounding and I simply do not understand why you continue posting things which can so easily be proven untrue.
Wrong, nor have you proven anything untrue. Clearly you are confused and only speaking of your own dishonest postings, especially with the crap you made up to believe.
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
40,394
Reaction score
9,053
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
You didn't quote Crosby, you quoted Edelman. You didn't source Crosby, you sourced Edelman.
You continue to deflect and show your made up beliefs in regards to what I intended.

The article itself is not the source for the information, Rita Crosby was. It even points that out, yet you can't seem to grasp that.


You said, "Exactly" when I said you are going to criticize Clinton no matter which podium was used.
There is that spin again.
And again.
You have been trying to use this to claim partisanship, that is an absurdly ridiculous argument.

Pointing out that I would criticize anyone using a different size lectern, means anyone, not just Clinton, which does not show the partisanship you you made up to believe.


You have provided ZERO evidence (dubious or otherwise) Clinton requested a special podium to "skew optics", as opposed to comfortable debate,
Figures, just more dishonesty from you.
Again.
EDITOR'S NOTE: The presidential debate commission settled an early flashpoint when Clinton demanded a step-stool at the podium to add height to her 5'4" frame. Campaign Chairman John Podesta expressed concern that Hillary would be dwarfed by 6'2" Trump. The request was quickly rejected. The commission is allowing for a custom-made podium, which will accommodate the difference in stature.
Do you have something showing that report to be false?
Any denials?
Anything?
Of course you don't.
All you have is your dislike of it, nothing more.
As reported, she requested a step (which is a podium) to account for the height difference over concerns of her appearing dwarfed. That is not for comfort but for skewing the optics. This request was denied. The report continues by saying the "commission is allowing" instead for a custom podium to be made. Podium in this case is a lectern.
When that is presented as the alternative to a request it is not for any other reason that for the original request. It is funny how you think you can pull that comfort bs off in light of what was reported and actually provided in the debate.


and your only evidence Clinton even requested one (as opposed to the commission simply providing a podium of appropriate height) is the article you sourced which turned out to be wrong and a "report" from a nakedly partisan website which provided no source for their "report".
Holy crap. Stop with the dishonest bs.
The article was not wrong. They reported what Rita Crosby said. That was dead on accurate and was the crux of the article, not what the author mistakenly believed about what was reported. That believed is underlined because his belief was stated as a belief and was not the crux of the article. That you do not understand that is telling.


I get why you likely feel embarrassed
iLOL Look at you making up more crap to believe because you can't accept reality. ****ing hilarious.
I am really laughing my ass off at your stupid assertions. :lamo


for believing something which turned out not to be true. But a person with integrity would simply say, "Well, they got me" and not lie about it. I suggest you just admit "Well, they got me" and move on. But I am quite through with responding to outright denials of reality.
Then I suggest you follow your advice and show this integrity you speak about by admitting you are wrong and were also making things up to believe. That is what actually needs to be done here. Nothing you can say will change that. You are simply wrong.
 

iguanaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
61,474
Reaction score
24,097
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Eh, I'm five-foot nothin'. I couldn't even see over a normal podium, and I wouldn't want to spend 90 minutes cracking my neck to look up at someone who's 6'3". I'd request a step stool. Really. So I don't blame her either!

Nobody is going to allow themselves to look like a miniature poodle standing next to newfoundland when the stakes are this high. But on the bright side, I seriously doubt she'll be sporting a spray tan and pasty white eyelids. :)

OR a dead animal on her head....:lol:
 

Slyfox696

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
13,808
Reaction score
10,714
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
You continue to deflect and show your made up beliefs in regards to what I intended.
Made up beliefs to what you intended? So you didn't intend to start a thread sourcing an article from Adam Edelman and only quote something from Edelman's article? You didn't intend that? Really?

There is that spin again.
It's not spin. You literally said it. You have no idea what the word "spin" means apparently.

Figures, just more dishonesty from you.
Again.
EDITOR'S NOTE: The presidential debate commission settled an early flashpoint when Clinton demanded a step-stool at the podium to add height to her 5'4" frame. Campaign Chairman John Podesta expressed concern that Hillary would be dwarfed by 6'2" Trump. The request was quickly rejected. The commission is allowing for a custom-made podium, which will accommodate the difference in stature.
Do you have something showing that report to be false?
That came from the Drudge Report and even that does not say it was requested to skew optics, as opposed to comfortable debate.

I couldn't be you. I couldn't constantly state things which are false, knowing they are false. Then again, I also couldn't excuse bragging about sexual assault, which you are currently doing in another thread.

So I guess that's just the difference between us. I'm done with the lies. You said these things, you were wrong, Drudge Report has no credibility and sexual assault isn't something to be casually dismissed because the person doing it plays for you team.

So how about you just "iLOL" fifty more times again and we can call this discussion done. But make no mistake, no one with a shred of honesty or intelligence believes anything you've said to try and excuse your partisanship.
 

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
40,394
Reaction score
9,053
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
And around we go again with your dishonest bs.

Made up beliefs to what you intended? So you didn't intend to start a thread sourcing an article from Adam Edelman and only quote something from Edelman's article? You didn't intend that? Really?
The source of the information was Rita Crosby. Not the author of the article.
You again, for the umpteenth time now, have fail to recognize that. She is the source of the information in the article. What she said is the crux of the information . Not the authors mistaken opinion.



It's not spin. You literally said it. You have no idea what the word "spin" means apparently.
Wrong.
It was your spin and was already pointed out.

Again.
Wrong.
Your assertion is wrong the way you make it. I did not admit I was going to criticize her no matter what size lectern she used. What I related was that I would criticize anyone who would use a different size lectern to skew the optics. Regardless of party.
What you also absurdly and conveniently leave out of that is if she had used the same sized lectern as Trump there would not be any skewing of the optics to criticize.

Do you not understand what the last sentence establishes?
Huh? It means she would not have been criticized had she used a same size lectern, which also then establishes that you did indeed make up something to believe because that would not be criticizing her no matter what lectern she used.

Then you used that made up spin to make an absurd and failed partisan claim which was dispatched with the following argument.

You have been trying to use this to claim partisanship, that is an absurdly ridiculous argument.

Pointing out that I would criticize anyone using a different size lectern, means anyone, not just Clinton, which does not show the partisanship you you made up to believe.

Give up your lies and bs. You literally have nothing of substance to your arguments.


demanded a step-stool at the podium to add height to her 5'4" frame
Campaign Chairman John Podesta expressed concern that Hillary would be dwarfed by 6'2" Trump.

That came from the Drudge Report and even that does not say it was requested to skew optics, as opposed to comfortable debate.
iLOL :lamo Wrong as usual.
It is right there.

Your contention here is that demanding a step-stool to add height over concerns that she would be dwarfed is not saying it is to skew the optics.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggghhhhhhhhhttt!

Try to sell your bs to someone else.


I couldn't be you. I couldn't constantly state things which are false, knowing they are false. Then again, I also couldn't excuse bragging about sexual assault, which you are currently doing in another thread.

So I guess that's just the difference between us. I'm done with the lies. You said these things, you were wrong, Drudge Report has no credibility and sexual assault isn't something to be casually dismissed because the person doing it plays for you team.

So how about you just "iLOL" fifty more times again and we can call this discussion done. But make no mistake, no one with a shred of honesty or intelligence believes anything you've said to try and excuse your partisanship.
Your thoughts are clearly deluded. Not only are you wrong here, as shown repeatedly, you have been since the get and are now wrong about what is going on in another thread.
Your thoughts clearly are deluded.
And what makes this even more sad is that what you say about lies and being wrong really only apply to the arguments you made, which has been clearly and repeatedly shown.


And make no mistake, no one with a shred of honesty or intelligence believes anything you've said to try and excuse your ridiculous claim of partisanship.
 

Top Cat

He's the most tip top
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
31,329
Reaction score
13,053
Location
Near Seattle
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
She is a fool for giving Trump such good ammunition.. Watch him point it out on stage and laugh at her..

Ha ha ha..

Donny be too busy dodging his stupid comments.
 
Top Bottom