If I have to ask the question, who won, then apparently you didn’t watch the debate. Trump lost, Hillary had him on the defensive almost from the start and it was abundantly clear Trump was not prepared.
I’m angry because Trump did about as well as if he was just some guy walking by the debate theater when he was grabbed and put on stage, behind the podium next to Hillary.
There was the annoying sniffing into the mike, he rarely finished a sentence before he interrupted himself and started a new sentence. He was verbose, inarticulate, and he suffered from a flight ideas which he never developed. This caused confusion and made him to look ignorant. His speech was filled with cliché’s and repetitious sayings like “Believe me.”
He said a lot of words, but those words had very little substance. They often came out of his mouth disjointed and in an angry tone. There was a time when he looked unhinged when he was trying to say he was never for the Iraq war. Towards the end he talked about one of his strong points being his temperament and the audience laughed. That was just sad. I did a face-palm slap with both hands.
Trump was not prepared and he exaggerated this by saying stupid stuff, like accusing Hillary of “fighting Isis her whole entire life.” Huh? She would have to be about 10 years old for that claim to be remotely logical, because we all know that 8 years ago there was no ISIS.
When Trump made a snarky remark that Hillary was staying home while he was out stumping…she seized the moment, “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 that is a good thing.” Zing!
Trump exposed his big ego more than once by frequently shouting over the top of moderator or interrupting Hillary. Trump said several times for unknown reasons, ”I have property there…” Why? I seriously doubt anyone gave a rats behind where he had property. Talking about his many properties brought nothing to the debate. He wasted value air time that could have been better spent conveying his platform planks.
I’ve heard that his campaign advisers pushed as hard as they dared to get him to sit down and do mock debates and properly prepare himself. But, Trump wouldn’t take their advise and choose to do more easy meet and greets. This makes me wonder, if he was president would he reject the council of his expert advisors too and go with his gut? A scary thought.
Trump really overreacted to Hillary’s comment that he supported the Iraq war, so much so he sounded nutty and unhinged. Trump was repeatedly saying, ask Sean Hannity or Howard Stern, blah, blah, blah. He would not shut up about it. Meanwhile my frustrations were showing. I was flipping and twisting in my easy chair as I thought to myself, “No, no, no …just shut up!”
Oh, there’s so much more I could say about the Donald, missing many great opportunities to nail Hillary, on her emails, on Benghazi, why she had to testify before Congress for 11 hours, etc. But, he never did. Trump had some great opportunities for zingers, but he was so wrapped up backtracking on countering wrongs from three or four questions ago he missed the moment!
A CNN/ORC poll of debate watchers released after the event found 62% felt Clinton won compared to 27% for Trump.
Now for the good part. Trump denounced the Iran nuclear weapons deal. He brought up tax cuts, but didn’t give any details. And the really good part is the CNN poll think he scored 27%. I don’t know why he got 27%, but it’s a generous gift – he should be grateful.
If Trump doesn’t shape up by the next debate, he’s done. He’s probably done now, but I’m trying to be optimistic.
In other words Jack, Trump was being Trump. The way he acted and spoke is the way he’s been from the very beginning. It’s one of the reasons I wasn’t for him from the beginning. He just speaks off of the top of his head, says stupid stuff and repeats himself over and over.
I too was so frustrated I got up and walked away from the TV to where I couldn’t see it. Did some cleaning in the kitchen where I could hear it but not be able to throw anything at it.
Not surprised to hear this morning all of the big pollsters declared her as the out and out winner, except for Drudge said he won. I was surprised to hear Rush say while most of the inside the beltway establishment polls showed her winning the polls done by voters were overwhelmingly for him.
Trump: I won every debate poll except CNN:
“The scientific CNN presidential debate poll, which surveys a Democratic-leaning audience, showed Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton as a decisive winner of the first contest. Of the CNN viewers who tuned in to watch the debate on Monday, 62 percent said that they thought Clinton was the winner, compared to 27 percent who said the same about Trump, the Republican presidential nominee. The poll found that viewers thought Clinton had a better grasp of the issues, was more authentic and expressed her views more clearly.
Trump earlier touted his wins in online polls from The Hill, CNBC, Variety and NJ.com, as well as the conservative-leaning Breitbart and Drudge Report.
An unscientific online poll with 1.5 million respondents from Time also found that Trump won the debate on Monday.
Smaller focus-group surveys conducted by CNN and CBS News found Clinton as a clear winner of the debate. In a focus group of undecided Pennsylvania voters organized by CBS News, only five said that Trump was victorious, as opposed to 16 who said the same about Clinton. Similarly, a focus group of undecided Floridians surveyed by CNN found that 18 out of 20 likely voters saw Clinton as the winner.”
LA Sun: Trump won with 82%.
Who knows at this point what people will do on Nov. 8th. Two more debates to go. This was his first general debate. Hopefully, he’ll take it more serious and realize he needs to prepare more if he really wants to be the president. God help us.
Peggy, Soaps, Tina, et al, I guess we’re all disappointed that Trump didn’t put on a better performance. Trump has the better plan for America and that is what it makes this debate performance so frustrating!
I DO NOT WANT Hillary to get back into the White House. She will continue down the democrat path and we all know that is a dead end. Tax the rich and offer all kinds of “free stuff” is the democrats way, and for the last 8 years it’s been a disaster. We don’t need another 4 more years of tax and spend.
I found it ironic that when she was promoting her plans, vague as they were, she was in effect saying Obama’s leadership was deeply flawed. She’s running against his record! Well, anyway, I honestly wished it had worked out better, but I think this performance is going to cost Trump. He should have prepared, he should have been more articulate and listened to his people. One can only hope.
I DO NOT want that woman anywhere near the WH again. If I could I would vote 10 times for Trump if it would guarantee it kept her from winning.
My problem with Trump isn’t with some of his plans to make our economy better, which I think he could do, it’s his inability to present them in a manner that doesn’t make me feel like I’m listening to a 3 year old. I wish he would stop repeating the same thing over and over, like he’s trying to either make sure we heard him the other times or is trying to convince himself of what he’s saying. It’s sooo irritating.
Just read this article and I’m so pissed I can’t see straight. Hillary’s “Secret War” in Libya was based on lies, just like Iraq. Those four men in Benghazi died for nothing. “Hillary lied and people did die.”
British Parliament Confirms Libya War Was Based On Lies … Turned Nation Into a “Shit Show” … Spread Terrorism:
“Parliamentary Report Confirms What the Alternative Media Has Been Saying for Years
The UK Parliament just confirmed what the alternative media has been saying for years.
Specifically, a new report from the bipartisan House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee – based on interviews with all of the key British decision-makers, review of documents, and on-the-ground investigations in Africa – found that Libyan war was based on lies, that it destroyed the country, and that it spread terrorism far and wide.
The War Based On Bogus Intelligence … Like the Iraq War
Initially, the report finds that the threat to civilians from Libyan government forces was dramatically overstated:”
“My problem with Trump isn’t with some of his plans to make our economy better, which I think he could do, it’s his inability to present them in a manner that doesn’t make me feel like I’m listening to a 3 year old.”
I don’t suppose it’s occurred to you that, in fact, he has no plan, which would be why he is unable to articulate a plan. What if I suggested to you that “candidate Trump” exists nowhere but in your fevered imaginations? That the man is a huckster, and nothing more?
Although why he wants to bother even mentioning his tax break for rich people, I can’t imagine, as it is generally believed that the release of the man’s tax returns would prove that he has not paid a federal income tax since Reagan was president.
Is any of this getting through to you? How truly shameful it is of him to be going on about our third world airports when he and his ilk have no intention of contributing one penny to any sort of upgrade? He expects you to pay for it all … as you have, indeed, been doing, lo, these 30 years.
“I can’t imagine,” Therein is your problem.
Wealthy people ARE the ones who create jobs and hire people to fill them. Every had a job from a poor man? Has that homeless woman on the corner given YOU money instead of asking for yours? Do you cuss out the person who signs your paycheck every month or even better tell them to fire you and to send the cost of your salary and benefits to the gov’t instead?
When those wealthy people are spending their money to hire you to work for them they’re buying goods and services that employee to people to produce them. They don’t just bury their wealth in a hole in the ground, they spread it around as they want.
As long as the Donald took advantage of tax codes for legal exemptions, no one should have a problem with the amount he paid. If he illegally evaded paying taxes then he should pay the penalties. But, remember to include Al Sharpton and his millions of unpaid taxes too.
Don’t like the tax codes, fine, change them. Otherwise as long as withholdings are legal and apply to everyone you have nothing to complain about. So hush!
“As long as the Donald took advantage of tax codes for legal exemptions, no one should have a problem with the amount he paid.”
But the problem is that we don’t know if that’s all he did. The candidate who spent months hounding the last president for his birth certificate–which no other president had ever had to produce–is refusing to release his tax returns–which every modern candidate has produced.
This does not strike you as hypocritical?
“If he illegally evaded paying taxes then he should pay the penalties.”
…And he also should not be president. Go on, say it. You’ll feel better, I promise.
“But, remember to include Al Sharpton and his millions of unpaid taxes too.”
Al Sharpton should also not be president, and the Democrats have so far been wise enough not to nominate him. So we Democrats can at least say that much: unlike the Republicans, we don’t nominate our loud racists for president.
Max, oh but we do know and no it’s not hypercritical.
He’s been audited for the past 15 years. If his deductions were not in compliance with the tax laws he’d have been charged with tax evasion. He wasn’t charged.
With the left leaning MSM supporting Hillz I don’t blame him for not releasing his returns. They’re sure to find something they can use against him even though they are legal. He’s in a damned if he does and doesn’t situation.
Dirty Harry repeatedly stood on the senate floor and accused Romney of the same thing, instead of doing his job as a senator conducting congressional business. Romney finally did release his returns and the media was all over them exposing how rich he really was and all of that money he just have to his church and other charities when he could have given it to the gov’t to spend through taxes.
Romney was painted as a terrible man because of his wealth and how he chose to spend and give away some of it. The same thing will happen to Trump if he does release them. Trump learned from Romney and I don’t blame him at all for not releasing them. If we had a fair media I’d probably think differently.
At this point, nothing either one says makes any difference. Almost all the voters have already made their decisions. If Trump did not appear as a lunatic, which he didn’t, and if Hillary did not collapse on stage, which she didn’t, then they will just continue on the same.
“Trump said several times for unknown reasons, ‘I have property there…’ Why?”
Because this, he believes, qualifies him for the office … and he’s been sounding this unhinged from day one … but you were willing to go with it. Pardon the gloat, but what WERE you thinking?
I am very pleased with the ratings, and Trump’s performance was so bad it will encourage a good turn-out for the next. Will he improve … or crash and burn? Americans love a firey car crash.
Re: “Americans love a firey (sic) car crash.”
Dear Lunatic Libby, you do not speak for Americans. If you speak for anyone besides yourself, you only speak for lunatics like yourself.
Re: “Pardon the gloat?”
That is you. It defines you. It is you. No need to pardon that.
And has NASCAR established an international franchise?
Alas … no.
CNN, the Clinton News Network, is the arbiter of what transpired? If you listen to the television pundits you won’t know what the people think. Many thought she was performing and disingenuous…puppet like. Online voting on debate:
I must say I’m surprised at the pulse of these online voters. I would expect more of them to respond like Jack. A reporter in a bar filled with Hillary voters said they thought Trump won this debate. What turned them off to Hillary? A Baltimore newspaper has reported that Hillary was given the questions before the debate, if true that is just another indication of the deceitful, sneering, condescending attitude of the current administration, Hillary and Bill, and the Democrat party. Example of reactions around the country, Charlotte Observer:
What’s going on? Maybe those people are tired of DC politicians. Politicians, as Trump pointed out, that have been making promises to us for over fifty years with little positive result and worse, massive debt! Maybe they want to try someone less polished, someone who doesn’t practice to perfect a “performance” and deliver lines someone else wrote for them. Maybe they are willing to take a chance on someone like them…people that have had to deal with all of the regulations, taxes, pandering, and broken promises
I agree with much of what Jack has to say about Trumps performance. But when he was on track he was spot on. I don’t think Hillary’s prepared politician performance dotted liberally with smug fake smiles went over well either.
Hillary said this morning she wants to lead “all of the people” and yet last night she said we were all racist and repeated the accusation that Trump is Racist, an implication that those who favor him are Racist. She also denigrated the police force by insinuating their practices are not up to snuff…who the he77 is SHE to judge their performance…SHE, the current leader of her party which embraces and supports organizations like BLM and Hamas and Hezbollah, racist agitators and terrorists. She says she wants to help the middle class but plans to continue to decimate all business except those who exist in the elitist club that pays for her way in life…she has never earned an honest dime! She doesn’t have a clue about creating jobs or the politically driven atmosphere her policies would create that will kill job creation.
“Maybe they are willing to take a chance on someone like them…”
I assume most Trump voters never received a building for their eighteenth birthday, so what do you mean when you say Trump is “someone like them?”
“people that have had to deal with all of the regulations, taxes, pandering, and broken promises”
According to what Trump said last night, the way he deals with taxes is by not paying them. I’d hope the majority of his voters deal with things differently.
As for “pandering,” I give you TacoBowlGate, and as for “broken promises,” there are too many to count: he literally began his political career by promising to uncover dirt on Obama’s birth certificate, and when he failed to do so, ignored the issue for as long as he possibly could. Now he’s pretending he did Obama a favor, which is outrageous. He has also repeatedly broken promises to charities that he had promised to donate to, including charities for vets.
He’s broken campaign finance regulations by soliciting foreign donors in e-mails, and has broken regulations regarding charitable foundations by using his own charity to buy personal items.
So. Voters who are frustrated by regulations, taxes, broken promises, and pandering have absolutely no reason to expect that Trump will be an improvement on any of these issues.
“Hillary said this morning she wants to lead “all of the people” and yet last night she said we were all racist”
She said everyone has some racial biases. This is true, and obvious. Anyone, black or white, who says they have no racial biases is lying to themselves.
“and repeated the accusation that Trump is Racist,”
Well, he led the charge on the “racist birther lie,” and I’m glad Clinton called it what it is.
“an implication that those who favor him are Racist.”
Ok. If you think that implies that, then fine. So? Should Clinton not say true things because you don’t like their implications?
“She also denigrated the police force by insinuating their practices are not up to snuff”
Calling for improvement in the practices of a group is not “denigrating” them. I can see that you have called for improvement in teaching practices. Do you believe you are “denigrating” teachers by doing so?
The police unions certainly aren’t helping matters. In the past few weeks one has said they will not escort a football team because they don’t like them using their freedom of expression, and endorsed an authoritarian candidate who advocates war crimes. If they’d like to not be seen as representing an authoritarian organization, they shouldn’t do these things.
“SHE, the current leader of her party which embraces and supports organizations like BLM and Hamas and Hezbollah, racist agitators and terrorists.”
She does not embrace or support Hamas or Hezbollah, and comparing either group to BLM is as ridiculous as comparing the NRA to the IRA.
Final thought: You are the only conservative I can see here who has not conceded that Trump lost the debate. Why is that?
Libby: “Trump said several times for unknown reasons, ‘I have property there…’ Why?”
Because this, he believes, qualifies him for the office … and he’s been sounding this unhinged from day one…”
He said it because he is used to having conversations with other wealthy people like Bill and Hillary at cocktail parties. He’s used to talking with contractors on the job in New York so his style is often that of private citizen. He’s not used to producing well-planned inauthentic sounding bites. You call it “unhinged” because you are a lot like Hillary who looks down her nose at anyone not in her elitist snobbish club. But guess what? Most of us taxpayers are also not in her elitist club and we don’t appreciate her game playing and her smarmy, gutter politicians style.
In Trump we recognize someone who has actually gotten his hands dirty on his way to fame and fortune, unlike Hillary and Bill who’ve created a fake foundation and relied on the taxpayers and donors their entire adult life.
The thing is, this “unhinged” common man nailed it when he made clear the thing that most Americans have felt at one time or another over the last fifty years…politicians like Hillary talk and talk and make promise after promise and then never deliver. Their talk and promises cost every working American a good chunk of their paychecks each week and for what? Example…how races have featured “roads and bridges?” The politicians are still scolding about the need to fix our infrastructure but, as Trump pointed out, the scolding politicians are the ones with the power to DO SOMETHING and campaign after campaign the work still needs to be done. So why not become unhinged! It’s about time someone came unhinged and called these pandering do-nothings on their pandering, broken promises, failed policies, and the waste, the fraud, and the busy work (dopey regulation) that yield no return.
Libby you were on board the train that criticized Bush for deficit spending but suddenly with the debt doubled due under Obama you are mute on the subject, a phony, willing to buy into the empty, programmed, political assertions of a facially coifed female promising more of the same.
Trumps performance was not up to par but Hillary did herself no favors.
“He said it because he is used to having conversations with other wealthy people like Bill and Hillary at cocktail parties…”
Tina also writes:
“The thing is, this “unhinged” common man nailed it when he made clear the thing that most Americans have felt at one time or another over the last fifty years…”
Wait, which is it? Is Trump a jet-setting CEO or a “common man?” He can’t possibly be both. And you know he’s not the “common man.” So why do you keep saying he is?
Is this some kind of code for “I like him because he doesn’t talk like an educated person, and thus doesn’t make me feel bad?”
“You call it “unhinged” because you are a lot like Hillary who looks down her nose at anyone not in her elitist snobbish club.”
I’ll let former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson respond to the “elitist” objection:
Trump’s defenders will charge his critics with elitism. The great public, it is argued, gets Trump in a way that the commenting class does not. But this claim is now fully exposed. The expectation of rationality is not elitism. Coherence is not elitism. Knowledge is not elitism. Honoring character is not elitism. And those who claim this are debasing themselves, their party and their country.
“But guess what? Most of us taxpayers are also not in her elitist club…”
But Trump is–and he’s also not a taxpayer! So what are you talking about?
Well, I’m glad somebody besides me has spotted it. Tina, you don’t write your own thoughts. “Elitism” is just a label that’s been provided to you … to slap onto any idea you don’t like, never mind what it means. And to describe Trump an “anti-elite” is ludicrous, nonsense, and in complete contradiction of fact. He is about as elite as it gets. The whole appeal of his long-running, reality TV shtick is the gold-plated-everything, so how you’ve convinced yourself that he has your interests at heart is … completely incomprehensible.
Also infuriating. I do not like to think that the country is so very full of people so easily manipulated. It’s nice that Rupert has seen the light, but the man still has a GD lot to answer for.
“Libby you were on board the train that criticized Bush for deficit spending but suddenly with the debt doubled due under Obama you are mute on the subject, ….”
Well … there is deficit spending to finance a pointless, bloody war.
And then, there is deficit spending to keep a global recession from turning into any out-and-out depression.
I guess we know which sort you prefer … and which sort I prefer.
“Maybe they are willing to take a chance on someone like them…”
Take a chance? … or poke a stick in the eye?? … their own eye ….???
Trump is, and always has been, one of them, Tina, not one of you.
At this point there is no rational reason to vote for the man.
Regarding CNN, since they’ve given up any semblance of reporting news in favor of trying to anoint $hrilLIARy for sainthood, they are now the Clinton NONSENSE Network!
And are you going to make this claim forever … about any entity that tells you something you don’t want to hear … truth notwithstanding?
CNN reported the over-all consensus that, over-all, Hillary did less smirking that Donald. I mean, it’s right there, taped for all eternity. They should have reported something else because this fact annoys you?
That’s kind of infantile, don’t you think? You gotta work with what is … not subside into bubbleland. This unwillingness to take responsibility, in this case, for choosing and supporting a losing candidate … or, go ahead, subside … just do it quietly.
Because, the worrisome thought on this side of the fence, now, is that, if the election is close, there are indications that you will go all third-world-violent and not accept the results. The huckster will call for insurrection and the nation will go all nasty.
Since Rupert shut him out, he is already, before the election results, talking of turning you all into his very own media empire. Why not a literal empire? You’re not really going to let him do that, are you?
Poor Libby. Rambling, Disconnected and Liberal: 3 strikes and you’re out.
Try reading your gibberish out loud before posting and perhaps you’ll hear how nonsensical you sound.
She doesn’t speak in memes and doesn’t find it clever to combine three separate insulting nicknames into one, and that makes her comments “gibberish?”
(I mean, really–$hrilLIARy? Michael Bay has more restraint.)
What? Now we have a King of Denial?
You do complain about the reporting of fact. And, what are you going to do if Trump loses, but it’s close?
Zero Hedge-Sprott Money:
Interesting, the things people notice.
“Holt continuously threw “hardball” questions towards Donald Trump, such as ones about his tax returns, the birther issue, and his support of the Iraq War.”
Those are not hardball questions. Those are absolutely normal questions that he should have prepared for. He clearly did not–or he did, and this was the best he could do. Either way: sad.
“Meanwhile, he asked Hillary Clinton NO, I repeat, NO real questions that the American public wants and deserves to hear,”
The author presumes to speak for the American public.
“such as her part in the Benghazi debacle, that resulted in the death of innocent lives under her watch.”
She has been answering these questions for years. There is currently, and mercifully, no investigation into Benghazi; everything that needs to be uncovered has been uncovered. What would be the point of such questions, other than to appease those who are impossible to appease?
“He asked no questions, and this one is mind boggling, about her 30,000-plus missing emails that she had deleted while Secretary of Defense.”
This is not even true. He did ask her about the e-mails.
“Despite the fact that this was a 2-on-1 debate, Donald Trump still held his ground, did not falter, and appeared very presidential, choosing not to attack Hillary on her husband’s countless rape charges and settlements of sexual harassment, proving he can be tempered and “the bigger person” in the room.”
That’s not “presidential,” that’s just called being a person. Such accusations have no bearing on Clinton’s qualifications for the presidency, and would be nasty personal attacks; avoiding such gutter tactics isn’t “presidential,” it’s the minimum standard of human decency. But at this point, Trump has so lowered said standards that I can see why it would be hard to tell the difference.
There’s also the obvious point that erhaps Trump did not attack Hillary on her husband’s “countless” rape charges because:
a) That’s not even a thing; Bill Clinton has been publicly accused of rape by one woman, Juanita Broderick. Even for Trump fans, “one” is not “countless.” (There are other online rumors of rape charges in college; none of the women named in those rumors have come forward publicly.)
b) Donald Trump has also been charged with rape. Was Clinton the “bigger person” for not bringing that up? Of course not to the writer of that piece, because they are blinded by bias.
“Interesting, the things people notice.”
Even more interesting is the things they don’t notice. Like you not noticing that Donald Trump has been charged with rape exactly as many times as Bill Clinton has, and thinking Trump deserves credit for not bringing up such charges against the opposing candidate’s spouse while Clinton deserves no credit for not bringing up such charges against the actual opposing candidate.
Max welcome to Post Scripts, nice of you to drop by.
You wrote: “Well, he led the charge on the “racist birther lie,” and I’m glad Clinton called it what it is.”
Sorry but the campaign that “led the charge” was the campaign in which Hillary ran and lost against Barack Obama. That was the same campaign in which her husband, Bill, talked to Ted Kennedy in an attempt to garner his support and famously said of Obama, that in days gone by he would have been serving them coffee. Hillary’s racist husband lost Ted’s endorsement.
I’m extremely tired of being labeled a racist, just for being white. America has bent over backwards to make amends to the black community for our nations past wrongs. In fact we teach only part of the story. Not all slave owners were white. Not all blacks were slaves. And those who sold people into slavery in Africa were not white!
Barack Obama has damaged our nation with a divisive, accusatory, activism that does not belong in the White House whatever the president’s color.
“… avoiding such gutter tactics isn’t “presidential,” it’s the minimum standard of human decency.”
Hillary chose to do the indecent thing accusing Trump of “stiffing” a contractor, pointedly placing him in the room, without knowing both sides of the story. It may be this man did not do the job or did it wrong, or failed to meet an agreed upon deadline. Hillary cared only to hit below the belt…she is a shrew.
“Bill Clinton has been publicly accused of rape by one woman, Juanita Broderick. Even for Trump fans, “one” is not “countless.” (There are other online rumors of rape charges in college; none of the women named in those rumors have come forward publicly.) ”
Many of Bill Clinton’s accusers have come forward. Some alleged assault or sexual assault. Juanita Broderick was interviewed on Dateline by Lisa Myers. Her testimony was so believable that the network shelved the story to save Clinton. Cosby wasn’t so lucky. See video here.
See a list of the women that have accused Clinton of assault here. See also articles here, here, and here.
Hillary Clinton has been a “partner” in Bills activities, a vicious enabler who allegedly created a war room to deal with Bill’s “bimbo’s.”
You should get to know the person you are defending with such vigor.
Regarding rape charges and Trump. As far as I can see the charges against him are three. The ex-wife used the charge in her divorce case and later denied she meant it in a criminal sense. She and Trump get along well today. The Epstein case, a Jane Doe filing with the court, is vehemently denied by Trump. Since the person doing the accusing was turned into a working girl, in it for the money from the start, it’s difficult to know whether the story is true or just another bid for money. Her witness is a recruiter who, if it’s the same person, has also placed Clinton at these parties. The third person was a business associate who promptly dropped her lawsuit after her boyfriend settled a business dispute with Trump out of court.
Both Clinton and Trump are famous. People target famous people, quite often for money. None of these cases have been litigated except the Paula Jones case to my knowledge. Only Bill has been accused since college and mostly by women who want no fame, no money, and risk a lot by coming forward.
Bill remains silent for the most part and the media doesn;t ask. But his denials are epic. In the Jones case, in which Monica Lewinsky surfaced with her blue dress, he stood before the cameras, wagged his finger and denied doing Monica in the oval office…he lied to the American people. Later he made some ridiculous statement about the definition of “is.”
The Clinton’s are oval office has beens; many of us have had quite enough
“Sorry but the campaign that “led the charge” was the campaign in which Hillary ran and lost against Barack Obama.”
You are simply wrong. One person in the Clinton campaign briefly entertained the birther idea, and was promptly fired for it.
How does that in any way match Trump personally claiming for months that he had damning information about Obama’s birth certificate–when he did not–and then refusing to concede the point for five years? This is a pathetic “She did it first!” deflection that ignores Trump’s irresponsible, dishonest, and racist crusade.
“That was the same campaign in which her husband, Bill, talked to Ted Kennedy in an attempt to garner his support and famously said of Obama, that in days gone by he would have been serving them coffee.”
That statement is historically accurate, not racist.
“I’m extremely tired of being labeled a racist, just for being white.”
I did not call you racist. I called Trump racist, because he spent months spreading the racist lie that our first black president was born in another country. Your statement is irrelevant.
“Hillary chose to do the indecent thing accusing Trump of “stiffing” a contractor, pointedly placing him in the room, without knowing both sides of the story. It may be this man did not do the job or did it wrong, or failed to meet an agreed upon deadline. Hillary cared only to hit below the belt…she is a shrew.”
Trump has done nothing but hit below the belt this entire campaign. He threatened to bring a woman Clinton’s husband had an affair with, and yet you do not target him with any kind of gendered insult. This, along with your explicit use of a gendered slur (“shrew”), is indicative of sexism. It is sad to see a woman wield such overt double standards against your own sex, but that’s what you’re doing.
“See a list of the women that have accused Clinton of assault here.”
That is not a list of women that have accused Clinton of assault; that’s a list of real accusations plus unconfirmed Internet rumors. It even admits that Elizabeth Ward says that the sex was consensual and has never publicly charged rape, and the only people who claim she was raped are unnamed “friends.” I could create a similar list of people who’ve accused you of rape and it would be just as credible. I.e., not at all.
If you applied the same benefit of the doubt you are giving to the accusations against Trump to Bill Clinton, you would reach the same conclusions. But you’re not. Because you’re infected by bias.
“He asked no questions, and this one is mind boggling, about her 30,000-plus missing emails that she had deleted while Secretary of Defense.”
Probably because her “answer” is a matter of public record. You only have to go look it up. Likewise, Benghazi. If you want Hillary’s take, go read her congressional testimony. And if you don’t like what she says, don’t vote for her.
Hillary has already said that the Foundation will go into a trust. What else is there to ask?
Now … Trump’s refusal re his tax returns IS pertinent to his qualification to hold the office? We’ve heard from Hillary on all your points, and you can make your decision based on what she’s said, but Trump refuses to come clean on this point.
Also … Trump’s inclination to say one thing one day, and deny it the next, this is also pertinent to his qualification to hold the office.
Hillary says that she would not, if she had it to do over, have voted for the Iraq invasion. She owns she did it, and asserts she has learned.
Trump simply denies his support for the war, taped for all eternity, and you think this makes him a stable, honorable person, fit for the office? Oh, well.
The person who “won” the debate is the person you prefer to be POTUS for most voters. That said, Trump let Hillary put him off message. The old “Rope-a-dope” worked and Trump fell for it. I was hoping for better but Trump could not deliver. The vile, corrupt, serial liar witch got under his skin and she was quite pleased with herself.
Th…Th..Th..That’s all folks.
My take on the debate was there were no winners at all, Just 321 million losers.
If this this type of hyperbole is what we have to make our decision on, then it is just going to end up with voters following party ideology, because neither of the two candidates presented anything of value for me, just a bunch of high school gotcha shots if anything.
Clinton had learned from her past loss to Obama that you need to be politically tactful in attacking your opponent just on your presumption of the issues from their past. She was careful , but baiting at the same time, and Trump was skillful it seems in avoiding those traps.
Trump was Trump, a successful business person who is not yet accustom to defending his positions on any given decision. Yes he did avoid some issues that were only intended to draw him into a discussion where Clinton could spin the answer to her benefit to create more misinformation. So in that aspect he has grown politically.
And it was clear that Lester Holt was not going to let any opportunity pass that may have challenged Trump to defend his statements, if only to point out maybe Trump was not correct in Trumps assessment, of course this was by design and clearly a media attempt at ratings and their opposition to Trump in general.
Only once can I recall that he even asked Clinton to clarify a issue, and that was to seemingly to provide her with a possible correction and escape. It’s good to have a home field advantage, isn’t it!
“She was careful , but baiting at the same time, and Trump was skillful it seems in avoiding those traps.”
Which traps did Trump avoid? When Clinton said he may have paid no income taxes, he said “That makes me smart.” When she said he rooted FOR the housing collapse, he said “That’s called business.”
THIS is the candidate you call “anti-elitist” and believe will stick up for the little guy? You’ve gotta be kidding me.
There were more traps: When Clinton brought up his misogynistic statements about Rosie O’Donnel, he said “She deserved it.” When she brought up his previous support for the Iraq War, he denied it–which everyone knew he would do–and stammered repeatedly “Why won’t anyone call Sean Hannity?” like a whining baby. (Imagine being so morally decrepit that you’re willing to stake your entire reputation on the word of Sean Hannity.)
He fell into every trap, because he has no impulse control. That’s a trait you want in a president?
“And it was clear that Lester Holt was not going to let any opportunity pass that may have challenged Trump to defend his statements, if only to point out maybe Trump was not correct in Trumps assessment, of course this was by design and clearly a media attempt at ratings and their opposition to Trump in general.”
This…isn’t a sentence, except in Trumpland. What does this mean?
A Hillary voter suck up, Chris = Max.
Can you rebut my argument?
” When Clinton said he may have paid no income taxes, he said “That makes me smart.”
It DOES make him smart.
Hillary advantages herself through the tax code. She’s become, and has lived as, a very wealthy woman while going through the motions of being a charitable foundation. It was a BS accusation.
I would rather have a president who has made in his private life an occasional snarky remark (to someone with a really filthy mouth, Rosie O, who said things just as rotten about him) than a woman who covers for her abusive husbands horn-dog activities (while serving in public office) by referring to the women he abused as bimbo’s and referred to Monica Lewinsky as a “narcissistic loony toon.” Hillary is no saint, nor is Bill. The people have seen this act before. This accusation doesn’t score points for Hillary? it just made her look hypocritical and petty. the pasted on chipmunk cheek smile doesn’t help.
“it was clear that Lester Holt was not going to let any opportunity pass that may have challenged Trump”
It was also clear that Lester Holt was not going to ask Hillary any tough questions or challenge her as he did Trump. According to DC Caller Holt interrupted or “fact checked” Trump 41 times and Clinton only 7. She was also given the questions ahead of time and her podium was adjusted soshe would’t appear her actual size. They rigged the debate as much as they could to favor Hillary.
Napolitano had a suggestion. A Republican chosen moderator should ask questions of the Hillary and a Democrat chosen moderator should ask questions of Trump. That way we might get a true reading of the candidates abilities .
When Hillary was asked about Benghazi in hearings before Congress she angrily blurted out, “What difference at this point does it make?” Never mind the ugly visual of that performance…the subject matter alone should make you realize she is the worst choice imaginable!
Holt probably feared condemnation by his peers.
LOL Max , your opinion is yours, and your post indicates to me no one can have a opinion and state it, unless it supports your view, I don’t think so.
Also your syntax seems all to familiar in one of your responses, I wonder if you have ever used another name in your postings here.
“LOL Max , your opinion is yours, and your post indicates to me no one can have a opinion and state it, unless it supports your view, I don’t think so.”
That’s a strange reaction. I explained why I disagreed with you, and asked you clarifying questions. In what way does that indicate you are not allowed your opinion?
As for “syntax:” at least my syntax is comprehensible and grammatically correct.
Well your closing snipe is purely Chris and argumentative,
complete with the terse elitist personality.
Harold I guess that means we have consensus!