First presidential debate - September 26: Trump vs Hillary

[cubby]

I think they both did decently. The fact that Hillary didn't obliterate Trump (with her 30 years experience in politics) and that Trump didn't come off as a complete oaf and doofus makes me think Trump might have taken the edge, but I can see how you might think Hillary took the night.

No, they didn't. Trump was awful and lied with almost every breath he took (see here). Clinton was elegant and poised and dominated the debating points. But any measurable standard Clinton won.

lThe moderator was clearly hell-bent on keeping Trump on the defensive (which is why most pundits were saying he seemed on the defensive -- he was lol). They spent about 3x more time on the Birther issue than Hillary's e-mails. The next debate will hopefully be more policy questions. We'll see.

The moderator was not - what are you talking about. He should have been all over Trump when he kept interrupting Clinton. I don't know what you mean by hell-bent on keeping him on the defensive.

[Felya]

Sounds like she grants wishes at a whim, but she's still selling out her office and gets paid whether or not she delivers.

The "donation" up front is for access only. Another bribe beyond that may also be required.

It's delivered by aliens... With mind altering techniques to block evidance. They are researching technology, but at this time, they can only make the second bribe disappear. In due time the first will disappear as well... Silly aliens...

[DeadmanWalking]

I'm really inclined to agree. The usual suspects are out saying Trump won or Clinton won and absolutely decimated or executed or decapitated or masticated their opponent when honestly I thought it looked more like a draw (maybe with Clinton coming out a little better, if you look at the debate on its own).

I don't think that applies to everyone. In Roney V Obama first debate Obama was soundly thrashed and even liberal media was harsh on him for not bringing his A game. They told him to get his shit together or lose the white house. What they didn't do was make up sound bytes from talking points like, "He was out meeting real americans rather than preparing and her preparing for a debate was so bad for a candidate when she should be out there shaking hands."

That was when she got her first solid thrashing on him when she stated she was preparing to be president and all he did was make a face rather than counter point her. When you let something hit, it sticks.

[Deleted]

Wow.

http://www.infowars.com/poll-who-won...ential-debate/

Internet polls are easily faked (botted). Look at the second brexit referendum.

The only true polls are those when they telephone random people or when they vote their preference in person.

The CNN poll was the only poll where people were telephoned after the debate, and the favor towards Hillary was huge.

[Daerio]

It's delivered by aliens... With mind altering techniques to block evidance. They are researching technology, but at this time, they can only make the second bribe disappear. In due time the first will disappear as well... Silly aliens...

We have the financial records of the Clinton foundation donations, no space ships or aliens are required, just plain and simple bribery which has been around even longer than politicians.

[Deleted]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...5bc_story.html

She thinks she's royalty that can demand 50,000$ just for an appearance before her to make a request. This is modern day monarchy.

Clinton then had those emails deleted with Bleachbit once investigation was looming, and then claimed those emails were only related to yoga and Chelsea's wedding. If she was anyone other than royalty, she would be in jail.

And you think Obama didn't ask that, or Trump, or Bush. If you can get paid for it why not. If you were in her shoes, you'd do the exact same thing. And don't come here "but I got morals", when it comes to easy money, nobody has morals.

Also the e-mail bleachbit, it's all going by the conspiracy that Gowdy thinks something bad happened, they've already recovered some of those mails and nothing classified has been in it so far. It's very likely they'll never find anything classified, and then we can all laugh again at how desperate the republicans are.

Don't forget though, 30k e-mails as SoS are nothing compared to the 22 million e-mails the Bush administration deleted.

[LaserSharkDFB]

I think they both did decently. The fact that Hillary didn't obliterate Trump (with her 30 years experience in politics) and that Trump didn't come off as a complete oaf and doofus makes me think Trump might have taken the edge, but I can see how you might think Hillary took the night.

The moderator was clearly hell-bent on keeping Trump on the defensive (which is why most pundits were saying he seemed on the defensive -- he was lol). They spent about 3x more time on the Birther issue than Hillary's e-mails. The next debate will hopefully be more policy questions. We'll see.

Hillary's emails, Benghazi and the Clinton foundation were not really discussed yet either (in depth), so those are coming up, in debates closer to the election which help Trump, in my opinion.

They both will review video and I look forward to #2.

Yeah, that's a totally fair metric. Like I said before, it's pretty sad if Trump gets kudos for not soiling himself. All Trump had to do was answer the questions he was asked and he wouldn't have looked to be on the defensive. Instead, he did his damnedest to not answer a single question, and at one point even used his two minutes on a subject (forget which one offhand) to talk about something completely different.

They spent more time on the Birther issue because Trump kept perpetuating lies about it and pretending he had nothing to do with it. Clinton acknowledged her mistake about the emails (and really, what is the stupid 'not a mistake, it was deliberate' thing about? You can choose to do something deliberately and it could still be a mistake; the opposite of deliberate is accident, which she didn't claim here) and apologized; what else was there to say? "Do you think you should have been prosecuted?" "No." "Had to ask."

And I guess Trump might review the video, but really, does that sound like his style?

[Narwal]

And the only people who "matter" in that sense are those who were undecided or who were disillusioned enough to not be wanting to vote. If the debate convinces any of that particular demographic to vote for either candidate, that's "success". People who were already going to vote for Clinton or Trump don't matter, unless the debate changed that view for them. So it's completely irrelevant how much Trump voters think Trump won; they aren't who the debate was for.

Right, does this disprove my statement that our opinion of who won doesn't matter? Just because one is undecided does not mean that they give both candidates clean slates going into this debate. There is a scale even within that group of people that may be leaning one way or the other going into it. They may be basing their vote on one issue, not on the host of issues out there. I just think it's futile to argue the winner because it's highly subjective.

[Breccia]

There's no discussion to be had here because you literally aren't making an argument.

Well...

The link is right there.

The link does not contain the information you said, nor information towards your overall argument. You posted something useless to you.

So, apparently, neither are you.

[Daerio]

And you think Obama didn't ask that, or Trump, or Bush. If you can get paid for it why not.

If you were in her shoes, you'd do the exact same thing. And don't come here but I got morals, when it comes to easy money, nobody has morals.

Well, if you're going to jump the shark from "There's no proof of anything!" to "Well everyone does it!"

Maybe they should all be in jail.

[Breccia]

And I guess Trump might review the video, but really, does that sound like his style?

At this point, his staffers might force him to actually prepare at gunpoint next time.

[Felya]

Die hard Clintonistas will stay with Clinton. Die hard Trumpists will stay with Trump. So the debate was not for them.

The debate was for moderates and soft supporters of either candidate and Clinton won them in a landslide. From the comments on Trumps latino beauty queen "Miss housekeeper" and his reply "where are you getting this from?" To his statements on the federal taxes he pays "If I did (pay federal taxes), they'd be wasted". It all hurt him with this moderate bunch.

He is an example of why the middle class shares more of a tax burden, than the top. It's not like his tax plan doesn't open up that possibility for the top, while no longer needing loopholes. If people like him paid taxes, those complaining they pay too much, wouldn't need to be. It's yet another way that Trump has been screwing the tax payer, which he will get applauded for.

This is a guy who said he was willing to take every loop hole and every law to its maximum, to avoid payment and paying taxes. If only he had some way to have closer access to laws, then we may see how much the tax payer would be paying Trump.

[Daerio]

The link does not contain the information you said, nor information towards your overall argument. You posted something useless to you.

So, apparently, neither are you.

Well, the first link absolutely does contain said information, and here's another one to boot.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...5bc_story.html
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/82df5...-met-her-state

2+2=4

But not when you're talking about Clinton.

[Felya]

We have the financial records of the Clinton foundation donations, no space ships or aliens are required, just plain and simple bribery which has been around even longer than politicians.

No, if this was the case, you wouldn't need to have the part I bolded. Your claim that there is a second bribe, was after evidance showing that the first didn't have the impact you claim. You are losing track of your own bullshit...

- - - Updated - - -

Well, the first link absolutely does contain said information, and here's another one to boot.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...5bc_story.html
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/82df5...-met-her-state

2+2=4

But not when you're talking about Clinton.

What are you adding? Where is this second bribe? It was already explained that these donations didn't result in anything.

[Daerio]

No, if this was the case, you wouldn't need to have the part I bolded. Your claim that there is a second bribe, was after evidance showing that the first didn't have the impact you claim. You are losing track of your own bullshit...

So your requirement for proof is that EVERYONE that donated to the Clinton Foundation got what they wanted...

When that wasn't even the claim?

Or you're saying absolutely nobody donated to the Clinton Foundation more than one time?

What are you even trying to bitch about? What ridiculous burden of proof is required this time?

[LilSaihah]

It all hurt him with this moderate bunch.

I am not certain about that. I think there are likely to be a lot of people who think the government simply doesn't know what it's doing with its tax revenue or monetary policy, or are very skeptical of its abilities when it comes to effectively investing. Hillary saying "invest more money into education" was one thing that particularly stuck out for me; I think there are likely quite a lot of American moderates who have very distinct issues with how the teacher's union works and suggesting simple increases in investment completely misses the point.

[Narwal]

I've also seen a bit of "the moderator was focusing Trump/helping Clinton" in the circles I read in, but I would need to review the transcripts and rewatch the debate to really make an assessment on the veracity of that suggestion.

I think the moderator put out some very general topics that Trump could have been strong on, he just missed the opportunities. There were times when the moderator took out quotes from Trumps past. Quotes on the war support, and the birther issue. Those fit into the topics that the moderator was keeping them on. Trump supporters will argue that he never quoted her about her lying about her emails, or maybe one that would have fit into a topic of the night was her support for the crime bill passed by her husband where she called black youth "super predators". Clearly the moderator had heard the conversation about him fact checking Trump, he was ready to do so, but not super aggressively. He just didn't have any quotes to pull out against Clinton, so it looks like he was skewed one way there.

[alexw]

He is an example of why the middle class shares more of a tax burden, than the top. It's not like his tax plan doesn't open up that possibility for the top, while no longer needing loopholes. If people like him paid taxes, those complaining they pay too much, wouldn't need to be. It's yet another way that Trump has been screwing the tax payer, which he will get applauded for.

This is a guy who said he was willing to take every loop hole and every law to its maximum, to avoid payment and paying taxes. If only he had some way to have closer access to laws, then we may see how much the tax payer would be paying Trump.

Then there was his comments about slashing taxes on people like himself because it'd create jobs. Doesn't he realize that the only people who believe in trickle down economics anymore are diehard republicans? He already has them. They are not going to vote for anyone else. So why make such comments that will alienate everyone else?

His total lack of preparation was obvious. Little thought to his words, and what words he used mostly hurt him with the moderates and soft lean voters he needed to win over.

[Reeve]

Because a debate isn't about 'hitting' anyone or anything. Just answer the fucking questions within your allotted time and don't start speaking in vague platitudes about your fucking golf resort in Palm Beach County Florida.

Where he totally allows minorities into.

[Narwal]

I am not certain about that. I think there are likely to be a lot of people who think the government simply doesn't know what it's doing with its tax revenue or monetary policy, or are very skeptical of its abilities when it comes to effectively investing. Hillary saying "invest more money into education" was one thing that particularly stuck out for me; I think there are likely quite a lot of American moderates who have very distinct issues with how the teacher's union works and suggesting simple increases in investment completely misses the point.

The governments squandering of money was a good argument he gave. The debt we have, and yet our bridges, roads, airports are all shit. Clinton tried a "maybe they'd be good if you didn't avoid taxes", which he responded with, "it'd just be squandered too", was a sentiment I immediately connected with. This goes back to those "shovel ready jobs" that never really happened.