Donald Trump was better than he was in Trump v. Clinton I, but he was still awful. Hillary Clinton clearly looked more presidential, had a better command of the facts, and connected with the audience (both at home and the event) better than did Trump. Clinton certainly had her weak moments. When given a chance to talk about the Supreme Court, she made a critical mistake of citing as its importance
protecting Roe v. Wade. That comment gets her not a single additional vote, but it reminds many evangelical and other pro-life voters who might be inclined to turn against Trump after the release of the video, why they should cast a vote for the New York businessman instead of Clinton. (Not that I for a second believe Donald "I Support Partial Birth Abortion" Trump has had a real conversion to the pro-life cause.
Clinton also dropped the ball on the final question. When asked to say something nice about Trump, she started out great talking about Trump's family. But then she quickly veered off into self-serving comments about herself. She should have stopped after praising Trump for her family, leaving viewers with a positive view of her.. On the other hand, Trump stopped on the positive note praising Clinton for her tenacity and determination.
On the issues, I believe the only place Trump bested Clinton was in discussion of energy policy. It is one of the few subjects on which Trump appears to have actual knowledge. Trump could have done even better with the subject by talking about Clinton's (new) opposition to the Keystone pipeline, and how not building the pipeline costs American jobs.
On the other side of the coin, Trump's first 20 minutes or so, when he had to answer questions about the newly released Billy Bush video, was borderline disastrous. Instead of sincerely apologizing for his comments, he reverted back to the nonsense that it was just "locker room" banter, as if we mentalk about non-consensual sexual assault of women when we get together. Uh, no we don't.
Stylistically neither candidate came across as likable. Hillary Clinton's smile often came across as more of a smirk. Trump never smiled. Both candidates seem completely incapable of connecting with real people when they talk...or even understanding that they need to do that as candidates. Hillary Clinton is clearly not Bill Clinton when it comes to the ability to connect with an audience.
I actually found the post-debate comments to be the most telling...and troubling. Trumpkins are absolutely convinced their guy won. They seem to think throwing out one liners about Clinton "lying" that "she should be in jail" is a substitute for actually prosecuting a case against her. (Since when is it acceptable for candidates to campaign on putting their opponents in jail as Trump suggested he would do with Hillary?) It's not. Hillary Clinton has no credible answer for deleting those personal emails and ordering the servers be scrubbed. That her aides took the 5th and the FBI allowed the destruction of evidence, is damning proof of the GOP case against her.
FYI, a new (scientific) CNN poll shows Clinton won the second debate, 57-34. That is down from a 62-27 victory in the first debate. But it is still a solid win. No, Trumpkins, the Donald lost the debatet badly.
Unfortunately, the Republicans simply don't have a candidate who is capable of making the intellectual case against Hillary Clinton. Add to that the fact that these debates further demonstrate that Donald Trump lacks the depth, intelligence and temperament to be President. Republicans are represented by the only candidate who could is so bad that he could lose to the worst presidential candidate the Democrats have fielded in at least half a century, if not longer.
4 comments:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/10/11/media-polling-fully-exposed-about-that-nbcwsj-clinton-11-point-poll/ While I've never heard of this internet source the points it makes are well and long understood among people who understand numbers, reality, and statistical theory. This does not include lawyers or journalists, as a rule, the latter being shills and liars for the most part with the former vying to overtake the oldest profession. Other sources report anent Communist Network News, fraud. This crap is most clearly seen, however, in the Romney campaign which was "poll driven" and media gushed. By the time Romney found out he'd been misled, fooled, defrauded, it was too late for him to get the help he and his stupid advisors had spurned.
Dennis Prager, “The Dennis Prager Show”, Oct. 2016:
“I just want to say something to my listeners. I totally understand people who are challenged to their personal principles how [they] could support Donald Trump. What I don’t understand is that nobody is ever challenged on principles reasons for supporting Hillary Clinton.”
http://buchanan.org/blog/the-donald-lives-125811 Let's see how many times Paul can be fooled by his obsession with Hilliary and how deranged he can get in the next few weeks on the subject.
Leon,
You know just because someone refuses to wear the rose colored Trump glasses and sees the NY businessman for the complete unqualified and unfit buffoon he is, doesn't mean that person likes Hillary. Add to that Trump's admiration for dictators and his comments suggesting he'd like to be a dictator himself. Personally I have a problem turning the country over to someone who is completely unfit for the office. I care about this country too much. Don't blame me for Hillary. It is the Trumpkins whose cult of personality obsession with Trump that gave us four years of Hillary Clinton when the GOP could have won the election in a landslide with any other candidate.
Post a Comment