Debate last night - change anything for anyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me? Yes. It reaffirmed just how complicit the media is with the Democratic party.

It's a very dangerous thing for the media not to be a neutral party.

My vote will go with the Republicans because that can't stand.

If it reaffirmed your notions, then no, it didn't change anything for you. Hate to break it to you, but Fox news and breitbart isn't exactly unbiased sources.

And how many are liberal sources? they range in dozens possibly even hundreds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a longtime Hillary supporter, and last night didn't change that.

But I did start crying a few times thinking that this is where we are. A boorish, loutish, uninformed, dangerous, pussy grabbing bully has almost as much support for President as a woman whose scandals of email use, foreign policy, and handling affair rumors would be mere blips if they were on the resume of a man.

It's such a double standard, and it's really depressing.

+1

+2

Woman card again! She doesn't get it both ways, she's either tough enough to handle this or she should get out. God I'm sick of Gloria Steinheim feminists!

I think she has clearly proven she's tough enough to handle it. But if you can't see that a huge amount of the criticism of her stems from pure, misogynistic "Salem witch trial" type BS, than you are not very bright. And the PP who said he wouldn't vote for her because she's 'the smartest girl in class that everyone hates" just proves it. a significant number of people are threatened by a smart, accomplished woman--why in the world wouldn't you want the smartest woman working for you?

BTW - I cannot believe no one has mentioned the fact that he said he'd put her in jail. Has it really come to this? Latin American style authoritarianism where we're going to jail the opposition? this is scary stuff people- he's sounding more like Hitler every day.

This, unfortunately completely this.

[Anonymous]

I am voting for Trump. Like Juanita Broderick said - Donald Trump may have said some regrettable words, but Bill and Hillary Clinton's actions were far worse.

Actions speak louder than words. I'm pretty much done with the Clinton's and I think we need a new approach - a business minded approach. That's Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way Trump moved around the stage and stalked Clinton, I would have told him to back the flock up. That said, it affirmed my thought that Clinton is just more knowledgeable about policy.

Did you watch the debate? I'm guessing you only looked at the pictures of it. Hillary was the one moving on stage... not in a bad way. She would just walk over to the audience. This made her position be in front of Trump. Trump just kind of stayed where he was when she did this. Of course, the photographs make it look different from what it was.

+1. During the debate I was wondering, why is Clinton going to Trump's side all the time? If anything, she was the one stalking him.

You two are delusional. She moved to speak to the person asking the question. Trump paced the ENTIRE time. He didn't stop or sit down once. Nor did he ever speak to the actual audience.

Apparently HRC supporters cannot read. You just repeated exactly what I said...

My words:
"Hillary was the one moving on stage... not in a bad way. She would just walk over to the audience."

Your words:
"She moved to speak to the person asking the question."

You are so ready to argue, you do not even realize when someone says the same thing as you. It's hilarious.

+1.

Hillary-zealots are as stupid as Trump-zealots...but they take themselves much more seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am voting for Trump. Like Juanita Broderick said - Donald Trump may have said some regrettable words, but Bill and Hillary Clinton's actions were far worse.

Actions speak louder than words. I'm pretty much done with the Clinton's and I think we need a new approach - a business minded approach. That's Trump.

You think there aren't actions that back up these words?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me? Yes. It reaffirmed just how complicit the media is with the Democratic party.

It's a very dangerous thing for the media not to be a neutral party.

My vote will go with the Republicans because that can't stand.

If it reaffirmed your notions, then no, it didn't change anything for you. Hate to break it to you, but Fox news and breitbart isn't exactly unbiased sources.

LOL!

Moderators bring up reality and your candidate always lies = JOURNALISM IS SUPER IMPORTANT IT'S TOO BIASED AND NEEDS TO BE OBJECTIVE!

Your candidate mocks, belittles, and threatens to jail members of the press = JOURNALISM IS EVIL

You Chumps have an amusing relationship with reality and the people who attempt to present it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am voting for Trump. Like Juanita Broderick said - Donald Trump may have said some regrettable words, but Bill and Hillary Clinton's actions were far worse.

Actions speak louder than words. I'm pretty much done with the Clinton's and I think we need a new approach - a business minded approach. That's Trump.

You think there aren't actions that back up these words?

Of course not. It was Trump's words that were grabbing women's genitals, not his (small) hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me? Yes. It reaffirmed just how complicit the media is with the Democratic party.

It's a very dangerous thing for the media not to be a neutral party.

My vote will go with the Republicans because that can't stand.

If it reaffirmed your notions, then no, it didn't change anything for you. Hate to break it to you, but Fox news and breitbart isn't exactly unbiased sources.

LOL!

Moderators bring up reality and your candidate always lies = JOURNALISM IS SUPER IMPORTANT IT'S TOO BIASED AND NEEDS TO BE OBJECTIVE!

Your candidate mocks, belittles, and threatens to jail members of the press = JOURNALISM IS EVIL

You Chumps have an amusing relationship with reality and the people who attempt to present it.

uh huh I guess you believe in UFO sightings the liberal news reports sometimes too? I have seen way more mocking by liberal journalists and supporters. Did you forget the nude trump statue?

[Anonymous]

My first election that I could vote in was Reagan/Mondale in 1984. Serious people with a history of accomplishments. You many not have liked their politics, but it was a valid choice. And if one won versus the other, we would be ok. These two bozo's today are an embarrassment, and they will each take us in a dangerous direction - Clinton to more debt and lawlessness, Trump to who knows where. Mitt Romney and Joe Biden must spend a lot of time thinking about what might have been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Clinton to more debt and lawlessness

please explain what lawlessness means here. Are you talking about the clinton's personally or is this some allusion to "law and order", which no one has actually been able to define

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My first election that I could vote in was Reagan/Mondale in 1984. Serious people with a history of accomplishments. You many not have liked their politics, but it was a valid choice. And if one won versus the other, we would be ok. These two bozo's today are an embarrassment, and they will each take us in a dangerous direction - Clinton to more debt and lawlessness, Trump to who knows where. Mitt Romney and Joe Biden must spend a lot of time thinking about what might have been.

+1.

Fully agreed.

The lewd guy vs. the lady with an email server in the closet.

Please...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Clinton to more debt and lawlessness

please explain what lawlessness means here. Are you talking about the clinton's personally or is this some allusion to "law and order", which no one has actually been able to define

I mean Clinton now following Obama's example by ignoring separation of powers and doing whatever she likes on treaties, appointments, etc. It's dangerous, and neither party should do it. We have divided government - it means not much meaningful will happen without consensus. Win congressional elections if you want to re-write laws.

[Anonymous]

Trump doesn't take any crap, Hillary is full of crap that's why a fly landed on her.?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way Trump moved around the stage and stalked Clinton, I would have told him to back the flock up. That said, it affirmed my thought that Clinton is just more knowledgeable about policy.

Did you watch the debate? I'm guessing you only looked at the pictures of it. Hillary was the one moving on stage... not in a bad way. She would just walk over to the audience. This made her position be in front of Trump. Trump just kind of stayed where he was when she did this. Of course, the photographs make it look different from what it was.

+1. During the debate I was wondering, why is Clinton going to Trump's side all the time? If anything, she was the one stalking him.

How is she stalking if she is in front of him. Hillary was always moving towards the audience, especially to the side where the questioner was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Clinton to more debt and lawlessness

please explain what lawlessness means here. Are you talking about the clinton's personally or is this some allusion to "law and order", which no one has actually been able to define

I mean Clinton now following Obama's example by ignoring separation of powers and doing whatever she likes on treaties, appointments, etc. It's dangerous, and neither party should do it. We have divided government - it means not much meaningful will happen without consensus. Win congressional elections if you want to re-write laws.

consensus would be possible if your ilk actually believed in compromise...which is what our branches are supposed to be doing. This doesn't mean you get everything you want - it means bother sides give a little.