Hillary won, no doubt. She was calm, presidential, knew what she was talking about, and defended her personal flaws well. Trump didn't defend well against Hillary's quotes of his sexism and racism, and about tax evasion, and he hadn't read up on the issues. He wasted time blathering about his ego, as usual, but that doesnt work in a 1v1 debate. his deflections were obvious and they mostly failed. when he brougt up her emails that was the only rel successful attack he had. other than that, trump had nothing. - - - Updated - - - If there was a prize for the oldest man who has yet to grow up, Trump would win it.
He was in a fight WAY over his head, Guy. Although I wanted Hillary to win...and win big...I actually felt sorry for him. In another thread, I mentioned that it was like my feelings for Chuck Wepner after his fight with Muhammad Ali.
He opened there allowing anyone in direct opposition to the racist limousine liberals wishes. http://m.palmbeachdailynews.com/new...ar-a-lago-to-combat-claims-from-clinto/nsf6f/
ironically this i the first time ive ever seen a pollster draw up a map with a projected trump victory.
I'm an objective free thinker, but I do have my bias's just like everyone else. As you may know I hate hillary's guts. But I have to admit that the old hag did well in this debate, she didn't croak and she held her own. She did seem to get under his skin. From what I can tell Trump was the winner in every poll except cnn's where they may have over sampled democrats. I don't know what to think about the polls but I do think Trumps hammering her on nafta and tpp will go a long way in winning key states with the working class.
The best "poll" or indicator of who won that debate would be for the candidates themselves to say...via body language. When they walked off the stage after the debate: Hillary Clinton looked like she won...and won big. Donald Trump looked like he lost...and lost big.
Any proof of that ? Wait, Liberals are the ones opposing minorities ? bahahahahahahahahaahahahaha STOP. This is the most ridiculous thing EVER. Claiming in any way, that the racial divide is being cured by allowing blacks in a country club is beyond laughable. "not an integrated club to the extent of Mar-a-lago"......i.e. There were integrated clubs so Trump WASN'T the first club to allow blacks. So he wasn't some trailblazer as he claims. "That was very brave of him".......holy (*)(*)(*)(*)balls batman. REALLY. He was "Brave" to allow someone to pay him thousands of dollars per year to golf ? SERIOUSLY Im just amazed that you are actually trying to defend this. Your defending a billionaire who thinks that allowing blacks in his country club is the answer to the racial divide in this country. And you say the liberals are out of touch......
Yeah, I know, allowing blacks into country clubs is ridiculous as you say. Just like all the other limousine liberals said.
Yeah, they'll quote Infowars links next time that point to the Hillary Defective Mic False Flag Operation. Can't wait to see that unfold.
I wouldn't, and I work in the television industry, going on nearly thirty-five years. Trump is the type of onscreen talent whose TV knowledge peaks at the fact that he probably knows which side is his "good side". I have met countless on screen performers who operate the way he does, most of them are C-list at best. I bet anything that he has absolutely ZERO interest in the technical or creative aspects of production, and wouldn't know enough on set patter to know the difference between a split screen and a medium closeup. To him the cameras are just necessary annoyances and his critique would always be post mortem. You can bet he NOW KNOWS the dangers of a split screen but at the time he couldn't have cared less, because camera work is something peasants do. In his mind a monkey can "turn on a camera and point it" because that is the kind of personality he has. That is precisely why he thinks his "defective mic" comment holds water...again, he wouldn't know a mic from a rolling pin and he could care less how a microphone works. The man lacks even the most rudimentary intellectual curiosity about anything if it doesn't directly connect to loads of cash pouring in. I'm betting his personality causes him to have YUGE knowledge gaps about even the most ordinary aspects of the creative process.
I thought it was roughly even. The goal of the debate was for: 1. Trump to look at least somewhat presidential, avoid making controversial comments, don't get tangled in Hillary's substantial debate experience, etc. 2. Hillary to not look like a complete, faceless globalist hack. She opposed the TPP and Trump didn't jump on her for the political convenience of this. She didn't collapse on stage. [Hr][/hr] Both candidates succeeded in these goals. I think it's really quite erroneous to suggest that Clinton clearly won purely because the markets were stable.
Trump failed to achieve his goal and did himself more harm than good with his rudeness and ignorance. Hillary managed to restrain herself from laughing out loud at Trump but it might have been better if she had. The markets have been having palpitations given the possibility of Trump in the oval office. The peso has been tanking and other currencies have been trying to safeguard themselves against the dollar. Investors were watching the debate closely and once they realized that Trump was a loser and that Hillary would essentially continue business as usual they heaved a huge sigh of relief and the markets reflected their confidence that she would prevail in November. I didn't check out the betting odds but I am pretty sure they also reflected the same confidence that Hillary would be the next potus. People with money at stake aren't about to take a massive risk on a shyster like Trump. They have too much to lose.
Markets are not always right as Brexit demonstrated. They thought 'remain' would win, and crashed when it became apparent that the elites had lost. But this too was a miscalculation - the FTSE is now way above where it was pre-Brexit. In short, shareholders are just guessing like everyone else. They have no special information. [hr][/hr] Furthermore, how absurd the idea is that "the markets realized Clinton would win". The polls are neck and neck, the debate was mostly gaff free, and there's still 2 months to go. Quite literally anything could happen. That's not why markets oppose Trump nor Brexit. Markets hate uncertainty. They would equally fret at the possibility of a Sanders or other far-left candidate getting into power. If you have shares in BoA you want stability and a continuation of the status quo. You don't want a radical, especially an unknown quantity like Trump (or Brexit!).
Brexit has nothing whatsoever to do with Trump losing the debate. The markets have been listening to the BS that Trump has been spewing and taking precautions because he is an unstable wannabe dictator who looked like he stood a chance of becoming the next POTUS. On Monday the false equivalence was shattered. Trump does not have what it takes to be president and investors breathed a YUUUGE sigh of relief. They will be backing HIllary and telling their clients that if they want their portfolios to continue to grow they should do the same. As far as being "gaff free" I have no idea what debate you were watching but Trump was making a series of gaffes, one right after the other. At one point Hillary basically stepped back and just let him run his big mouth and the gaffes just tumbled out. Trump was his own worst enemy on that debate stage and lost the debate by exposing his ignorance and arrogance to the American electorate. And if you want to know how they reacted just take a look at the tracking that Frank Luntz performed during the debate. It is patently obvious what was turning off the voters and why the Independents all gave the debate to Hillary afterwards.
I know this may sound bizarre. But i think the bar was so low going in (thanks to Hillary) that trump came on top without actually winning the debate. It was clear me that he wanted to show his calm demeanor and look presidential, he did. But don't be surprised if he pulls out the blade round 2.
I don't think either one won the debate! It didn't sway anyone. Trump supporters will vote for him while Hillary's will vote for her. Undecides? No such thing.
Trump going Trump only made him look bad....Clinton looked great and didn't have to SNIFF her way through statements Hey, I hear Trump claims he won the CBS poll .....except there wasn't one !!!
I am quite sure that is the opinion in every country club in new england and at the pool parties in malibu. However out her in flyover country I would not bet on it. Trump came off as a bully in some people eyes but in others he signaled strength. No one will ever see trump riding a girls bike with a pink bike helmet that is for sure. Hillary came off as a polished but also smug and snide. She should have practiced her likable instead. In other words the people that think she is just 4 more years of a less likable obama don't have any reason to change their opinion Primaries give every indication that this is a change election. I don't see hillary getting the bernie voters. My bet is the majority of them will just stay home
I agree with you about Bernie supporters. What CNN, DNC and Hillary camp did to them is simply unforgivable. I wouldn't be surprised of some of Bernie supporters actually voted for Trump. After all it's all about jobs. Bernie supporters were cheated on, lied to and humiliated by DNC and Hillary's camp. Shocker: WikiLeaks Emails Prove Clinton, CNN & DNC Conspired to Sabotage Sanders Campaign; DNC Chairwoman Steps Down in Shame http://sandrarose.com/2016/07/wikileaks-emails-prove-clinton-cnn-dnc-conspired-to-sabotage-sanders/
