Hillary - Trump Debates redone.....

This is fascinating. A professor of economics named Maria Guadalupe was watching the presidential debates last year and had a thought. What if Trump were a woman and Hillary were a man? How would that change people’s perceptions of the exchanges in the debates?

With the help of Joe Salvatore, a professor who specializes in something called ethnodrama, Guadalupe set up a recreation of sections of the original debates using actors to play the roles of Trump, Clinton and the moderator. All the words the actors spoke were taken from transcripts. The candidates’ body language and delivery were studied and the actors did their best to match it moment-to-moment to video feeds from the actual debates. The only difference was that Donald Trump was now a woman renamed Brenda King while Hillary was now a man dubbed Jonathan Gordon.

Initially, both Guadalupe and Salvatore had little doubt what the experiment would reveal, i.e. Trump’s behavior would never be tolerated coming from a woman while Clinton’s competence would be even more obvious coming from a man. But as rehearsals for the performance of the reimagined debates went on, Guadalupe and Salvatore were surprised by what they were feeling about the two candidates. It turned out the woman version of Trump seemed more likable than they had imagined. Salvatore told Guadalupe during rehearsals, “I kind of want to have a beer with her!”

When the debate was actually performed, for a crowd of mostly academics, the audience was somewhat bewildered.

Herbie Green wrote:Does this make republicans better than democrats?

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:What if they both had to ride on horses while they debated??? Or if people randomly shot ping pong balls at their faces???

a) what a stupid waste of time irrelevant study. Changing a fundamental dynamic then pretending everything else would be the same when it so clearly wouldn't be is just a silly waste of time. b) way to play like Don by ignoring the disaster around you and continuing to talk about the election instead

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:What if they both had to ride on horses while they debated??? Or if people randomly shot ping pong balls at their faces???

a) what a stupid waste of time irrelevant study. Changing a fundamental dynamic then pretending everything else would be the same when it so clearly wouldn't be is just a silly waste of time. b) way to play like Don by ignoring the disaster around you and continuing to talk about the election instead

lol, nah - I've just decided not to join the freak out. Just like 92.35% of America.

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:What if they both had to ride on horses while they debated??? Or if people randomly shot ping pong balls at their faces???

a) what a stupid waste of time irrelevant study. Changing a fundamental dynamic then pretending everything else would be the same when it so clearly wouldn't be is just a silly waste of time. b) way to play like Don by ignoring the disaster around you and continuing to talk about the election instead

lol, nah - I've just decided not to join the freak out. Just like 92.35% of America.

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:What if they both had to ride on horses while they debated??? Or if people randomly shot ping pong balls at their faces???

a) what a stupid waste of time irrelevant study. Changing a fundamental dynamic then pretending everything else would be the same when it so clearly wouldn't be is just a silly waste of time. b) way to play like Don by ignoring the disaster around you and continuing to talk about the election instead

lol, nah - I've just decided not to join the freak out. Just like 92.35% of America.

Herbie Green wrote:Does this make republicans better than democrats?

I.B. Fine wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:Does this make republicans better than democrats?

No, I think it simply points out, to the surprise of those conducting this exercise, that Hillary is an unlikable person, despite her gender, and was an all around terrible candidate, which is why she lost to the "smarmy guy with the long red tie", not that the country is misogynist.

But those in denial will continue to bash the 'Deplorable' half of the country that voted for Trump as know nothing, knuckle draggers at their own peril.

I.B. Fine wrote:

Herbie Green wrote:Does this make republicans better than democrats?

No, I think it simply points out, to the surprise of those conducting this exercise, that Hillary is an unlikable person, despite her gender, and was an all around terrible candidate, which is why she lost to the "smarmy guy with the long red tie", not that the country is misogynist.

But those in denial will continue to bash the 'Deplorable' half of the country that voted for Trump as know nothing, knuckle draggers at their own peril.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

I.B. Fine wrote:
No, I think it simply points out, to the surprise of those conducting this exercise, that Hillary is an unlikable person, despite her gender, and was an all around terrible candidate, which is why she lost to the "smarmy guy with the long red tie", not that the country is misogynist.

But those in denial will continue to bash the 'Deplorable' half of the country that voted for Trump as know nothing, knuckle draggers at their own peril.

I never understood why Dems pushed so hard to get Hillary their nomination. So unlikable.

I'm pretty independent and was all set to vote for Johnson until he went kind of looney tunes near the end. I finally broke down and voted for Hill Dawg just because I didn't want to see what is currently happening with the executive branch, but I didn't feel good about doing it.

Blanch32 wrote:

I.B. Fine wrote:
No, I think it simply points out, to the surprise of those conducting this exercise, that Hillary is an unlikable person, despite her gender, and was an all around terrible candidate, which is why she lost to the "smarmy guy with the long red tie", not that the country is misogynist.

But those in denial will continue to bash the 'Deplorable' half of the country that voted for Trump as know nothing, knuckle draggers at their own peril.

this. libs just don't and won't, get it. it's probably the saddest output of this election

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:What if they both had to ride on horses while they debated??? Or if people randomly shot ping pong balls at their faces???