CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Trump Vs Clinton Debate 2 - Who Won?
Trump Vs Clinton II
Did Trump do what he needed to do to live and fight another day, or did Hillary score a knock-out?
*******It appears we have some major league trollers down voting Trump supporters and upvoting Clinton supporters- SHAME ON YOU. As always, the left tries to game the system and cheat; it's just what they do.************
Looks like a bunch of them came along and down voted the Trump supporters, but it's clear Trump won last night, even the fly confirmed this fact; look at who it landed on: Hillary. It knows bullshit when it smells it. lol
Obviously you were joking when you talked about the fly as an indicator, but for the sake of argument can you clarify exactly how it was clear Trump won?
I actually think flies know when someone is evil because of their sensitive physical instincts. At least in this case, the fly was all over what flies naturally are drawn to. And in this case...it was fresh...
Obama actually killed the Biblical wrath of God fly, sprawling it to its death, and then. It was later found on his forehead and it later tried to get up his nose. Said "curse" fly has now found Clinton's noggin...
Take a handful of eccentril, ambitious, relentless supporters and have them give off the impression of her actually having support unlike her rallies that have dead space with no people at the events. I saw one where they had a sign that said for Hillary supporters to show up at such and such time. So the sneaky reporter snuck by at that time, and the coordinators began getting ants in their pants knowing their empty event was being filmed.
She never seems like she even knows what he's talking about. She's like "TPP is bad? Why? Me no know about trade agreements. Me only know how to steal and lie..."
Trump won. Why? He kept her on the defensive and at this point she's being incircled by the fact her public comments contradict her private comments. This has taken away her magic "Trump lives in a fantasyland" deflection.
What made you think she was on the defensive, and how are her comments about her private stances "encircling her"? Her approval ratings haven't moved at all, and unlike Trump, she isn't facing a party that is refusing to fund raise for her, being disinvited by the Speaker of the House, and is being called to step down by a number of sitting House and Senate members.
1)He attacked things that are political death on her part. She attacked his word choice. She married a man with worse sexual choice making. I could see the look of terror in her and Bill's eyes on several occassions.
2)Seeing we now know her private stances as per wikileaks, it's safe to say her supporters do not actually really know where she stands on any issue. On TPP she has said she's now against it. In wikileaks she has to push TPP or combat her own lobbyist support. So is she lying to them or to the American people. It's an issue that actually affects every one of us in a big way.
1)He attacked things that are political death on her part. She attacked his word choice. She married a man with worse sexual choice making. I could see the look of terror in her and Bill's eyes on several occassions.
Except he didn't. You might think they should have been political death for her, but they demonstrably aren't. The things that Trump said should have been political death for him, but it wasn't. Hyperbole is pointless.
2)Seeing we now know her private stances as per wikileaks, it's safe to say her supporters do not actually really know where she stands on any issue.
The same can be said for Trump. That accomplishes nothing.
On TPP she has said she's now against it. In wikileaks she has to push TPP or combat her own lobbyist support. So is she lying to them or to the American people. It's an issue that actually affects every one of us in a big way.
Again, both of them have taken a wide variety of stances on issues without any consistency. You aren't winning any points there.
1)We can prove Hillary has 2 CURRENT stances per wikileaks.Not a flip flop. 2 stances. A "private stance" and? A "public stance". She straight up renounced tpp in the first debate, yet wikileaks says she will get back to it once elected.
With Trump, you are making a liberal assumption. Flip fl
1)We can prove Hillary has 2 CURRENT stances per wikileaks.Not a flip flop.
Oooohh, you can prove she is a politician. How scary. Politicians telling their supporters one thing and lobbyists another is damn near the bedrock of our political system (Hence why we need to bring back public financing of elections to stop this shit).
2 stances. A "private stance" and? A "public stance". She straight up renounced tpp in the first debate, yet wikileaks says she will get back to it once elected.
No, wikileaks says that she told some people she would get it back. After what happened with Sanders, she wouldn't dare try, and would fail if she did.
With Trump, you are making a liberal assumption. Flip fl
Wait, directly quoting Trump is a "liberal assumption"?
You'll need to look at anonymous polls. They show he has a monstrous lead. The non anonymous liberal polls, well...we both know the media is as useful as a condom still in the wrapper. Look at her rallies. Why is she bussing people inand still having no one at her rallies? Youknow why. You drank the liberal koolaid.
Trump won. How do we know? The look on Bill Clinton's face when Trump went after his dirty sex scandal laundry. What is sad is I was surprised Trump only had a few of the victims. That list is huge. Look up Bill Clinton sex scandal on a google search. That well runs deep for Trump. He could introduce a victim a day so people could get to know them and just how many there really are.
Hillary lost when she proved she was not the champion of minorities by calling Muslims sand n-----s per wikileaks and frauded the people of Haiti out of billions in aid promised by the Clinton Foundation. Years later the place still looks like a hell hole.
Did not want to discuss the mishandling of classified information.
Did not want to discuss having an illegal server to bypass the freedom of information act.
Did not want to discuss her arming and backing ISIS.
Did not want to discuss Bill's sexcapades or her assault on his plethera of victims.
Did not want to talk about TPP which she rejects in public, at least this week, but supports in private per wikileaks.
Did not want to talk about Her globalist agenda per open borders per wikileaks.
Did not want to talk about the danger of thousands of Syrian refugees flooding into Europe and America causing violence, rape, and anarchy in every European country they enter to the point of civil uprisings to stop it in those countries.
Did not want to discuss the mishandling of classified information.
Did not want to discuss having an illegal server to bypass the freedom of information act.
She did discuss it, and appologized for it. There's nothing else she could have said about it while still being a smart politician.
Did not want to discuss her arming and backing ISIS.
She didn't.
Did not want to discuss Bill's sexcapades or her assault on his plethera of victims.
No shit, she isn't Bill Clinton.
Did not want to talk about TPP which she rejects in public, at least this week, but supports in private per wikileaks.
She did discuss it.
Did not want to talk about Her globalist agenda per open borders per wikileaks.
"globalist agenda" really is meaningless. She did discuss immigration and trade.
Did not want to talk about the danger of thousands of Syrian refugees flooding into Europe and America causing violence, rape, and anarchy in every European country they enter to the point of civil uprisings to stop it in those countries.
Probably because that isn't happening, and isn't going to happen.
This is the same Hitlery Rotten Klingon that gathered billions to "help the Haitians". They never saw their money, were furious, and now do not want her taking advantage of them again during their new tragedy.
Looks like Trump won. The liberal diehards are living in Never Never Land. Plus? I actually saw the debate. It was like nothing I have ever seen. Not only did he win, it was no contest. The look on Bill's greedy, snively, corrupt face was worth millions. Millions!!!!!
Trump won this debate, hands down. He did what he should have done in the first debate- practiced, and it showed. He had Hillary on her heels and called it like it was regarding her lying, email escapades, her lack of accomplishments, her trashing of victims of Bill's sexual exploits; it was a slam-dunk.
Everything considered Big Don came out the winner by a short head.
His, ''attack is the best form of defense'' strategy put Hillary onto the ropes early on in the contest and she was unable to slug her back into the scrap.
Her feigned indignation over Trump's machiso remarks about his female conquests made her look and sound childish.
She tried, unsuccessfully to give the impression that butter wouldn't melt in her mouth, or anywhere else for that matter.
Who does she think she's kidding?
Unfortunately, our Donald's remarks have made him unpopular with many female groups so I'm afraid he ain't going to win, but nobody is ever going to forget him.
A weird thing, just saying. Not attaching meaning. But man, its interesting.
Donald Trump was born on June 14, 1946.
If you move ahead 70 years from that date, that brings you to June 14, 2016.
Moving forward another seven months brings you to Jan. 14, 2017.
And moving forward another seven days brings you to Jan. 21, 2017.
And if Donald Trump wins the election, Jan. 21 will be his first full day in office. Also note worthy a day in the Hebrew Calander goes evening to morning. Trump would be inaugurated on Jan. 20, but he would only be president for part of that day.
So that means that Donald Trump would be 70 years, seven months and seven days old on his first full day as president of the United States.
And this would happen during year 5777 on the Hebrew calendar.
Trump definitely won what must have been the ugliest such debate ever to take place.
It was a pitiful and saddening sight observing the two contenders for the Presidency of the greatest and mightiest nation on earth down in the gutter squabbling like silly adolescents and having to defend conduct which was more or less the indefensible.
Pray tell me my American cousins, were these two the best the United States could come up with?
Hillary is definitely a loser and 30 years of political life shows she is. How many scandals have surfaced under the Clinton's ? What is Hillary's love for Muslims ? Maybe the money they pour into the Clinton Foundation ? Hillary is DISASTROUS !
She sells herself out for globalist money, then attaches this mindless global agenda to her migrant policies never fully aware that she's just turning the west into a third world hell hole.
How does she "sell herself out for globalist money", what do you define as "globalist money", what "global agenda" are you referring to, what "migrant policies" are you referring to, how is she "turning the west into a third world hell hole", do you know what the term "third world means", and why would she want to do this, in your opinion?
NAFtA and TPP benefit the U.S. in absolutely no way. She supported/supports both even in wikileaks of her "private speeches". This was in direct correlation with Chinagate of which the Clintons sold out America to the Chinese. This is why Trump says "we lose in trade with China.", "Nafta was the worst agreement in the history of agreements", etc. She got kickbacks from China, we signed a deal that gains us nothing, gains the Chinese a buttload, and loses us $800 billion a year in a trade deficit. A trade deficit that she publically refuted calling Trump delusional when he said she called TPP "the gold standard". She did say it. She did deny it. She called Trump a liar for calling her on it. She did say she'd support it in wikileaked transcripts from her secret speeches to big banks. She's guilty of treason. Period.
Because the longer it went along, the more we expected to see them role her off in a wheelchair or toss her a walker. Nevertheless, the Obama fly was an omen, she looked well beyond nervous, wikileaks has turned every word she hisses be an apparent lie by default. When you have a private position vs a public position...no one takes you seriously anymore. The end.
Because the longer it went along, the more we expected to see them role her off in a wheelchair or toss her a walker.
Based on what? There's no actual evidence that she has poor health right now.
Nevertheless, the Obama fly was an omen, she looked well beyond nervous,
Of course it wasn't an omen, just like how the bird wasn't an omen for Sanders. As for her looking "nervous", both her and Trump looked uncomfortable.
wikileaks has turned every word she hisses be an apparent lie by default.
Not really. It has show that on some policy stances (particularly trade), she projects one agenda to the public and one to the backroom deals. That's like American politics 101. It's a corrupt system, but her worst sin there is being indicative of our system as a whole.
He said everything Americans have been wanting to hear about these decades of Clinton scandals.
He had the guts to do what Romney, Mc'cain, Bob Dole, and many of these establishment Republicans refused to do. These boring phonies refused to take a stand against this sickness of political correctness, and say it like it is.
All these estblishment politicians are afraid to say anything that the liberal media would attack them for.
Trump says it LIKE IT IS! He's spending his own money on this campaign and is not beholden to big money corporations.
He is every thing this nation desparatedly needs and have always said they want.
But what we all know is that the majority of the electorate now wants someone to resdistribute our tax dollars into their lazy dependent pockets.
I'm not talking about the disabled, the elderly or the truly needy. I'm talking about the many able bodied people who refuse jobs to stay on the dole.
Our entire Government now worries about offending those who want free stuff. They should be worried about offending the middle class tax payers.
PolitiFact does tend to be marginally left-leaning, so some of the factchecks about Donald Trump especially will have harsher rulings than I think is fair. However, that is not discrediting all of their fact checks, because, as evidenced here, sometimes they get it spot on.
No person with a brainstem believes anything the manipulative liberal media says anymore. You think we'll ever see Bill Oreilly or Shawn Hannity as moderaters? Why no.
First things first, Bill O'Reilly should be put in a seniors home and locked away for the rest of eternity. Secondly, whenever faced with actual information, screaming "liberal media lies" does nothing. Just because you don't agree with something or it doesn't suit your agenda does not mean it is biased. If you can't realize that your candidate is a blabbering idiot then you're probably one yourself.
CNN and all the other "liberal medias" were completely reasonable with every other candidate in the GOP primaries, but you can't see what Trump says, does and promotes and think that no one in the media is going to speak up about it. It's not the media's fault that Donald Trump is such a reprehensible and controversial human being, it's his own fault. If he spoke in a manner that showed respect and intelligence the media would give him the time of day, but he doesn't, so they don't.
I can almost guarantee that you belong in that "White without a college degree" demographic that Donald so effortlessly holds onto.
So 1-4 moderators are liberals. Interesting odds. Perhaps Hillary can one day stand before a conservative firing squad playing 1 on 3 or 1 on 2 as Trump has had to do, and still found a way to win.
Sure I have. We know exactly who owns these networks, what their political affiliations are, who they hire, and can see which way they lean with these amazing things called eyes and ears.
You can't in one breath complain that there is no representation of FOX journalists in the debates (when Chris Wallace is hosting the next), and in the next breath say you have researched the debate moderators.
I can have 2 claims on one post. I know it may seem like magic, a mythological concept, a fairytale from Never NeverLand, but alas...I did it just the same.
First, the metric used is rather silly. Judging the ideology of a network based on their viewers ideology? In terms of Political Science, that's nonsense.
Second, from your article: The broadcast stations (NBC, CBS, ABC) and online news sites like Yahoo and Google have a more middle-of-the-road audience than other mainstream media outlets.
Debate moderators so far: NBC, CBS, CNN.
That's one somewhat liberal outlet and two moderates.
Whether or not an initial view of yahoo.com is slanted prove absolutely nothing. They have, historically, undergone periods where they were slanted to the left and to the right. Who gives a fuck, nobody cares about yahoo anymore.
And "that dream"? I directly referenced and quoted your source.
How many news stations are conservative? Thst's what I thought. Hillary could eat a live child, have less than 1% support, and Clinton News Network would be touting her decisive lead.
This entire thread of yours has been typical "the side I don't agree with is bad" partisan shtick, and I did prove you wrong earlier using yl the very source you cited.
Well the side "I don't agree with" wants us to deny our evolutionary instincts to determine threats per survival and? Just let in everyone. Hell, there's no threat! Apparently, only Republicans would have survived back in the day per survival of the fittest. Prove me wrong.
Trumps "lie" is "you've been fighting ISIS your entire life". Sure. It's not technically 100% accurate but there was no false intent meant in the statement. A Hillary lie is "We know Donald lives in a dreamworld...but I did not say TPP was the gold standard." But...
1)She did say that. I youtubed it.
2)And now she claims she's against it. But...in wikileaks she tells the lobbyists that she is for it.
THAT is what a real lie looks like. It's demonstrably 100% false, with ill intent of an orchestrated deception.
What is the point of this strawman? You are simply "debating" yourself, so if you have so little interest in actually discussing this, then why are you on a debate website?
Your candidate has a private position and a public position, meaning? You have no idea where she stands on any single issue. Knowing this, what exactly are her stances that you actually support?
"Her e-mails"?? State Department foreign affairs manual (5 FAM 443-5) Allows it's employees to delete those which are personal and to determine which are work related. "Messages that are not records may be deleted when no longer needed."
Her lawyers (not her), made those decisions and deleted them and there is NO evidence that she knew they were deleted after the subpoena was issued.
If Donald Trump has the right to follow government rules to keep from paying the taxes WE have to make up for, SHE has the same right to follow government rules.
Fact checkers have shown Trump lied about many more things than HRC ... who, it was said, "slightly exaggerated" a couple of points. The lies and "crookedness" came from Trump.
Doesn't it get exhausting trying to defend Hillary? Thirty years in politics, and yet she claims that she did not know what the "C" on classified files stood for. What, is she an idiot? Was that really her excuse? Sowwy, I dumb. Actually, that phrase is more fitting for anybody who believes her mind-numbing, pneumonia-inducing, bullshit excuses. I haven't received much classified info in my life, but I imagine upon initial review, I'd be able to tell whether or not the info should be shared with non-authorized individuals, "C" or not.
Let's not pretend she is a good candidate. She's not. She's probably the most scandalous candidate of your lifetime, and certainly mine... Although, her husband was pretty scandalous, with his impeachment and whatnot.
It makes me wonder how many things she'll "not understand" or "not know", then screw up beyond repair when/if President.Hillary: "Well...I didn't know the button would fire nukes at Russia."
Hillary has the face of a woman with a very short fuse. Look at her eyes. I mean, I know that isn't a convincing argument, but you really can tell a lot about a person by looking at them.
It seems like it would be very exhausting. The reason I think it is not exhausting is that most of them are not actually aware of her scandals or how they have destroyed and weakened this great country.
Chinagate? Helped the Chinese. Hurt us. She got rich.
Emailgate? She's literally guilty of treason against the United States. She leapfrogged the freedom of information act. She got rich.
Haiti? She gathered up billions to help Haiti. They never saw the money and are furious.
etc etc
And it goes all the way back to when she was 27 where her boss said, and I quote, "She is untrustworthy and a liar..."
Most Hillary supporters seem to think they're intellectuals, even though they're not. They are the embodiment of the know-it-all teen, despite the fact that most of them are adults. But more importantly, they are brainwashed. I don't like saying that about Americans, but they are. Otherwise, why would they support a scripted politician whose personal beliefs contradict her public "beliefs, who shit-talks a man for being a womanizer while remaining married to a womanizer herself. She has been involved in numerous scandals, some of which carried the possibility of prison time (for treason of all things). She also accepts millions of dollars from foreign powers and others for giving speeches, yet despite being wealthy beyond most peoples dreams, does not put any money towards her own campaign, unlike Trump who funded most of his himself.
I could go on all day about the disgusting human being that is Hillary Clinton. People who support her should truly be ashamed of themselves.
How have you been? I think I remember us never agreeing, but that's really the ideal relationship for a debate site, isn't it? Figured I'd drop by and see what's new.
nothing stands out as memorable so we couldn't have disagreed too vehemently. glad to have more people - even if you're in a Trump phase (lots of people are more disappointed with the choices this year compared to years past.)
Meh, my college semi-liberal hippy days are behind me.
I think we have gotten a good look at the massive political corruption and MSM bias this election, and like it or not, Trump had a lot to do with bringing that to light. We've learned just how dirty the establishment is, Republican and Democrat, and we now have the opportunity to elect an individual that is outside the establishment. If we want change, he is literally are only possible option at this point. He's far from perfect, but he is the most human candidate we have probably ever seen. He's unscripted and untouched by the corruption found within the inner circles of our government. Yes, this means he does not have the political background, but a fresh start is the only way we can come anywhere close to fixing this broken system. Plus, it's not like he won't be running the nation without help.
Hillary is the embodiment of a dirty politician. It's as if she were pulled from a movie. She talks the same old talk, but comes with the added bonus of endless political scandals. Trump has scandals, but he doesn't have political scandals.
However, on top of all that... I agree with most of what Trump says, and it certainly is possible that he's full of shit and will keep none of his promises, but guarantees don't exist in any presidential race, do they? We can't say that Clinton will fulfill more promises than Trump, unless we're psychic, but we can consider how genuine they seem, and personally, I think the guy who funds most of his own campaign and does not rely on a script comes across much more reliable than a multi-millionaire who can't remember her own policies without preparing and does not put any of her millions of dollars into her own campaign.
Horrible analogy. Trump himself is outside of the political establishment, but he'll be working alongside experienced politicians.
Here's a better analogy: You have a newcomer surrounded by experienced dentists, who thinks he can fix your teeth. Then you have a dentist with a lousy track record, who has faced one dental scandal after another. Do you choose the dentist with the clean sheet, or the one with a history of fuck ups?
What you got is somebody who aspires to be a great dentist, and then somebody who should have been banned from the dental field, yet seeks a promotion.
Working alongside experienced politicians while completely ignoring any advice they give doesn't improve anything.
So, you have a construction worker surrounded by experienced dentists - and the construction worker derides experienced dentists and has so far ignored all information from experienced dentists.
An you have a very experienced dentist who has a lot of lousy yelp reviews most (if not all) of which were falsely submitted by her competition.
Dentist or construction worker - that's the choice.
Hold on, let's come back to reality. Falsely submitted? Jesus Christ, man! She has an endless list of scandals, many of which are directly fueled by her actions. She potentially committed treason, but we don't know for sure because she deleted 33,000 emails after receiving a subpoena.
Don't defend her. She's so blatantly corrupt that she seems like a movie character. It's unreal. If you want to debate who is better for the future of our nation, fine, but arguing that she is not corrupt is idiotic and lacks common sense.
Just saying scandal after you say someone's name doesn't make them involved in a scandal. Most of the "endless list of scandals" have amounted to nothing.
It's unreal.
Indeed - most of it is unreal. People have her going around murdering dozens of people - committing treason, etc., etc. "like a movie character"...
If you had hundreds of well-connected, well-financed enemies that sought to destroy your reputation and career for decades, and in those decades they could find nothing worth prosecuting - would that make you highly scandal-prone - or far less scandal-prone than most people?
She is less charismatic than Bill or Obama, but she is right on policy - and Trump is not only wrong on policy - to the extent that he has any; he has the opposite of Presidential temperament, is just as corrupt if not more, alienates Americans and our allies and emboldens our enemies.
Liberals don't care about the emails or Trump's comments. It's all a guise for political gain, a push of a globalist worldview over nationalism, mainly...social control.
Wait, you actually believe that tens of millions of people from all walks of life are united in a cynical desire for political control to the extent that they fake an entire political ideology?
"He later claimed to be the first Jewish President."
No - he didn't.
--------
"Earlier this week, I was actually interviewed by one of your members, Jeff Goldberg. (Applause.) And Jeff reminded me that he once called me “the first Jewish President.” (Laughter.) Now, since some people still seem to be wondering about my faith -- (laughter) -- I should make clear this was an honorary title. (Laughter.) But I was flattered."
I believe the group is following someone who actually detests their ideology per her actual actions, votes, and private speeches, per not being aware of what her "private worldview" actually is.
Yeah check out snopes. Their main writer was a liberal tabloid writer on steroids before joining. And? The owners of snopes look like no baking soda has hit those teeth in many a decade.
And usually their fact checker needs fact checked. Clinton News Network isn't a fact checker. This is the same network that uses green screen in studio to look like its crews are in war zones.
She would have had Hitler and Stalin defending her if she could. Or...I could be wrong.. perhaps even Hitler wouldn't be able to stand that fly attracting stench..
The whole system is being gamed. The sheeple are supporting a woman who is opposite of everything she says in public per wikileaks. The President is mocking Trump's supporters, and all while the world is warning us that our President is a terrorist and creator intentionally of ISIS. Hillary could eat a live baby on tv and they would bow before her. It's become a mindless zombie cult.
Sadly I don't think liberals will ever wake up. They are busy watching the View and MSNBC while ignoring how liberalism has demonstrably destroyed and divided Europe.
I've noticed that, too. The liberal elites want to pattern our country after Europe, but they seem to have a blind eye to the reality of whats happening there.
There's a big difference between stating not fully accurate comments and lying. Hillary lies, meaning? She makes up a deliberate, demonstrably false narrative with intent of knowingly lying.
A Trump "lie", is "Hillary has been fighting ISIS her entire adult life". Sure technically not fully true, but just a mis-speak based on emotion.
I mean. It's more that Trump lost rather than Hillary won. He did not do well enough to make up for the losses he suffered from the recently leaked video from 2005 in which he brags about his failed seduction of a married woman and his penchant for sexual assault. Instead of addressing this issue he made the attempt to associate Hillary with Bill Clinton's alleged mistreatment of women. It seemed like he was trying the adolescent excuse: "He did it too! Why am I the only one being punished?"
As far as the rest of the debate went it became painfully apparent how easily Trump was distracted and how thin skinned he is. Any question of which he was not the first to answer he was unable to resist going off topic to bring the conversation to faults of his opponent or the current administration. The very first question was about the conduct of the nominees as role models for children and he changed the subject to "we don't win anymore." When he was asked if he has committed sexual assault his answer was "Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton, no I haven't, Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton."
The worst low for Trump was his announcement that he would appoint a special prosecutor to look into Hillary's email scandal and that she would be in jail if he were president. The devolution of our political culture to the status of an Eastern European democracy is now complete.
I don't think anyone actually cares. Liberals defended Bill Clinton like a mantra prior to the days of Trump saying that Bill's sexual choices had nothing to do with his ability to be President. The politicians that drop him then bounce back. Any "drops" are the politics of them not being sure whether supporting him publically is good or bad for their own career. Cruz was gone then back, then gone then back. It's meaningless. The people were unmoved.
so.....Since when do liberals think what you do and say sexually behind closed doors is anyone else's business or has anything to do with politics. I smell bs....deluxe...
I can't speak for liberals since I lean more libertarian but I will say that it is unacceptable for Trump to be a role model in any way for this country's youth. Personally I find his racist remarks regarding the Indiana judge and his blanket ban on Muslims more offensive than this episode but I'll take anything I can as ammunition against Trump.
So how did you feel when Hillaty referred to Muslims as sand n-----s per wikileaks and frauded Haiti out of billions of dollars of promised aid, role modelesque?
So my preference for president goes like this: Kasich, Paul, Jeb, Hillary, then Johnson and Sanders with the other republicans, Trump and Jill Stein tied with boothead man for last. So it's not like I'm a Hillary supporter, its more that I'm a Never Trump person. He reminds me too much of Putin and other strong men that have destroyed democracies in other countries.
Trump's comments on the Indiana judge have been spun by the left. He was saying he couldn't fairly adjudicate his case because of conflict of interest; the judge had an association with La Raza who has an anti-border wall position which is opposite of Trump's position.
I'm sorry, but you are just being stupid. The links to his site do not make him a member of it, and the fact that they are two different, distinct organizations that do two different, distinct things and are made up of different, distinct people means that it is most certainly not a distinction without a difference.
The lengths you go to try to apologize for this demagogue are incredible.
The problem with that is no one knows what you are talking about. Brietbart may have covered the story you are talking about but no one else did. I hardly think anyone could say Hillary is losin at this point, Trump is hemorrhaging republicans on a unprecedented scale.
I sometimes wonder if Trump lanned it this way. The tape came out? Now he can legitimize going after Bill and her cover up concerning sexual misconduct. And their's is worse. The Republican establishment ejects? A sign to Bernie supporters that Trump is the anti establishment candidate. And as people chew on his lewd comments vs what the Clinton's actually DID, common sense begins to get a comparable taste. And as what he said fades, what the Clintons did cannot. You don't forget rape scandal in a month. You do forget lewd comments pretty quickly. And she begins to become the rape scandal candidate as wikileaks dismantles every bit of credibilty she ever had.
Well if he planned it he is an idiot. The tape completely delegitimizes his accusations against the Clintons. He looks desperate.
As if Bernie supporters, the biggest supporters of PC nonsense, are going to support Donald Trump. The media doesn't really care about the Wikileaks stuff because Trump's implosion is so much more interesting.
If he really wants to win, he has to become the boring one and let the spotlight fall on Hillary. Which is hard to see happening since even if Kellyanne Conway gets him under control, the chance that another tape will come out and shift the attention back to him is extremely likely. I imagine there are a couple tapes that are being saved for the last two weeks of the election for just this purpose.
I disagree. Now that establishment Republicans are bailing, the Bernie Supporters can see there is only one clear anti-establishment candidate left. And now? People will forget his "lewd comments". It's forgettable. They will not forget multi rape scandal and cover ups. And with WikiLeaks showing there is zero credibility to anything Hillary says, having a private policy vs a public policy, only the most mindless of sheeple will be able to support her.
The Bernie Sanders supporters are irrational enough to believe that Jill Stein has a chance. They are also the least dependable voting block. At least old racist republicans show up. Young people just can't be bothered to vote. So even if they preferred Trump to Hillary, it seems unlikely that it will make any difference on Election Day.
eah....it's beginning to look as if Trump will probably have to withdraw as the GOP candidate. He is self-destructing worse and worse every day. Last night's debate proved there is no way in Hell this idiot can ever by President.
Mark my words...he will go down in history as a joke. They'll probably even invent a term after him, like "Trumpian" for when some future candidate says something totally outlandish that proves him to be unworthy of office.
This is how insanely bad Trumpy is. Among his gaffs Sunday night....
suggesting that as president he would jail his opponent; defend Vladimir Putin and Russia over the hacking of the U.S. election;
praise brutal Syrian tyrant Bashar Assad;
admit to not paying federal income tax; and rebuke his own running mate for daring to criticize Russia over the indiscriminate bombing of Syrian civilians.
That's a very partial list.
Trump also lied with enthusiastic regularity, again saying he opposed the second Iraq war before it started (he didn't), claimed his opponent would jack up the tax rate on the middle class (she says she won't) and protested that he did not Tweet at 3 a.m. that people should check out a sex tape featuring a former Miss Universe (he did).
And never mind that Trump spent the first portion of the debate apologizing for a video leaked over the weekend in which he grotesquely bragged about his ability to commit sexual assault because he's a "star." Diving deeply into the gutter, Trump tried to turn the video into a bizarre bank shot attack on Clinton by bringing to the debate women who claim former President Bill Clinton sexually abused them.
Wow...what a douche bag. I will be happy when he resigns soon. I am guessing in about two weeks or so.
If you think Trump will resign, you are terribly misinformed or not informed on Trump. He's an entertainer and a fighter. He'll toss a grenade into politics and set the house on fire as he leaves if she beats him. That's his style. He's playing the biggest game of "you're hired you're fired" ever seen in the history of tv.
Assad is like Sadaam, not good but not replaceable. The people he is fighting are worse. This administration's policy of overthrowing governments is suicide and has destabilized the area. Russia is trying to prevent the anarchy and chaos the U.S. is so well known for creating. They are tired of having to fill our vacuums. This is the one time in recent history that Russia is in the right. Obama is going to start WWIII over trying to protect ISIS and overthrow yet another government, meanwhile Obama is giving us over to the United Nations. It will not be long and we will no longer be a sovereign nation.
Or? We can go by the naturalistic answer, meaning?
1)The anonymous non liberally biased polls say she's not only getting beat, but getting blasted.
2)His rallies are huge. Her rallies are tiny with no support, and sheactually is bussing in the people in her tiny crowds. Either she has no actual substancial support and we are being fed a false narrative on said issue, or...her "supporters" may not care that much.
3)What we know with Trump is his supporters actually show up and vote and in record numbers.
Literally every single poll on there with the exception of USC Tracking has Clinton with a wide lead.
And USC Tracking notes very clearly that their polls use a different algorithm than the others, e.g bases things on which party's candidates the respondents voted for in previous elections, which is a mistake in an election where people are ditching party affiliation in droves.
2) The size of rallies is irrelevant to a candidate's success. Clinton is among many leaders in the past and present who is simply not trying to maximize rally attendance, instead relying on micro-management and organization. Recent examples of people who won elections despite low rally turnout - Justin Trudeau of Canada, Barack Obama (2012), George W. Bush (2004).
The best predictor of a candidate's success in history has been, sorry, polling. It has evolved over time for that very purpose.
3) What we know about Clinton is that her supporters are everyone else.
Trump is a clear victor in every anonymous poll I have seen. Why does it matter you ask? Well...we have a new phenomenon this time. Liberal Nazis have used a smear campaign to label anyone who openly supports Trump as homophobic, sexist, racist, thus his people are shamed into only declaring allegiance to him anonymously. Thus? The anonymous polls tell the story. ABC, CNN, etc polls are? One lie spun upon another lied, heaped upon even more lies.
Clinton, and I already elaborated on FromWithin's debate of what he would be saying if he had been the debater in the 2nd debate.
But what you keep seeing demonstrated on this site is the Trump supporters absolutely refuse to acknowledge any scenario where he is behind or loses, and in that respect they're no different than the RNC website which declared Pence the winner even before the VP debate had started.
Trump went on the attack, appeasing his core supporters. But he bungled answering any questions on the topics asked, shared no plans or policies of his own, looked absolutely uncomfortable much of the time, and had insufficient answers to his sexist and other comments. His core supporters are not nearly enough votes to elect him, and he made no progress on gaining more. And fact checkers (see other debate I referenced) have already given almost all the confirmed truth to Clinton for that debate.
The same fact checker who interrupted Trump to fact check him letting him know that stop and frisk was "unconstitutional? Snopes, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC? All liberal diehards who will spin so called "fact checks" to direct a liberal narrative. If you are getting your news from mainstream media you probably do not know the Russians put up anti air defense in Syria to attack the U.S. and that wikileaks proved the media is bought off.
Conservatives label everything that isn't conservative as instead liberal and biased. I'll ask you what I've asked previously on this site. Can you give me a list of 10 publications I can get my news from which are neither liberal leaning nor conservative leaning? Seriously. Who is fair? Tell me.
No one. So quit drinking the koolaid and find out for yourself. You want to know about the email scandal? Actually watch or listen to the testimonies. It'll make your skin crawl.
You want to know what "lewd comments" Trump made 12 years ago? Actually listen to the audio.
You want to know about Obama's worldview? Read his books. I did. Scary stuff.
And I often do. In fact I'm usually the person on this site who picks political poll claims apart after reading the actual poll data. Yet that doesn't mean that not a single scrap of credible published news is out there. Nor does it help when you're essentially saying anything people quote on a debate website for documentation is automatically all trash.
The American media is a government puppet propaganda machine. Go check out foreign mews. You'll then begin to notice this magical phenomenon calleda blackout. I watched news on the Syrian conflict for years. Never saw it covered on American tv. We weren't supposed to know. The internet has made it hard for them to hold onto their mind monopoly, but still yet, if enough become informed? They'll shut the internet or be toppled depending on who moves first.
I do read foreign news sources, too, including BBC and the Australian. Their takes are not dramatically different from the mainstream US publications you're slamming.
Look, I'm not even denying media bias exists. Take all information with a grain of salt. But it's ludicrous to summarily reject any and all published information. And it's silly when some boost opaquely conservative propaganda sites as the only real truth and then cr@p on old standards like the NYT and WSJ.
America will be exactly the same whoever wins. The American people won't decide who will win, that part is already done by the Banks, Pharmaceutical companies and the NRA. Your screwed like the rest of the world.
