Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

I know. I'm picturing their respective approaches to meeting with world leaders on important issues. It's painful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump: "my father gave me a small loan" lol.. wtf? since when is $14mil a small?

The $14 million was a lie. It was $1 million - still big bucks - but she lied about the amount and had to attack him personally, right out of the gate.

I don't know if 1 mil or 14 mil but lots of business get loans. I actually done begrudge T on that.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

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.

Is that sort of like the so-called trick that people who listened to the Nixon-Kennedy debates thought Nixon won but those who watched it thought Kennedy won?

Do you think split screen technology is new?

God, I really fear for our country.

And, Lester Holt is a republican. Yes, he is on your side. But go on and keep spouting.

How do you know on what side I am? Bush is a republican too, but he is as corrupted as Clintons.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Is that sort of like the so-called trick that people who listened to the Nixon-Kennedy debates thought Nixon won but those who watched it thought Kennedy won?

Do you think split screen technology is new?

God, I really fear for our country.

And, Lester Holt is a republican. Yes, he is on your side. But go on and keep spouting.

So why did you vote for him?

How do you know on what side I am? Bush is a republican too, but he is as corrupted as Clintons.

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.

Is that sort of like the so-called trick that people who listened to the Nixon-Kennedy debates thought Nixon won but those who watched it thought Kennedy won?

Do you think split screen technology is new?

God, I really fear for our country.

And, Lester Holt is a republican. Yes, he is on your side. But go on and keep spouting.

This is the answer I would pick out, coming after moderator Lester Holt asked Hillary Clinton how to defend against cyber attacks. Clinton responded that it was a serious threat, as evidenced by the Russian hacks of American institutions including the Democratic National Committee.

Then it was Trump's turn. Take this in your hands. Look at it.

As far as the cyber, I agree to parts of what Secretary Clinton said. We should be better than anybody else, and perhaps we're not. I don't think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC. She's saying Russia, Russia, Russia, but I don't — maybe it was. I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, okay?

You don't know who broke in to DNC.

But what did we learn with DNC? We learned that Bernie Sanders was taken advantage of by your people, by Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Look what happened to her. But Bernie Sanders was taken advantage of. That's what we learned.

Now, whether that was Russia, whether that was China, whether it was another country, we don't know, because the truth is, under President Obama we've lost control of things that we used to have control over.

We came in with the Internet, we came up with the Internet, and I think Secretary Clinton and myself would agree very much, when you look at what [the Islamic State] is doing with the Internet, they're beating us at our own game. ISIS.

So we have to get very, very tough on cyber and cyber warfare. It is — it is a huge problem. I have a son. He's 10 years old. He has computers. He is so good with these computers, it's unbelievable. The security aspect of cyber is very, very tough. And maybe it's hardly doable.

But I will say, we are not doing the job we should be doing. But that's true throughout our whole governmental society. We have so many things that we have to do better, Lester, and certainly cyber is one of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

But your 7 year old might also have a computer and be really good on it. Because then you could be qualified for President!

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

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.

Anonymous wrote:

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 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.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

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?