Jump to content

Who won the first debate?


laripu
 Share

Recommended Posts

In my view, Clinton won, and looked much more like a person who could be President.

 

Trump was negative, attacking, interrupting, and looked flustered.

 

And what about the sniff? Cocaine use? Howard Dean and many others questioned that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sniffling? Cocaine use? A big jump from the former to the latter. Sounds like pure spin, at this point.

 

Almost everyone, Left and Right are giving the win to Hillary; Although many on the Right are saying Hillary didn't win it so much as Trump lost it; Through poor preparation which led to his inability to take advantage of openings. That said, Hillary comported herself very well, and looked consistently strong.

 

Trump held his own, in the first half of the debate but after he flubbed the birther question, started to fade. Hillary looked to have far more stamina than Trump, on this outing. In the last half, Trump came close to incoherence a few times and seemed to partially lose control of his facial expressions. He remained glib, but his answers made less sense. Hillary was solid, from start to finish.

 

But it's only the first debate. Obama lost his first debate badly in 2012, against Romney, but improved his performance in subsequent debates, and went on to win the election. But is Trump capable of changing his spots like Obama was? We will see. All indications are that Hillary will continue to perform consistently well.

 

The next few days will reveal whether this debate affected polling significantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sniffling? Cocaine use? A big jump from the former to the latter. Sounds like pure spin, at this point.

 

More like gossip than spin. I haven't seen any responsible person on a network saying that. Just lots of tweets some comedy.

 

I liked what Colbert said:

“Trump sounded like he was fighting off a cold,” Colbert said. “With cocaine!”

:)

 

Your description of it seems pretty accurate. Except my wife and I thought he was less effective even earlier on. But certainly he got worse as time passed.

 

Back to the sniffing, it went on the whole debate. Trump blamed it on a defective microphone, but apparently other microphones picked it up too.

 

In the past Trump went to bat for a convicted felon: a cocaine dealer.

 

As hunter Thompson famously said:

 

image004.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I listen to someone, I want the whole picture, not just the phrase. So what you say today should resonate with what you said yesterday. If the two contradict each other, then I have a bit of evidence you think one way, and a bit of evidence you think some other way. Which way is it? How can I tell? It comes out to me like gibberish, which is all I really get from Trump. First he wants to lower American wages to make America more competitive, then he wants to work some magic and make wages go up. What does he mean? Is he saying he changed his mind and now doesn't want America to be competitive? If America is not competitive how can wages increase? What about min wage. If min wage is dropped how would anyone make more wages? Are American wages to be competitive (lower) with Vietnam? This is just one example, and there are many many others.

 

Hillary on the other hand is relatively consistent. I can understand what she is trying to say. Yes, she parses her words like any politician (or salesman), but I get the picture. The TPP for example was called the Gold Standard of trade deals. When political pressure was applied, she changed her mind and said after further review, she saw sections which would harm American Labor so she now opposes it, until it no longer harms labor. I can understand. I hope she will go into more detail and describe exactly what sections she is referring to, and how they might have to change so that I would not be surprised by her approving some minor change which leaves most of the egregious sections intact. I could have a conversation with Hillary with mutual understanding of what was said. I could not have that conversation with Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure who won the debate. At least in terms of who'll gain more support because of it. Unfortunately we live in a country where people like the idea of Trickle-Down economics. Where it's bad if poor people take advantage of the system, but it's good if rich people do (unless they use it to support Democrats, in which case it's bad again). Too many people think that we need to spend more on military, and less on schools and healthcare.

 

Objectively speaking though, Hillary won the debate. Here's why I think so:

When the question rose about Trump's tax returns, Trump tried to leverage Hillary's emails against her. He's always claiming that he's good at getting what he wants. That he's a great negotiator. But here we see for a fact that he's not. He'll claim that he got Obama to release his birth certificate (which he then ignored for three years). But he doesn't seem to realize that Hillary has all the leverage here. It benefits her for him NOT to release his tax information UNLESS there's something worse in there than we can even imagine.

 

But more than that--when she brought up the idea of him not paying taxes, he took the bait, and said that it makes him smart, and that if he did pay taxes it'd be squandered anyway. He basically admitted to NOT paying taxes. Hillary got more than she could have ever hoped for from Trump in the debate. That's some soundbites that'll undoubtedly be used in an ad against Trump in the coming weeks.

Combine that with Trump admitting to refusing to pay for work he's had done---and you basically have a guy who's looking like he's playing checkers while everyone else is playing chess.

And don't forget his refusal to explain what made him change his mind on birtherism. He just looked like a giant clown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked the part where he challenged her stamina and she answered (paraphrasing):-- 'When you spend weeks abroad, negotiating a diplomatic agreement, or endure an 11 hour grilling in front of the House Ethics Committee; Then, talk to me about stamina.' That one probably got the most enthusiastic, unauthorized, audience reaction of the night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO Clinton won the Debate in a Huge Margin Donald Trump was just his same old self just blabbing on and on about pointless things that don't matter, Lester Holt asked him multiple times to get back on topic and the he just seemed like a High School student in Debate class, and Hillary was right whoever gets provoked by a Tweet should not have acsess to the Nuclear Launch Codes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO Clinton won the Debate in a Huge Margin Donald Trump was just his same old self just blabbing on and on about pointless things that don't matter, Lester Holt asked him multiple times to get back on topic and the he just seemed like a High School student in Debate class, and Hillary was right whoever gets provoked by a Tweet should not have acsess to the Nuclear Launch Codes.

 

Completely true.

 

And yet, look at how his supporters think none of that is important.

 

Let me emphasize what you wrote. To me, it's the #1 priority.

 

"Hillary was right whoever gets provoked by a Tweet should not have access to the Nuclear Launch Codes."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump is a disaster on so many levels it is too daunting a prospect to go into them all here. However, early in the debate Trump scored some points—especially in referencing Michigan and Ohio—on the issue of lost manufacturing jobs that is a potent issue for many voters who might be inclined to go his way. He did himself some good on this issue before discombobulating later.

 

HRC, while setting traps for Trump (in an obvious fashion) got the desired response from her opponent (who can't help himself), but she failed to listen and counter-punch with the sort of knock-out blow that was all set up for delivery. "I'm too smart to pay taxes" was the most egregious example when the opportunity for a clean shot that would have effectively ended the Trump threat was missed.

 

As it was, she won on a decision. Handily, but after a ragged start where she got behind on points.

 

I hoped for better. She needs to be able to deliver the knockout.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people watched the debate unsure of who won. Some of us thought that yes, Trump was incoherent, yet we kind of wondered what those who supported him think. Trump would interject under his breath, "this is business, how business gets done", and in a general sense, he makes no sense regarding how to orchestrate any good business sense as far as I can tell - but I know, I'm not the only one watching the show.

 

In the fist part of the debate, the slogan from Trump was, we need to unleash the power of industry by reducing business taxes and taxes on the wealthy who have not invested because of the high tax margins set. Trump also used the broad terminology that we need to do away with regulations that are killing business on every level. In this first part of the debate it was hard to hear any kind of cogent rebuttal from Hillary considering what would be required to set the record straight regarding basic economics, which I'm sure Trump knows not much about - sadly that would take several hours and a whole lot of pain.

 

So I gave Trump the highest score in the first part - not because he said anything remotely important or clear, but because that is the conservative Reagan era supply-side crap that the multitudes of republicans still cling to un-repentantly, almost as a flock of ignorant sheep being herded by a few skilled dogs who like only to have fun, or is there a better term for an ignorant group, such as, a cajoled or spun down flocculate easily controlled in solute, to be used one day for unspecified purpose, but only at your own severe risk.

 

Then, straight away, Trump goes into foreign policy matters regarding Trade - NAFTA was brokered by and completely a Republican plan, and yes, a Clinton then signed that Bill into law. And a Ho Hum Ho Hum as everybody who knows knows. (clearly not everybody did or does it seems)

 

And the rest, you know, we should have taken the oil, we should make them the allies pay for the use of our military, etc... All token jesters from the candidate perpetuated from the Fox News propaganda initiative - crazy shit.

 

Peace!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh, and I wanted to add, it is obvious to me that Hillary won the debate hands down, and not because she was practiced and said nothing that was dumb. I didn't expect her to say anything dumb because she's extremely smart. But I was amazed how she sort of sat back and smiled, that was probably kind of a hard thing to do. If it were me I would have said a whole lot more, but you have to remember the time constraint, and she did, looking back an outstanding job considering...

 

What she did was let the other guy tell the world of informed people who he is / and he did easily show that he is not equipped to lead even a small village towards a just, equality that could be construed as democratic and determined to find a somehow some way towards what some might call a sustainable future towards true prosperity. "We shouldn't call people pin heads, no matter how dumb" .

 

Peace!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hillary had no competition during the debate.

 

On the other hand, I remember the Gore/Bush debates, in which bush appeared to be drunk, rambling incoherently, slurring his words and yet many claimed bush won as he came across as the kind of guy you would like to have a beer with. If that is the American public's idea of a debate winner, then I have no idea who won between Hillary and Trump. Maybe they are looking for something different than I am.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...