seb146 wrote:

NoTime wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Don't deflect. This is not about "well, that's as bad as the other guy so let's just drop the subject." It is about the fact that Republicans just want to do nothing. They have been in control of both houses of Congress and have done nothing. It is not about "well they are as bad" but, rather, Republicans have proved they do not want to do anything and claim the system does not work.

Not deflecting at all. I mean, pretty much ALL you hear coming out of the DNC is how terrible Trump is, and what a disaster it will be if he gets elected. That's exactly what you're complaining about with the GOP in your earlier post.

There are literally thousands of examples as to why Trump is awful. Examples that to not take a PhD to understand. In years past, candidates would put out their proposals for various things and experts and scholars would debate why this plan is better than that plan. Very intellectual and insightful and we the people learn things. Republicans have simply given up. Their new strategy seems to be "vote for us because we are not Democrats."

And, yet again, you're saying that as if it's only the GOP doing it. There are, literally, thousands of examples as to why Clinton is awful and shouldn't be elected. But, for some reason, you have convinced yourself that a strategy of "vote for me, because I'm not Trump" somehow has merit, while "vote for us, because we're not democrats" doesn't. That's probably one of the purest examples of someone wearing ideological blinders that I have seen on this message board.

ER757 wrote:

This.....the debates will be Trump's Waterloo. Hillary will eat him alive. Trump is an empty suit - zero foreign policy experience, zero real plans for anything domestically and he'll be exposed in the debates. HRC is not going to ever win miss congeniality and there's folks like me who just can't put her name down (I am choosing "none of the above" for POTUS) but any undecideds out there will fall to Clinton after the debates.

None of which has seemed to have hurt him yet so why should it hurt him now?

NoTime wrote:

seb146 wrote:

NoTime wrote:

Not deflecting at all. I mean, pretty much ALL you hear coming out of the DNC is how terrible Trump is, and what a disaster it will be if he gets elected. That's exactly what you're complaining about with the GOP in your earlier post.

There are literally thousands of examples as to why Trump is awful. Examples that to not take a PhD to understand. In years past, candidates would put out their proposals for various things and experts and scholars would debate why this plan is better than that plan. Very intellectual and insightful and we the people learn things. Republicans have simply given up. Their new strategy seems to be "vote for us because we are not Democrats."

And, yet again, you're saying that as if it's only the GOP doing it. There are, literally, thousands of examples as to why Clinton is awful and shouldn't be elected. But, for some reason, you have convinced yourself that a strategy of "vote for me, because I'm not Trump" somehow has merit, while "vote for us, because we're not democrats" doesn't. That's probably one of the purest examples of someone wearing ideological blinders that I have seen on this message board.

So, I make a point of something and you deflect. Again.

Hillary has experience. Any time that is pointed out, the right simply says "but she is awful." Okay, but how? That she is diplomatic? That she does not piss off several nations at once? That she did not bribe an attorney general? That she has no ties to Russia? Or is it that she has avoided prosecution because there is nothing to prosecute her for?

And, yes, Trump is being investigated for his ties to Russia.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pre ... or-ties-to

To, to sum up: he has no diplomatic back ground, his businesses failed, two of his marriages failed, he hates minorities, hates the Second Amendment, hates the Fourth Amendment.

But, he is better than her because Trump is not Hillary. That is the whole point you are defending.

Boeing717200 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

blueflyer wrote:

Where to start...

Did I mention Benghazi? I know she has been cleared of Benghazi, and rightfully so. The Congress hearings were nothing but witch hunts by incapable politicians who have not had a single original or constructive idea to offer since "Obama must be a one-term president."

Since my first post didn't spell it clearly enough for you, let me try again. What her handling of her email (server) tells me is she is unable or unwilling to learn from her mistakes, at least not when it inconveniences her. Even if it was acceptable when she became SecState (it was not, StateDept would have stopped her if they had known), having her own email server controlled and secured by her and her contractor became an intolerable cybersecurity risk during her term! And unless China or Russia prove otherwise, we'll never know if it was indeed hacked because she ordered the server, and its logs, destroyed. She refuses to this day to acknowledge these issues, and back then she would not even tolerate discussions on that topic (I refer you to Huma Abedin's statements that her email server was not a topic for conversation at StateDept).

If more evidence is needed of her refusal to adapt to changing environments and learn from her mistakes, the Clinton foundation is there...

Finally, "he did it first" hasn't worked for me since kindergarten. We rightfully expect very little of politicians, but if that is your standard, perhaps it isn't just candidates who deserve to be disqualified.

She had one server. Not several over the course of decades, as you think. The Clinton Foundation has been found to be one of the most transparent charities. Guess why? The Clintons have been under constant scrutiny for decades.

https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-an ... dation/478

Colin Powell told her she could use a private server but to be careful.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09 ... l-use.html

Clinton and transparent in one post. That's epic considering the entire purpose of the server was to circumvent FOIA requests.

Transparent my ass.

And Republican ended up with all of her emails and found nothing anyway, so....

This fake outrage by the right over servers and emails needs to stop. It has already been proven that TWO top Republicans did THE EXACT SAME THING as Hillary. Zero outrage, zero investigations. If you all were never outraged then, you have no right to be outraged now over the exact same thing.

LMP737 wrote:

ER757 wrote:

This.....the debates will be Trump's Waterloo. Hillary will eat him alive. Trump is an empty suit - zero foreign policy experience, zero real plans for anything domestically and he'll be exposed in the debates. HRC is not going to ever win miss congeniality and there's folks like me who just can't put her name down (I am choosing "none of the above" for POTUS) but any undecideds out there will fall to Clinton after the debates.

None of which has seemed to have hurt him yet so why should it hurt him now?

It won't hurt him with his racist, Islaophobic, Xenophobic, uneducated base. But it will cost him among Independents and undecideds.

And I still don't believe it'll be that close. When 90% of African-Americans, 80% of Hispanics and Lationos, and about 70% of women are voting against you, you cannot win with that narrowing base of support.

Hillis wrote:

It won't hurt him with his racist, Islaophobic, Xenophobic, uneducated base. But it will cost him among Independents and undecideds.

Politico tracked Trump's and Clinton's media this past week. Trump tells a lie every 3 1/2 minutes.

Some metrics on Trump’s statements this week:
Number of appearances: 6 speeches; 1 town hall, 7 TV interviews; 0 press availabilities; 37 tweets
Combined length of remarks (speeches, interviews): 4 hours and 43 minutes
Raw number of misstatements, exaggerations, falsehoods: 87
Rate: 1 untruth every 3.25 minutes

Hillary was rated at close to 80% less lying, yet Trumpanzees consistently claim their guy "tells it as it is, even if people don't like it". No, he's just an epic liar.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... z4LICwTyIb

mham001 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

mham001 wrote:

Meanwhile the big kids can discuss why Hillary has not the commanding lead after spending all that money.

But why would you suggest that she should have a greater lead "after spending all that money"? Money does not make one successful, as Trump as proven.

Tugg

So why is Hillary spending all that money?

It is beginning to become clear that Hispanics are not flocking to Hillary in the numbers she needs to overcome her other deficits. Recent polls have Trump getting about the same numbers as Romney in 2012.

In some places, Trump is actually outperforming Romney. In Nevada, for example, President Obama ran up a 47-point margin of victory among Hispanic voters in 2012, according to exit polls, defeating Romney 71 percent to 24 percent. A recent Marist poll in the state for NBC News and The Wall Street Journal showed Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton leading among Hispanics, but by the smaller margin of 35 points, 65 percent to 30 percent.

A series of Univision polls earlier this month surveying Hispanic voters in four battleground states — Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Nevada — also put Trump in the same ballpark as Romney four years ago. Clinton’s lead over Trump among Hispanics in Colorado was smaller than Obama’s margin in that state in 2012.
http://origin-nyi.thehill.com/homenews/ ... -you-think

If the princess doesn't get her act together, this forum will be the go to place to watch epic meltdowns on election night. She's leading by a safety and trying to run out the clock while Donald is on the 15 yard line about attempt a field goal. He'll either choke or nail it and walk away. She has no control over her destiny.

Hillis wrote:

It won't hurt him with his racist, Islaophobic, Xenophobic, uneducated base

Statements like these are why Trump has a better chance of winning. Some people are intimidated by comments such as this during polling, but not when voting of course, and they are practically tied in the polls.

afcjets wrote:

Hillis wrote:

It won't hurt him with his racist, Islaophobic, Xenophobic, uneducated base

Statements like this is why Trump has a better chance of winning. Some people are intimidated by comments such as this during polling, but not when voting of course, and they are practically tied in the polls.

Hardly. Statements like this are exactly why he will lose. You cannot win with the fascist-leaning, white-only vote. You just can't. Maybe you could 30 years ago, but those days are gone.

And in another twist, apparently Trump has let senior campaign staffer Carter Page go. Page seemingly has a chummy history with Vlad Putin and Russia. Not that it will matter either way, but Trump has surrounded himself throughout this campaing with several people who have shady ties to Moscow. And if you think about it, Trump's in that same category.

And being tied in the national polls isn't the thing that matters; it's state-to-state,and currently, Hillary Clinton is still sitting in very good position to win the electoral vote. The lynchpin is Pennsylvania. And Trump is in trouble in Pennsylvania.

afcjets wrote:

Statements like these are why Trump has a better chance of winning. Some people are intimidated by comments such as this during polling, but not when voting of course, and they are practically tied in the polls.

No, not at all. That is unless you want to lie to your spouse or loved ones you actually voted for a demagogue. I watched people I knew full well voted for GW Bush run away from because they didn't want to take responsibility for his ineptness before "they knew better".

The only ones I suspect that will double down on this are the usual racists and deniers. The ones that claim they have black friends "at the office". Or gays are some of their best friends, or any number of people. No, the provable, repeated, lies that Trump has PROVEN to have told won't matter with this crowd.

Trump hates "those" people over there, not the group of people voting for him....that is....until he starts to hate pieces parts of that community. The Stormfront crowd are unfortunately alive for a few more years. *shrug* If others want to align themselves to the Stormfront crowd they can knock themselves out. At a certain point the Republican party will realize if they wish to survive they need to denounce the racist fringe in their group, and toss them to the side.

My educated guess, is this forum is going to have to get used to saying Madam President for at least the next 4 years, biting their tongues until the taste of blood fills their mouth, and then, and only then, might they run a moderate Republican Presidential nominee again. *shrug* We'll see in what 42 days?

PB88

My educated guess, is this forum is going to have to get used to saying Madam President for at least the next 4 years, biting their tongues until the taste of blood fills their mouth, and then, and only then, might they run a moderate Republican Presidential nominee again. *shrug* We'll see in what 42 days?

I hope and pray you are correct, because if you are not, it means we have a ton of dumb people out there who voted for this big mouth phony. Hillary is no peach, but I certainly do not want the next USSC justice approved by the Heritage Foundation. For that reason alone, I will vote for Hillary. Be afraid, very afraid if this man attains power.

[quote][/quote]http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/26/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-colorado-pennsylvania-polls/index.html


You guys keep getting caught up in emotional debates in this thread.

Ill continue to provide poll numbers, because the OP seems to want to know where the race stands today.

Several weeks ago, Trump made FL OH and NV lean red when they were leaning blue. Clinton had large leads in PA and CO

There is a trend here as PA and CO are now essentially tied. If she loses even one of those states plus the three that now lean red, it is President Trump

Clinton has had a brutal September.


Of course, this can all change tonight at debate if Trump says or does something stupid. We will see

Is Donald Trump leading the poll? From what I heard he is.....recently

looks like its close, within a few points. Look what happened with brexit, anything can happen!

If Trump wins its gonna be epic!!

CNN New Day with Alisyn Camerota and Chris Cuomo talk of opening for Hillary to respond with something like 1980 Reagan's "There you go again" to Trump's attacks.

Looks like Hillary will do very well but don't count Trump out yet.....

United Airline wrote:

Is Donald Trump leading the poll? From what I heard he is.....recently

Latest Fox News poll - well of course he is!!!

mad99 wrote:

looks like its close, within a few points. Look what happened with brexit, anything can happen!

If Trump wins its gonna be epic!!

If he wins, and I still don't think he will, it would be the white race declaring war on minorities. That's what it would be. I think Americans are smarter than that.

Looking at Truman's predicament in spring of 1945 when Atom Bomb was revealed to him - one has to wonder how Hillary would act if in 2017 the Air Force other Pentagon branch revealed a new secret highly destructive weapon.

Hillis wrote:

It won't hurt him with his racist, Islaophobic, Xenophobic, uneducated base.

.

Do not underestimate power of those things. And do not assume independents and undecideds will not overlook them.

NoTime wrote:

And, yet again, you're saying that as if it's only the GOP doing it. There are, literally, thousands of examples as to why Clinton is awful and shouldn't be elected..

Name some examples that are not either debunked conspiracy theories, things that other politicians have done and worse, or half truths.

LMP737 wrote:

NoTime wrote:

And, yet again, you're saying that as if it's only the GOP doing it. There are, literally, thousands of examples as to why Clinton is awful and shouldn't be elected..

Name some examples that are not either debunked conspiracy theories, things that other politicians have done and worse, or half truths.

THOUSANDS??? Really? I mean, serious? Show me one not-contrived "scandal" that she's been found guilty of? You won't find them.

[quote="Dreadnought"

There, corrected it for you. You don't remember Hillary booting journalists from the Daily Mail or Politico, and in just last month actually kicking out all white reporters (supposedly because it was an event for the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists? And Trump doesn't hold a candle to Hillary as far as being a liar and a fraud. Finally, the Democratic party in general has not had ANY respect for the Constitution in the past 100+ years, you expect Hillary to be different?[/quote]

Don't go marking up my statements with your fraudulent statements and not include links.. The democratic party has a much better record in recent history than the frauds in the GOP. Gay Marriage, abortion, voting districts, healthcare and a litany of easily verifiable facts. Trump only offers the following for the constitution.


http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... han-214139

Shit. Trump may have won that debate. Let's see if he loses it on Twitter now.

Let's see.
Trump basically admitted he doesn't pay his share of taxes. Release the Tax Records!
Trump is currently getting raked over the coals for his birther claims on CNN

Trump was making good points about the economy early on. The VAT, NAFTA. He did well there

He lost himself further down the line.

coolian2 wrote:

Shit. Trump may have won that debate. Let's see if he loses it on Twitter now.

What debate were YOU watching?

I'm serious. You say an unglued, rambling idiot, and a woman who was calm, collected, and basically give Trump the rope and let him the noose around his neck!

Seriously, I don't know how you come to that conclusion.

Sound like Trump fell into HRC's trap and came off as a blithering, racist, tax and debt dodging fool.

The key things is Trump has/had a much lower bar to hurdle. Basically he had to step over the bar. In my opinion no one really expected anything significant from him or others simply expected him to do poorly. On that he did succeed on both counts.

Hillary did just fine for what her skill level is and what her audience expected. She didn't make any mistakes but she didn't hit any knockout punches (again in my opinion).

So I think the "win" here is that Trump didn't blow it. This will be a slow slog.

Tugg

casinterest wrote:

Trump was making good points about the economy early on. The VAT, NAFTA. He did well there

He lost himself further down the line.

I completely agree with you, Trump had some solid points in the beginning, but after the economic topic, Trump got worst and worst the longer the debatte went on.

On a side note, I didn't like that the audience couldn't keep calm...

Tugger wrote:

The key things is Trump has/had a much lower bar to hurdle. Basically he had to step over the bar. In my opinion no one really expected anything significant from him or others simply expected him to do poorly. On that he did succeed on both counts.

Hillary did just fine for what her skill level is and what her audience expected. She didn't make any mistakes but she didn't hit any knockout punches (again in my opinion).

So I think the "win" here is that Trump didn't blow it. This will be a slow slog.

Tugg

Problem is, he didn't step over the bar-he tripped and fell before he got to it.

Anyone with any common sense can't look at this and not see what a rude, petulant man, who doesn't have any idea what he's talking about.

Hillis wrote:

coolian2 wrote:

Shit. Trump may have won that debate. Let's see if he loses it on Twitter now.

What debate were YOU watching?

I'm serious. You say an unglued, rambling idiot, and a woman who was calm, collected, and basically give Trump the rope and let him the noose around his neck!

Seriously, I don't know how you come to that conclusion.

Okay, he won what I saw

ltbewr wrote:

Sound like Trump fell into HRC's trap and came off as a blithering, racist, tax and debt dodging fool.

Dodges taxes, debt and the draft. What's not to like?

coolian2 wrote:

Hillis wrote:

coolian2 wrote:

Shit. Trump may have won that debate. Let's see if he loses it on Twitter now.

What debate were YOU watching?

I'm serious. You say an unglued, rambling idiot, and a woman who was calm, collected, and basically give Trump the rope and let him the noose around his neck!

Seriously, I don't know how you come to that conclusion.

Okay, he won what I saw

Like I said, I'm wondering what the heck you saw.

I agree- Trump won, comfortably, and pretty much every poll I can find confirms this. Clinton was banking on him hanging himself, and he didn't.

She may have been more Presidential, and have lied less, but that doesn't really count for much these days. I think she's going to have to go on the attack a bit more.

zckls04 wrote:

I agree- Trump won, comfortably, and pretty much every poll I can find confirms this. Clinton was banking on him hanging himself, and he didn't.

She may have been more Presidential, and have lied less, but that doesn't really count for much these days. I think she's going to have to go on the attack a bit more.

What polls are you looking at? I can't find any that are saying that Clinton won by less than 10 points.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main ... -5140.html
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/26/politics/ ... ald-trump/
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/statu ... 6133129216
http://www.vox.com/2016/9/27/13069088/h ... ial-debate

zckls04 wrote:

I agree- Trump won, comfortably, and pretty much every poll I can find confirms this. Clinton was banking on him hanging himself, and he didn't.

She may have been more Presidential, and have lied less, but that doesn't really count for much these days. I think she's going to have to go on the attack a bit more.

Shoulder shimmy? Yes, she prepared for the debate. And she prepared to be president. Paraphrased and my favorite quote.

I listened to the debate and in my opinion Hillary won this convincingly. Trump's lack of Shame on making money on the home foreclosures was the noose that will derail his campaign.

I also see that he is claiming he was given a defective mic.

Hillis wrote:

coolian2 wrote:

Hillis wrote:

What debate were YOU watching?

I'm serious. You say an unglued, rambling idiot, and a woman who was calm, collected, and basically give Trump the rope and let him the noose around his neck!

Seriously, I don't know how you come to that conclusion.

Okay, he won what I saw

Like I said, I'm wondering what the heck you saw.

To be fair, eff-all.

I got the parts he didn't lie.

coolian2 wrote:

Hillis wrote:

coolian2 wrote:

Okay, he won what I saw

Like I said, I'm wondering what the heck you saw.

To be fair, eff-all.

I got the parts he didn't lie.

I went to Google and typed "did trump lie in the debate" and came up with

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=c ... e%20debate

yeah...

A few points about the debate:

o I did not expect the gloves to come off as early as they did
o This turned into and remained largely a slugfest of soundbites instead of substance
o Trump dominated in the first 30 minutes
o Clinton kept Trump solidly on the defensive for the remaining 60 minutes
o Trump repeatedly failed to take advantage of MANY clear opportunities to hammer Clinton on substance


As someone who, based on what the candidates' positions are, has strongly favored Trump over Clinton, I'm disappointed that he did not come remotely close to selling his ideas to the viewing audience. He squandered what was a golden opportunity.

Hopefully, he's far better prepared to engage on substance in the next two debates, or this won't even be close come November 8th.

I'm really worried about Dumpy Donnie. Did you guys see how much he sniffled in the first part of the debate? Could be a serious case of meningitis right there.

http://twitter.com/BuzzFeed/status/7805 ... wsrc%5Etfw

BestWestern wrote:

Trump's lack of Shame on making money on the home foreclosures was the noose that will derail his campaign.

That as well as bragging about not paying taxes are going to be very unpopular with middle class voters. Meanwhile the bit where he bragged about opening a club that had black people and didn't have racial discrimination was straight-out hilarious.

EA CO AS wrote:

A few points about the debate:

o I did not expect the gloves to come off as early as they did
o This turned into and remained largely a slugfest of soundbites instead of substance
o Trump dominated in the first 30 minutes
o Clinton kept Trump solidly on the defensive for the remaining 60 minutes
o Trump repeatedly failed to take advantage of MANY clear opportunities to hammer Clinton on substance


As someone who, based on what the candidates' positions are, has strongly favored Trump over Clinton, I'm disappointed that he did not come remotely close to selling his ideas to the viewing audience. He squandered what was a golden opportunity.

Hopefully, he's far better prepared to engage on substance in the next two debates, or this won't even be close come November 8th.

Sound bites and "bumper sticker politics" is all Americans care about. Trump really has no ideas other than "Muslims bad" and "build a wall."

I only saw the tweets and FB updates and I could hear Hillary's eye rolls. From what I saw, he came across as the typical "you weak little thing, get back in the kitchen and make me a sandwich" man.

Listening on BBC world service, the sniffles were very pronounced. He sounded very aggressive and angry as the debate rolled on - probably 90 minutes is too much to concenrate on for him.

The BBC had a commentator from Breitbart radio on after the debate, and he said that Clinton won.

Which probably just leaves Hannity as his best friend forever.

I didn't feel either candidate stood out as a clear winner.

Both made good points, both made fumbles.

The main negative is when Donald said several times that 'I never said that' or words to that effect about things he has clearly said in the past/ tweeted/ etc. He seems petulant and childish when he tries to insist he was always against the 2003 Iraq war. It was 13 years ago, a lot of people thought it was a good idea at the time, and changed their mind.

I didn't even think Donald refusing to answer several questions from the moderator, but going off on tangents, hurt him. Hillary didn't pound back on his ignoring questions, which could have helped her.

Donald's clearly not understanding why he gets audited almost every year is funny. He gets audited because the type of business he runs results in lots of questionable deductions. Also because his personal taxes and his business taxes are so intermingled that it takes auditors to determine what is the tax his business should pay and what is the tax he personally should pay. (I'm not sure if it has ever been clearly determined if Donald Trump the individual taxpayer is being audited, or Donald Trump the corporation is being audited, or both. Donald does have a habit of combining both into one when he does things and talks publicaly.)

Yes, lots of rich folks don't get audited. Folks like Mitt Romney who have a pretty clear, cut and dried income and tax. Whose business is very clearly separate from his personal life as far as money.

His comment about not paying taxes will hurt him in the election IMHO. Romney's effective tax rate hurt him with a lot of people who would have voted for him in 2012 in my opinion. Many solid Republican supporters felt strongly that Romney wasn't paying his fair share of taxes and decided to stay home in 2012 rather than vote. Just a personal perception and discussions with friends - but I think the effect across the nation was similar. Trump saying he doesn't pay taxes might have been a mistake rather than fact - but it will be brought up over and over during the next month.

One thing Trump must not do if he wants to win is to turn off blue collar Republican voters. They are the angry folks who could turn out and vote in numbers to put him in the White House. He has to have high voter turnout. His emphasis on his wealth builds a natural barrier between himself and those votes. If he keeps pointing out how he takes advantage of the system and pays lower taxes, percentage wise, than those voters - it doesn't help motivate them to go to the polls.

He has to focus on ideas and issues he has in common with those voters, not focus on differences.

---------------------------------------------------------------

At least neither showed such a basic mis-understanding as Jimmy Carter did in 1976 when he said that under his plans "Almost all Americans will have an above average income."

EA CO AS wrote:

o Trump repeatedly failed to take advantage of MANY clear opportunities to hammer Clinton on substance

I watched the entire debate.

Trump missed a big opportunity when Hillary said "words are important" - he should have nailed her right there and reminded her about the tens of millions of Americans she recently called deplorables.

With all of her political experience, Hilary should have done much better.

Trump's line that Hillary has spent her entire adult life "fighting ISIS" was pretty dumb, but it could have been a lot worse.

Regardless of who won the debate, I'd be happier if I was Trump all things considered - he did better than I expected.

I doubt this debate will affect the polls much at all or influence enough undecided voters to influence things at this stage.

The problem with the debate: the bar was set SO low for Trump that even tripping before reaching it, he cleared it. The fact that he didn't walk off or call her Crooked Hillary or spouted a "word salad of negative words (which he still did)" was enough to convince people that he did well. But there are no teleprompters here. Telling it like it is is not gonna help bring the undecided ones.

Last night Clinton showed what it takes to be president: articulate in a coherent and calm manner what your policies are and respecting a difference of opinions.

Expect the "my mic was faulty, that's why I lost" or "Lester Holt treated me very unfairly" tweets.

However, we must ask ourselves: was Trump sick last night? So many sniffles. Does he have swine flu? Was he doing cocaine before the debate? We deserve to know the truth!!

Anyone see a Reagan "There you go again" moment for Hillary?

For me it was her smiles, laughs and her response "I think Donald just criticized me for preparing for this debate. And, yes, I did. And you know what else I prepared for? I prepared to be president. And I think that’s a good thing."

Another big moment for Hillary to present herself as POTUS ready is the next debate which is in town-hall format where she will interact with the audience.

Any way you cut it, one candidate has a plan and a proven track record of cooperation with the other party to govern. One candidate is realistic and has a sensible world view, but understands the need to balance instant voter gratification with the long term view. The other candidate has none of these qualities. It will be the saddest day in American history if we send Trump to the White House. And I hate to say this but any voter with any understanding of real politik who votes for Trump will in effect be putting their dislike of Hillary ahead of their love of country. That's the truth.

I am now thinking that Trump did not do well enough, I am watching Fox News and there is no crowing, no statements declaring the strengths of Trump, only review of the debate match ups (and of course in those they are leaning to Trump's points/position as the more important).

If Fox News has not found it in their ability to clearly come with Trumpo as the winner, then it means really he isn't and in that he lost. Remember the bar was set incredibly low for him so even a strong performance by him would have seen him do well.

Tugg

zckls04 wrote:

I agree- Trump won, comfortably, and pretty much every poll I can find confirms this. Clinton was banking on him hanging himself, and he didn't.

She may have been more Presidential, and have lied less, but that doesn't really count for much these days. I think she's going to have to go on the attack a bit more.

Again, I wonder what you're looking at. Every poll I've seen, every rundown of the debate shows that Trump took a drubbing last night. And, yes, he hung himself on many occasions. I can't remember where I was watching, but in one of the post-debate broadcasts, a commentator mentioned that all the Republican he talked too, off camera, said that Trump looked and acted horrid. He said they looked like they just had a death in the family.

-Saying Clinton doesn't have the temperament to be POTUS, while she's standing there calmly, and he's ranting at that moment.
-Showing his petty and vindictive side by saying Rosie O'Donnell "deserved" all the derisive things he said about her.
-Saying Hillary doesn't have "The Look" to be president, even though she was composed and prepared.
-Once again lying about his support for Iraq.
-His constant sniffling, mumbling, nervous-Nellie demeanor the whole time.

Hillary didn't have to attack. She present FACTS, and Trump went off the deep end every single time Clinton challenged him. She just let him go on his rants and hang himself. It was the worst performance I've seen in any presidential debate.

Trump tried to make an issue of her being "prepared". Well, Donald, you have to be prepared as President. You can't just make stuff up as you go.

Trump lost big, and by early next week, the polls will indicate. And I don't see him recovering.

Hillis wrote:

Again, I wonder what you're looking at.

To me it isn't his faux pas or his attacks on Clinton or his deflections and refusal to actually answer questions. It is that he did not clearly fail and implode. He kept hammering one message: Clinton is an old, insider politician, whose past actions caused the situation we are in. The inference is that he is a fresh outsider and why not take a chance?

He did not fail to his audience and to me at least you have to try and view it that way.

I am taking nothing for granted in this election and know to stay observant and not try to convince myself or anyone else that Trump "can't win because...." I see that as moving to complacency and a real risk at missing what is critical in this election: Don't under estimate the ability of Trump to get people to vote for him. We have seen what happens when people do that and it is damaging the Republican party quite a lot. I don't need that happening to the nation.

Tugg