Final Debate 10/19/2016

[crabcake]

I don't like him - you know that - but I thought he won. Trump did nail her on more things than he has in the past, but he did miss a few opportunities (I called out one earlier re: abortion & guns/toddlers and equal pay for women in HER campaign & foundation). And there were several items they did not go back to her on to force an answer ... the foundation money from foreign countries, her condemnation of Bill's victims, the allegations involving her emails, her campaign scandals re: the underhanded targeting of Trump rallies ...

I thought Chris did okay, but could/should have held her to the line on answering his questions. I think this comes down to a situation where - because she is a woman - no one really wants to treat her "equal" like she keeps saying.

 

[DipStick]

I turned it off after the first hour to watch American Horror Story. Turned the post-debate analysis on. Matthews says Trump won (like he always does), but the clips they kept playing, ouch. Very bad.

Looked to me like Clinton was composed and Trump was angry. He acted like a petulant child up there.

I'm definitely going to have this forum open in a tab on November 8th when Clinton wins.

 

[vraiblonde]

They're making an enormous deal over Trump refusing to say he'd accept the election results. What do they think he's going to do, go commando on the White House and put her head on a pike? This fretting over stupidity is why people have such a low opinion of the news media. If there is indication that the election is rigged and there is evidence of fraud, of course he's not going to accept the results. Why would he?

They're also having a cow because he called her a nasty woman. Um, she IS a nasty woman; why is it bad to call her what she is?

Trump also missed the opportunity, when Hillary was scoffing about rigged elections, to remind her that she and the DNC rigged the primary against Bernie Sanders and the DNC chair was fired for it. And, PS, was promptly hired to be Hillary's campaign chair. If the DNC would do that to their own party members, why wouldn't they do it to their opposition? Especially now that the person who actually did the rigging is working for Hillary.

In other news, Megyn Kelly had Donna Brazile on her show tonight to reassure everyone that she was never fed debate questions in advance. Plus, she is a Christian woman and she will not stand for this persecution. Whew! What a relief! I thought for a minute Donna might go, "Dang, girl, you caught me."

 

[PrchJrkr]

I turned it off after the first hour to watch American Horror Story. Turned the post-debate analysis on. Matthews says Trump won (like he always does), but the clips they kept playing, ouch. Very bad.

Looked to me like Clinton was composed and Trump was angry. He acted like a petulant child up there.

I'm definitely going to have this forum open in a tab on November 8th when Clinton wins.

^And this is why we must get out the vote. They are too delusional and/or stoned to even comprehend what they see with their own eyes.

 

[Bann]

Trump dropped the ball and so did Chris when he asked The Donald about the crazy women who are cropping up to accuse him of all these weird things, then said he'd ask Mrs. Clinton about the accusations that she threatened the women who said Bill sexually assaulted them. They spoke about Trump at length, then never got back to Hillary.

I'm sure she is thankful to have dodged that bullet but Chris Wallace should have remembered to get back to her.

I thought Trump sucked tonight. He had a number of opportunities to nail that bitch to the wall...and he whiffed. I'm surprised that it's being called a tie by most news orgs - I'd have said Hillary won by a smidge. She loses major points for looking down the whole time and talking to the top of her lectern. She's usually a much better liar than that.

I really didn't think Trump sucked last night. True, he missed some opportunities, but in the overall scheme of things, that happens in all the debates, because of the setup of them. I think they had more time than in any other debate to answer questions, and I thought Trump did get a chance to throw in some of the more recent developments like the Wikileak memos, etc. There were so many times I thought that Chris let Hillary run over him more than a couple of times, and derail the questions. Nearly every single question - and then on top of that - the re-buttal questions she was asked - she tried to take a trip down diversion lane. I think Chris quit chasing her after awhile because he lost track!

I really thought she didn't bring it as she should have last night. You're right - she was referring to her notes so much - because without them she's lost. Mostly, Hillary blathered on about the same old same old that she is going to do and I thought Trump was right on point when he told her that she's all talk and for 30 years hasn't really delivered much.

My sense was that he did better than her last night. I still think so.

 

[Bann]

I wonder why Clinton is so concerned about The Donald "refusing to accept the results of the elections" when she spent one whole segment of her time (where she deliberately took the trip down diversion lane) blaming RUSSIA for interfering in the US Elections?

WALLACE: Secretary Clinton, I want to clear up your position on this issue, because in a speech you gave to a Brazilian bank, for which you were paid $225,000, we've learned from the WikiLeaks, that you said this, and I want to quote. "My dream is a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders." So that's the question...

TRUMP: Thank you.

WALLACE: That's the question. Please quiet, everybody. Is that your dream, open borders?

CLINTON: Well, if you went on to read the rest of the sentence, I was talking about energy. You know, we trade more energy with our neighbors than we trade with the rest of the world combined. And I do want us to have an electric grid, an energy system that crosses borders. I think that would be a great benefit to us.
But you are very clearly quoting from WikiLeaks. And what's really important about WikiLeaks is that the Russian government has engaged in espionage against Americans. They have hacked American websites, American accounts of private people, of institutions. Then they have given that information to WikiLeaks for the purpose of putting it on the Internet.
This has come from the highest levels of the Russian government, clearly, from Putin himself, in an effort, as 17 of our intelligence agencies have confirmed, to influence our election.

CLINTON: So I actually think the most important question of this evening, Chris, is, finally, will Donald Trump admit and condemn that the Russians are doing this and make it clear that he will not have the help of Putin in in this election, that he rejects Russian espionage against Americans, which he actually encouraged in the past? Those are the questions we need answered. We've never had anything like this happen in any of our elections before.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...al-trump-clinton-debate-transcript-annotated/

 

[SamSpade]

I really thought she didn't bring it as she should have last night. You're right - she was referring to her notes so much - because without them she's lost. Mostly, Hillary blathered on about the same old same old that she is going to do and I thought Trump was right on point when he told her that she's all talk and for 30 years hasn't really delivered much.

I can't believe they're spinning the "Russia made up the Wikileaks stuff" thing. Or that Russia is to blame for every election controversy - well, every one that goes against Hillary.
Because the story doesn't make sense.

Didn't Hillary "reset" relations with Russia? Didn't she make things better? Why would they conspire against her, then?
Wasn't Hillary's private server "secure"? Weren't we told repeatedly there were NO penetrations of security, that they weren't "hacked"? Then what's with the Russia story about them doctoring emails they never had?
Why would the government pressure Ecuador to muzzle Assange, if he was just releasing a lot of Russian propaganda?

I'm back to the simplified version of Occam's Razor - the simplest answer is probably the truth.
No complicated conspiracies. What makes MORE sense is, her emails WERE hacked, the emails ARE true and being released to embarrass her, she hasn't released her
speech transcripts because they say things that embarrass her - and that the dirty tricks are all true.

We know Hillary by now - we know she's not clean. At every turn, she's made up stories until the truth comes out, and she tells a different story.
Until THAT is shown to be a fabrication. We know this - we've been watching her for years. This is the kind of White House we're going to get.

Now - I wish Trump was more effective as a speaker. The "you're the puppet" may have been spot on, but it sounds like a schoolyard taunt.
He's just not - witty. He's not fast on the draw. BILL was good at this - Romney was good at this. Obama was good at this - Trump is not.

 

[This_person]

I wonder why Clinton is so concerned about The Donald "refusing to accept the results of the elections" when she spent one whole segment of her time (where she deliberately took the trip down diversion lane) blaming RUSSIA for interfering in the US Elections?

It really would be horrible if Trump acted like Bill Clinton's VP, showing a complete lack of temperament to be president (as Tapper said) by not accepting the results of the election. Bill Clinton apparently proved an inability to make good decisions by choosing such a man to be his VP, if the media is being consistent.

Of course, unlike Nixon who stepped down instead of putting the country through impeachment, Mr. Clinton thought of himself as being above the country and therefore put himself first. Maybe Gore was good before, but learned from his boss, Mr. Clinton. If that's true, imagine what Hillary has learned with her additional years with Mr. Clinton.

Just some random thoughts on the whole "will he accept the results" topic.

 

[Bann]

They're also having a cow because he called her a nasty woman. Um, she IS a nasty woman; why is it bad to call her what she is?

I honestly couldn't believe my ears when he said that - I have a habit of not looking straight at the TV when I'm online at the same time. So I heard it, but didn't see it - and that's why I posted it last night.

I loved that he said that!! This is so Trump. We all think it, and we all say it when we are watching her, but never have the the opportunity to actually tell her. Throughout the election, he's been saying what the American people have been thinking for years, but have never had a voice. For me, it's like NOW, we have a voice.

Trump also missed the opportunity, when Hillary was scoffing about rigged elections, to remind her that she and the DNC rigged the primary against Bernie Sanders and the DNC chair was fired for it. And, PS, was promptly hired to be Hillary's campaign chair. If the DNC would do that to their own party members, why wouldn't they do it to their opposition? Especially now that the person who actually did the rigging is working for Hillary.

I agree - and I think it was because she freaking deflected so many times. There is SO MUCH to call her out on - he could spend an hour!

In other news, Megyn Kelly had Donna Brazile on her show tonight to reassure everyone that she was never fed debate questions in advance. Plus, she is a Christian woman and she will not stand for this persecution. Whew! What a relief! I thought for a minute Donna might go, "Dang, girl, you caught me."

I didn't see this last night - I had to go see it this am after reading your post.

Donna Brazile needs to give me a freaking break! That woman can claim her Christian values with her grandmotherly hairdo and pearl necklace and earrings all she wants today. For the 20 years that I've seen her in politics she is the damn nastiest b*tch that ever was. Oh, you better believe she'd do that and more.

I love how all of these people are just out-and-out bald faced LYING about emails which catch them red-handed. They just figure they will act ferklempt and wring their hands that the mean and eeeevil Russians hacked their emails and made it all up to make them look bad. They will keep this up for 3 weeks until the election when they think no one will even care after that.

 

[PsyOps]

They're making an enormous deal over Trump refusing to say he'd accept the election results. What do they think he's going to do, go commando on the White House and put her head on a pike? This fretting over stupidity is why people have such a low opinion of the news media. If there is indication that the election is rigged and there is evidence of fraud, of course he's not going to accept the results. Why would he?

I didn't get to watch that part, but caught the reviews this morning, and thought this was the low point for Wallace. Not only did he ask a question that he should know the context of challenging the result of elections, but he chose to badger Trump with follow up by lecturing Trump on the peaceful transfer of power in this country. He apparently forgot about Al Gore and the 2000 election. And Al Gore brought this up again in his recent stumping for Clinton in FL, with Clinton nodding in approval in the background as the crowd chants "you won". They still haven't accepted the results of that election:

[video=youtube;1oUUEytRYUI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oUUEytRYUI[/video]

 

[Bann]

It really would be horrible if Trump acted like Bill Clinton's VP, showing a complete lack of temperament to be president (as Tapper said) by not accepting the results of the election. Bill Clinton apparently proved an inability to make good decisions by choosing such a man to be his VP, if the media is being consistent.

Of course, unlike Nixon who stepped down instead of putting the country through impeachment, Mr. Clinton thought of himself as being above the country and therefore put himself first. Maybe Gore was good before, but learned from his boss, Mr. Clinton. If that's true, imagine what Hillary has learned with her additional years with Mr. Clinton.

Just some random thoughts on the whole "will he accept the results" topic.

I disagree.

We all know the elections are rigged. We are seeing people talk about doing that sort of thing in the Veritas Project videos.

And please, spare me the whole "temperament to be POTUS" thing. That is not what is the most important issue on the table this year FOR MOST OF THE TRUMP SUPPORTERS. That's been proven over and over all throughout this election season.

However, while I'm on that subject - I will say Trump's temperament is right on the money. I am 100% okay with his temperament. I'm tired of the Romneys and McCains and the namby pamby p*ssyfooting around of the GOP candidates since Reagan.

 

[This_person]

I disagree.

We all know the elections are rigged. We are seeing people talk about doing that sort of thing in the Veritas Project videos.

And please, spare me the whole "temperament to be POTUS" thing. That is not what is the most important issue on the table this year FOR MOST OF THE TRUMP SUPPORTERS. That's been proven over and over all throughout this election season.

However, while I'm on that subject - I will say Trump's temperament is right on the money. I am 100% okay with his temperament. I'm tired of the Romneys and McCains and the namby pamby p*ssyfooting around of the GOP candidates since Reagan.

You started that with "I disagree" and then agreed with everything I said

Perhaps you didn't catch the tongue in my cheek.

 

[Bann]

I didn't get to watch that part, but caught the reviews this morning, and thought this was the low point for Wallace. Not only did he ask a question that he should know the context of challenging the result of elections, but he chose to badger Trump with follow up by lecturing Trump on the peaceful transfer of power in this country. He apparently forgot about Al Gore and the 2000 election. And Al Gore brought this up again in his recent stumping for Clinton in FL, with Clinton nodding in approval in the background as the crowd chants "you won". They still haven't accepted the results of that election

I am laughing out loud after seeing the headlines on "all the major newspapers".

Like Vrai says they're making a YUUUUGE deal of this one line. Trump had lots of great moments last night.

This one was his greatest and here is why. He's on the front page (top of the fold) of every major newspaper, he's being talked about online social media outlets and elsewhere online.

FREE advertising. It isn't going to hurt him. This was already out in the mediasphere before he was asked about it and, like I said, most people in the US don't trust the current government now anyway. I think it will help him in the long run. He doesn't have to commit to anything ahead of time. What kind of Art of the Deal is that?!

They're all leading with and talking 'bout Trump today.

 

[Bann]

You started that with "I disagree" and then agreed with everything I said

Perhaps you didn't catch the tongue in my cheek.

My bad. You usually disagree with all that I post.

...going for more coffee - yesterday was a long day.

 

[tommyjo]

Given the incredibly low bar that has been set for him, Mr. Trump had his best debate last night....for about 30-40 minutes. You could see the anger building on his face...his eyes got squintier, that stupid pout got more pronounced and then for the remainder of the debate he was the churlish child he always is.

Most of you on here will obviously agree with the "nasty woman" comment. However, (unless you were born under the front porch and raised by wolves) an adult should understand those are not the words that should come out of the mouth of a candidate for President of the United States. Once again, Mr. Trump presented himself as unqualified for the job.

Ms. Clinton had rough spots, non-answers (Mr. Trump had more as he clearly has very little clue about anything) and her repeated comment about not adding a penny to the debt was quite stupid (Of course, Mr. Trump's economic "plan" is as he so often likes to say a disaster from the standpoint of debt).

Ms. Clinton obviously tried to project an image of a positive future. Mr. Trump could do nothing but paint a dark and dank picture.

Ms. Clinton's closing statement was positive and forward looking. She actually provided reasons why someone should vote FOR her. Mr. Trump's closing statement was a rambling mess. He has no answer as to why someone should vote FOR him...he offered many reasons why someone should vote AGAINST Ms. Clinton...for those who don't understand...there is a very big difference.

Once again, side by side Ms. Clinton looked and sounded more presidential...mostly because Mr. Trump does not look or sound presidential in the least.

The clear winner of the debate was Chris Wallace. He did the best job of the three debate moderators.

 

[Bann]

SHUT UP Geraldo.

#badhombre

 

[tommyjo]

As for Mr. Trump's refusal to accept the results. ANYONE who considers themselves an American should stand up against Mr. Trump's words. Those of you who think this is no big deal really ought to seek a new country to live in.

Here is the second time Mr. Wallace asked the question:

CHRIS WALLACE

But sir, there is a tradition in this country, in fact one of the prides of this country, is the peaceful transition of power and that no matter how hard fought a campaign is, that at the end of the campaign, that the loser concedes to the winner, not saying that you are necessarily going to be the you loser or the winner, but that the loser concedes to the winner and that the country comes together in part for the good of the country, are you saying that you are not prepared now to commit to that principle?


DONALD TRUMP

What I'm saying now is I will tell you at the time. I will keep you in suspense, okay?

http://www.npr.org/2016/10/19/498293478/fact-check-trump-and-clinton-s-final-presidential-debate

The comments regarding Al Gore on here are really stupid. There was a recount in Florida. Mr. Bush had lost the popular vote. When the Supreme Court ordered the recount stopped, Mr. Gore accepted Mr. Bush as the winner. Hell, Gore even preceded over the ratification of the electoral college vote as the President Pro Tem of the Senate.

Mr. Wallace was not asking is Mr. Trump would ask for a recount. Mr. Wallace was not asking about a situation where the outcome was a razor thin margin in a state that would tip the election on way or another.

Mr. Wallace asked a very simple question...at the end of the campaign (that does not mean on election night) will you concede if you are deemed to be the loser? Mr. Trump refused to answer. A kid in elementary school should know the answer to that question.

This is YOUR candidate for President of the United States? This is what you support? This is who your entire self worth is now wrapped up in? Shame on you and shame on the country if this man becomes President.

There is no law that says you have to vote D or R. Write someone in. There are some stand up Republicans voicing objection to Mr. Trump. Vote for one of them.

 

[Bann]

 

[PsyOps]

Once again, Mr. Trump presented himself as unqualified for the job.

I mostly agree with you, but neither of them is really qualified. Although Trump might disqualify himself because of his temperament, Clinton disqualifies herself because of dishonesty and corruption. Given we have the two and stuck with the two, I would have to side with bad temperament. This boils down to trust. Aside from the fact that there is nothing I would agree with on the issues regarding Clinton (so I wouldn’t really vote for her anyway), she is completely untrustworthy – to a degree I can’t accurately put into words. While you consistently ignore this, I cannot.

 

[SamSpade]

As for Mr. Trump's refusal to accept the results.

"Don't get snippy".