Official 1st Presidential Debate Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's put to rest this false equivalency that Bush didn't release his emails, so why should Her Royal Crookedness release hers? Did Bush ever get a subpoena to turn over his illegal server and then bleachbit it I to smithereens?

No, because back then nobody was trying every trick in the book to get Bush indicted. Nobody cared about emails back then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There's a strong connection among Epstein, Trump and Bill Clinton, as Epstein donated a lot of money to his foundation. And unless Bill is naive, which is doubtful, he, too, understood what sort of parties Epstein had at his private island.

Both men are despicable. Hillary is far from innocent, however. Her husband flew many times on Epstein's Lolita Express. And while there's no story suggesting Clinton raped these young teenagers - some as young as 12 - he knew they were being used as sex slaves. Why do you think the plane was called Lolita Express? And why do you think Epstein was jailed for only about 18 months?

So if you're OK voting for a woman whose husband "looked away" during Epstein's child sex ring parties, go right ahead.

Again, both are despicable.

So you would rather vote for the man who raped a 13 year old than a woman whose husband may or may not have partaken in illicit activity but has no record of doing so herself?

Has he been proven guilty of a rape?

[Anonymous]

I think this debates was an eye opening for a lot of people and just proved what Trump stands for. US media is corrupt and biased. I wanted to refuse to believe what I saw and heard during debate, but then I read a transcript of the debate and it is so obvious how Lester is biased. Hillary's prepareness raises some questions too. Her smooth responses actually turned away a lot of voters. Whether she had questions in advance or was so prepped for this debate with her smooth speach -- it is turning off. The trick that they did with a split screen and Trump's microphone is at the level of kindergarden. It is funny how far Clinton can go to win this race. She is discusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this debates was an eye opening for a lot of people and just proved what Trump stands for. US media is corrupt and biased. I wanted to refuse to believe what I saw and heard during debate, but then I read a transcript of the debate and it is so obvious how Lester is biased. Hillary's prepareness raises some questions too. Her smooth responses actually turned away a lot of voters. Whether she had questions in advance or was so prepped for this debate with her smooth speach -- it is turning off. The trick that they did with a split screen and Trump's microphone is at the level of kindergarden. It is funny how far Clinton can go to win this race. She is discusting.

I read your post out loud with a Russian accent and it is awesome. You sound like Boris Badenov.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There's a strong connection among Epstein, Trump and Bill Clinton, as Epstein donated a lot of money to his foundation. And unless Bill is naive, which is doubtful, he, too, understood what sort of parties Epstein had at his private island.

Both men are despicable. Hillary is far from innocent, however. Her husband flew many times on Epstein's Lolita Express. And while there's no story suggesting Clinton raped these young teenagers - some as young as 12 - he knew they were being used as sex slaves. Why do you think the plane was called Lolita Express? And why do you think Epstein was jailed for only about 18 months?

So if you're OK voting for a woman whose husband "looked away" during Epstein's child sex ring parties, go right ahead.

Again, both are despicable.

So you would rather vote for the man who raped a 13 year old than a woman whose husband may or may not have partaken in illicit activity but has no record of doing so herself?

Wow. I sure as hell wouldn't want you on a jury ready to convict based on your prejudice before any evidence is presented. Trump is just as innocent as Clinton as they both may or may not have participated.

So you would rather vote for the man who allegedly raped a 13 year old than a woman whose husband may or may not have partaken in illicit activity but has no record of doing so herself?

So who's the lesser of the two rapists? Is that your point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hate to break it to you, but manufacturing jobs really started leaving around the Reagan administration, the architect of NAFTA. Even Trump admits to that.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/26/politics/donald-trump-when-america-was-great/

"As much as I liked Ronald Reagan, he started NAFTA," Trump said"

Reagan did a lot I thought would have negative consequences. My point is we have to stop the drain.

The way Trump wants to stop the drain is very unAmerican and will hurt our economy. Both taxing goods coming back or manufacturing the goods here will increase the cost of that good. That gets passed on to the consumer. It won't hurt people like Trump. It will hurt people like my single mother sister making barely minimum wage and my parents who live on social security. It will hurt the majority of Trump supporters the most.

Wages never keep up with inflation.

Well there are 1400 consumers in Indianapolis that would be happy to pay a bit more out of their paychecks. Buying less consumer goods. But at least have a check. Women are also affected by loss of manufacturing jobs. Then we have CALL CENTER jobs. How about paying more to get those back? If they were ever here.

Years I ago I remember calling Gateway-humans in I believe one of the Dakotas. Ever been in Dell He11 in India?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There's a strong connection among Epstein, Trump and Bill Clinton, as Epstein donated a lot of money to his foundation. And unless Bill is naive, which is doubtful, he, too, understood what sort of parties Epstein had at his private island.

Both men are despicable. Hillary is far from innocent, however. Her husband flew many times on Epstein's Lolita Express. And while there's no story suggesting Clinton raped these young teenagers - some as young as 12 - he knew they were being used as sex slaves. Why do you think the plane was called Lolita Express? And why do you think Epstein was jailed for only about 18 months?

So if you're OK voting for a woman whose husband "looked away" during Epstein's child sex ring parties, go right ahead.

Again, both are despicable.

So you would rather vote for the man who raped a 13 year old than a woman whose husband may or may not have partaken in illicit activity but has no record of doing so herself?

Wow. I sure as hell wouldn't want you on a jury ready to convict based on your prejudice before any evidence is presented. Trump is just as innocent as Clinton as they both may or may not have participated.

So you would rather vote for the man who allegedly raped a 13 year old than a woman whose husband may or may not have partaken in illicit activity but has no record of doing so herself?

None of the above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Hate to break it to you, but manufacturing jobs really started leaving around the Reagan administration, the architect of NAFTA. Even Trump admits to that.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/26/politics/donald-trump-when-america-was-great/

"As much as I liked Ronald Reagan, he started NAFTA," Trump said"

Reagan did a lot I thought would have negative consequences. My point is we have to stop the drain.

The way Trump wants to stop the drain is very unAmerican and will hurt our economy. Both taxing goods coming back or manufacturing the goods here will increase the cost of that good. That gets passed on to the consumer. It won't hurt people like Trump. It will hurt people like my single mother sister making barely minimum wage and my parents who live on social security. It will hurt the majority of Trump supporters the most.

Wages never keep up with inflation.

Well there are 1400 consumers in Indianapolis that would be happy to pay a bit more out of their paychecks. Buying less consumer goods. But at least have a check. Women are also affected by loss of manufacturing jobs. Then we have CALL CENTER jobs. How about paying more to get those back? If they were ever here.

Years I ago I remember calling Gateway-humans in I believe one of the Dakotas. Ever been in Dell He11 in India?

2. It's not going to be a "bit more" . The amount tax Trump would have to apply to make companies bring back manufacturing jobs would have to be huge. Inflation won't just hit those products. It's a domino affect.

2. call center jobs are not manufacturing jobs. Trump only talked about manufacturing jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this debates was an eye opening for a lot of people and just proved what Trump stands for. US media is corrupt and biased. I wanted to refuse to believe what I saw and heard during debate, but then I read a transcript of the debate and it is so obvious how Lester is biased. Hillary's prepareness raises some questions too. Her smooth responses actually turned away a lot of voters. Whether she had questions in advance or was so prepped for this debate with her smooth speach -- it is turning off. The trick that they did with a split screen and Trump's microphone is at the level of kindergarden. It is funny how far Clinton can go to win this race. She is discusting.

lol!

[Anonymous]

Why was Mr Khan who made an impassioned speech at the DNC not given a front row seat by the Hillary campaign.

I guess he has outlived his usefulness. Was he even invited to the debate by the campaign?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why was Mr Khan who made an impassioned speech at the DNC not given a front row seat by the Hillary campaign.

I guess he has outlived his usefulness. Was he even invited to the debate by the campaign?

Was the Benghazi Mom, Mrs. Smith invited? Or has she lived her usefulness?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this debates was an eye opening for a lot of people and just proved what Trump stands for. US media is corrupt and biased. I wanted to refuse to believe what I saw and heard during debate, but then I read a transcript of the debate and it is so obvious how Lester is biased. Hillary's prepareness raises some questions too. Her smooth responses actually turned away a lot of voters. Whether she had questions in advance or was so prepped for this debate with her smooth speach -- it is turning off. The trick that they did with a split screen and Trump's microphone is at the level of kindergarden. It is funny how far Clinton can go to win this race. She is discusting.

lol!

It's an upside down world when being prepared for the test is a point against you.
Oh my...My nerdy self is hurting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree with her policies but she is much better prepared than he is. He has the vocabulary and temperament of a seven-year-old.

That is highly insulting to my 7yo

[Anonymous]

Trump is really a lousy debater.

If he was going to use the argument that she had been preparing for the past two weeks prior to the debate, he should have followed with saying that is the reason she is so scripted and nothing she says represents her real views, etc and that he, OTOH, does not prep and so what he says is what he believes as opposed to contrived answers from advisers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump is really a lousy debater.

If he was going to use the argument that she had been preparing for the past two weeks prior to the debate, he should have followed with saying that is the reason she is so scripted and nothing she says represents her real views, etc and that he, OTOH, does not prep and so what he says is what he believes as opposed to contrived answers from advisers.

True, but at some point he would still have had to at least give the impression of having solid plans instead of just speaking in generalities. He might have gotten here by just winging it, but you can't just wing a presidential debate. You have to say something substantive and that isn't his strong suit.