Climate Politics

Worst presidential debate in history

by Ed Berry

Replace Chris Wallace with a robot

Amazon “employs” 100,000 robots that would have been a better debate moderator than Chris Wallace. He would not shut up after he asked a question. Viewers wanted to hear the candidates, not his squeaky Donald Duck voice talking over the candidates.

As for future debates: Robot controls the clock and the microphones. The robot would not talk. Robot would display the question in less than 10 words for each session. No need to repeat a question. Robot would never interrupt a candidate because the robot did not like the candidate’s answer.

Robot would allow 5 seconds for everyone to read the question. Then Robot would point an arrow at one of the candidates, turn on his microphone, and start the countdown clock. At the end of the countdown, Robot would switch the arrow and the open microphone to the other candidate.

The whole show was painful to watch because of Chis Wallace. Unless I were professionally interested in the debates, I would not watch another debate moderated by that idiot.

President Trump lost the debate.

You know my bias. I am 100 percent for Trump. Based on the candidates’ comments about what they will do for America, I conclude Trump will be good for America and Biden would be bad. However, I work to follow the logic of the debate and I represent probably less than 3 percent of American voters.

The winner of the debate was the one who best connected emotionally with the 10 percent of the voters who have not decided who they will vote for.

Biden connected with that audience much better than Trump did. Biden looked at the camera and spoke well. Trump rarely did. His posture was not good. His expressions were not good.

Trump should have waited until he had a clear time to speak and then looked into the camera and addressed the American voters like he does in his speeches.

Trump’s most important audience were the women. He needs their vote. I don’t think Trump won any new votes in the debate.

What do I think of Trump’s answer to the climate question?

President Trump should have said, if squeaky Wallace would have allowed him:

Economist Bjorn Lomborg – in his book “False Alarm” – shows no amount of money spent on trying to control global temperature would have any measurable effect. He agrees that my plan to adjust to any effects of climate change is the most economical and moral.

But new discoveries in climate science change the picture. Now we know nature controls CO2. Our CO2 has little effect. We are not responsible for climate change. We don’t need to fix it. There is no climate crisis. We should not spend money on a delusion.

Of course, that quick statement will need much more explaining. Trump would have to do that explaining in his following news releases.

Those few words would have shocked enough undecided voters to make them consider voting for Trump.

The New York Times reported today that climate is now a factor in the elections and will likely be in the next two debates.

16 Comments

  1. I agree 100%. Trump should have looked at the audience and spoke directly to them. Biden told one lie after another … most were his lack of understand of the issues. However, the uninformed in the audience would not have known. His climate discussion was absurd.

    I am worried about the outcome of the 2020 election. We need both houses of Congress plus Trump or it is GOODBYE America as we know it.

    1. I actually thought Biden looked very phony when he attempted to address the audience. I thought Trump won — not on the basis of anything he said or did not say — but because he was passionate and energetic. Biden looked terribly old. Not a good look. Plus I thought the points he made were simply shallow.

      Trump is not a debater, so I don’t expect a perfect performance, but I did think he looked more in command than was the case in the debates with Hillary. And he definitely looked more capable than Biden. Really, I would have expected anyone who is a Biden supporter to be cringing at getting a closer look at the candidate Dems have picked.

      1. Dear Mary,

        Thank you for your comment. I have a question that you may be able to answer. I don’t know the answer.

        Why does Trump get 16 percent more of the men’s votes than Biden, but Biden gets 32 percent more of the women’s votes than Trump?

  2. Chris Wallace is a jerk, just like his father Mike Wallace. Chris destroyed that debate. When the president was asked about climate change, his answer should have been, I think it is a lie.

    If you look at Biden’s eyes they were dilated and look black. I will admit Biden was very relaxes but he did not answer one question. I would like to see what drugs they had him on. i agree with you a robot would done a better job than Wallace.

  3. One more thing, when Wallace asks about tax returns, the President should have said, because I am in the Private sector, we are the only real taxpayers. You Mr. Biden have never paid taxes because you are government sector for the last 47 years. The salaries and benefits of government employees come from taxing the private sector.

    There is another point I would like to make on Free market vs. socialism. Instead of the Republicans trying to outspend the democrats in this election, why not ask how they got all their money.

    Hollywood movie stars and athletes, bankers, are all pushing socialism and communism and living in homes worth millions of dollars. How did they make their money? Was it through the Free Market or communism? If, through communism, they would lucky to live in a dog house.

    George Soros made his money by stealing the gold from the mouths of dead Jews, during the 2nd World War.

    President Trump made his money building big buildings in the Free Market.

    This video shows an interview on 60 Minutes, talking to George Soros https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/09/fox-news-preventing-negative-reporting-george-soros/ The interview lasts 7 minutes.

  4. Fredh,

    I hope someone relays your comment to the Trump campaign! Your first paragraph is sufficient to put the candidates in perspective: one is a taxpayer, the other is a tax sucker.

    This election is being waged by a taxpaying candidate against someone who represents the federal bureaucracy (AKA: “the deep state,” or “the Swamp.”)

    That yuge army of drones has grown inexorably. It is now the country’s biggest special interest group, and feeding that army is the biggest single reason the average working person is forced to pay half of their earned income in taxes.

    This country rebelled over a 3% tax on tea. Now we have a giant parasite attached to our wallets, demanding higher pay than comparable jobs in the private sector.

    The choice in this election is clear: if the Democrat is elected he will reward that special interest army with even higher pay — not at his expense, or his Party’s expense, but at the taxpayer’s expense. A vote for Biden is a vote for even higher taxes. Think about that.

    Finally, for amusement I’ve asked Biden supporters a simple test question:

    “Tell us why you’re voting for Biden — but without mentioning Trump.”

    So far all I’ve gotten for an answer is either embarrassed squirming, or an angry outburst about the Evil Orange Man. (It’s more fun if there’s an audience).

    If they get angry, remind them that you only asked a simple question…

  5. The worse part was the climate change subject. One simple phrase could have set things in motion in the right direction.

    “Do you believe CO2 is causing warming?”

    “Line spectrum cannot return to its radiating source and increase its temperature. Not how the physics of boson energy works. Let’s start the conversation of climte change with real science and work from there.”

  6. Trump spent a few years doing TV; he knows and understands camera angles. Why did only Biden make full use of uninterrupted time to talk directly to TV viewers?

    It seems only Biden was given the information to make use of a direct camera—or perhaps only Biden had a camera facing him at the right times? Either way, is this the 2020 version Hillary being given the answers or last century’s Kennedy-Nixon make-up scandal?

  7. Hi Ed, love your work. But, I think you have misunderstood what Trump was doing:

    1 The first thing Trump was doing was stopping biden from lying. Everything biden said was a lie. Trump cut in continually to point this out. No one has done this before.

    2 Trump raised issues which had been ignored by the msm and therefore the voters had probably not been aware; such things as biden’s corruption, his son’s corruption, bidens involvement in the Russian collusion lie and biden’s support of antifa, the green new deal, his support of defunding the police and so on.

    3 Most importantly Trump forced biden to distance himself from the berni supporters, the aoc supporters and the hard left generally. This election is a completely polarised election, the undecided voter is negligible. Voter turnout is crucial. Trump beat hillary because not enough anti-Trump voters could vote for her. This time the radical left are crucial for biden and Trump forced biden to seperate himself from the radical left. Trump did this while giving his supporters some red meat. I think it was a good tactic.

    Generally conservative politicians have not been taking the fight up to the left who could do and say anything while the right was more focused on decorum. Trump has been vilified by these mongrels for nearly 4 years. he has shown you can’t beat the left by playing by the rules, especially when the umpire is a leftie, as wallace is, and will side with the left, as wallace did. If you wanted a polite, gutless, useless conservative POTUS you should have voted for Romney.

    Just watch, the left will figure out what Trump did and demand no more debates.

  8. The lack of what I would consider proper decorum displayed by both Trump and Biden was appalling during this thing that some are labeling to have been ”a debate”. Each participant was to have had two minutes to respond to the third participant in this debate, Chris Wallace’s, questions and that should have happened without interruption. Dr. Ed’s idea of having robots handling the moderation of debates would work better than how this circus, (debate) was presented to an audience that had expected much more than what was delivered to it; but, were thankful that it cost them nothing to waste their time watching.

    What happened was that the majority of the however long this mindless ordeal played out and endless display of rudeness and talking over each other resulted in me not getting much of an idea just what the hell any of the three were saying and in the end, what the hell did it matter?

    Chris Wallace did no more to hide whose side of this debate he was on any more that what Candy Crowley did when she ‘moderated’ the Barack Hussein Obama and Mitt Romney debate and Candy Crowley tried to back up the lie that Obama had issued, for all to hear, about how long it took him to properly label the attack on Benghazi as being a terrorist attack, which it certainly was.

    Trump should have been more forceful when Chris Wallace implied that; “the science of climate change”, backed up Biden’s assertions that fires, floods, a derecho, and ingrown toe nails were all the result of anthropogenic climate change caused by humans putting the essential for all terrestrial life on earth trace gas, CO₂, into the atmosphere.

    This is the flawed hypotheses behind this kooky green new deal that the left pushes because of the control factor that it presents to far left people such a Joe Biden. Removing the United States from the horribly flawed Paris Climate Accord was something that absolutely had to be done and President Trump did that, in addition to getting rid of most of the regulations that Biden and Obama had saddled the US economy with.

  9. Keep up the good work. It is important for all of us in North America.

    I do not know whether or not you have contacts at the White House. It would be useful if Trump had and understood the information below for the next debate.

    The message below is a simple and accurate way of proving the IPCC is wrong and has been since 1990.

    As an engineer with extensive design experience, I know it is necessary to understand the science and ensure it is properly applied.

    The correct science about the role of CO2 in climate change is in technology that became available through AccuWeather in 2007, in the Gas Laws and in psychrometric charts. The last two are well within the education and scientific knowledge of engineers.

    First, to AccuWeather on your cell phone add Libreville, Gabon, on the Equator and McMurdo Station in Antarctica. As I am writing this it is 8:56 PM Sept 27 at Libreville; temperature is +26oC and RH is 78%. At McMurdo it is 8:56 AM Sept 28; temperature is minus 22oC and RH is 71%. These are real measured values of temperature and RH.

    Second, the temperature is (26 + 22) = 48oC higher at Libreville than at McMurdo and the time is exactly the same. Moving from the Antarctic to the Equator, the warmer air expands and the concentration of CO2 falls in accordance with the Gas Law of Charles/Gay-Lussac, i.e., at constant pressure, the volume of a gas is proportional to the absolute temperature. Thus, the CO2 falls by ((299 – 251)/(299)) = 16%. The effect of Boyle’s Law is ignored because it is very small as the difference in elevation is only 20 metres.

    Third, using a psychrometric chart or program, the actual water vapor content at McMurdo is 0.000378 kg of water per kg of dry air and rises to 0.0168 at Libreville.

    The key point is that as temperature rises from the Poles to the Equator, CO2 goes down and water vapor goes up. Pictorially: T↑, CO2↓ and WV↑. Actually, CO2 and water vapor move in opposite directions in response to temperature.

    In contrast, the IPCC reports claim increasing CO2 increases air temperature, the air can then hold more water vapor and this water vapor amplifies the warming by CO2. Pictorially: CO2↑, T↑ and WV↑. Note that for the IPCC, CO2 and water vapor move in the same direction with temperature.

    The example of Libreville and McMurdo provided here is proof the IPCC is wrong. Climate models are based on the IPCC concept and are, therefore, also wrong.
    The Equator is always warmer than the Arctic and Antarctic at any time of the day or night or season. I encourage you to repeat the three steps and obtain similar results for yourself.

    Currently, the world is going rapidly down a path based on the incorrect science of the IPCC. It is time for engineers and their elected representatives to step up and protect the public.”

    For reference there is more information and diagrams at:
    http://thelightfootinstitute.ca/assessIPCCaccuracy.html

    Hope this helps to bring some good sense to the current debate. Biden’s program is based on the erroneous concept that increasing CO2 warms the air and can cause dangerous climate change. Trump’s program is realistic.

  10. Thanks, Dr. Berry! Your analysis and commentary is spot on about this debate and about “climate change.”

  11. “Trump should have waited until he had a clear time to speak and then looked into the camera and addressed the American voters like he does in his speeches.”

    Unfortunately, that is what we Trump supporters get for his lack of preparation.

  12. Dr. Berry,
    Biden is not likable. He had never been likable. People see through his act.

Comments are closed.