Who won the debate?

[JBark]

And, where did you fabricate that link from? The Clinton News Network link from the article?

Why is it no one hears him inhaling on the mike at his live speeches?

If you want to discuss the use of coke, you should ask Hillery about Bill Clinton drug use. http://www.nationalenquirer.com/cele...g-use-scandal/

Did you just cite the National Enquirer? OMFG!

[Biscuit]

I'm a little late to the thread, but I was early for the debates: early to bed. Both candidates are walking cluster****s. Both candidates will harm the country in different ways. So I saw no reason to stay awake just so I could get upset about the current state of political affairs, possibly to the point that I couldn't sleep.

[Escape2Victory]

Well thought out evaluation of the subliminal currents of American politics.

Most Americans have no idea what multiculturalism is nor all the other post modernist movements like intersectional feminism. Even the well educated have trouble grasping the corrupting influence Marxist ideology and it's disdain for liberal democracy has had on otherwise humanitarian movements. While the intellectual "elite" go about congratulating themselves for supporting the humanist candidate it amounts to little more than virtue signalling....[SNIP]

Hillary doesn't just represent the status quo but incompetence clothed in pseudo sophistication. If you believe things can continue as they have them voting for her makes sense but if you believe as I do that the circus and bread party is nearing it's end vote for anyone else.

I think this is right. Most people in their busy lives don't have time to think about these things in detail or they lack the language to express how they feel, 'angry' is the easy substitute.

There is a presumption that social liberalism is the majority view. I know our countries are not the same but you will struggle, after Canada, to find something closer. Recent polls have revealed that in fact social conservatives are the majority and by instinct the majority do not like concepts of mass migration from different cultures.

There was a time, when multiculturalism was in its pomp, the virtue signalling you allude to was fashionable. It is a movement running out of time and one that increasingly looks like code for attacking white people. Obama was its high priest, anointed to usher in a new dawn of post-racial politics. It has been anything but and Clinton, the heir, doesn't look like she will make any concessions to Obama doctrine. Does America's white population, and especially it's working class, want another 5 years of being disadvantaged morally, economically and socially, or do they want someone to rig the game in their favour instead? Have enough people seen through to the reality of what has been happening. That is the key question this election will answer.

[ljadw]

On 23 september (before the debate ), Real Clear Politics was giving the following polls :

Clinton :45 % / Trump 39 %

Clinton : 48 % / Trump 41 %

Clinton 44 % /Trump 40 %


On 30 september (after the debate ) ,the result was :

Clinton 43 % /Trump 40 %

Conclusion : there is no proof that the debate had any influence on the polls; thus it is totally irrelevant who won the debate (if someone won ) and the hysterical claims that Trump lost the momentum,etc, and that he lost the election,are very suspicious ( one has heard the same claims after the convention), they indicate only that the Clinton camp and the media are very anxious and even are panicking because Clinton does not succeed to build up a comfortable advance in popular and electoral votes .

[Salinator]

Did you just cite the National Enquirer? OMFG!

How about an interview with a former Bill Clinton lover?

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/sho...er-lover-says/

[Bwaha]

I'm a little late to the thread, but I was early for the debates: early to bed. Both candidates are walking cluster****s. Both candidates will harm the country in different ways. So I saw no reason to stay awake just so I could get upset about the current state of political affairs, possibly to the point that I couldn't sleep.

I had to listen to a local radio station that carried it due to the Loma fire. So in essence I was forced to listen to it. (Local evacuation seemed imminent.)

I'll be glad when this is over, I'm so tired of this constant political stuff. I'm secretly hoping for a bolt of lightening to wipe both of them from this planet... Meteor perhaps? Please oh gawd spare us from either of these two....

[JBark]

How about an interview with a former Bill Clinton lover?

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/sho...er-lover-says/

Now THAT is credible.

[craven]

I had to listen to a local radio station that carried it due to the Loma fire. So in essence I was forced to listen to it. (Local evacuation seemed imminent.)

I'll be glad when this is over, I'm so tired of this constant political stuff. I'm secretly hoping for a bolt of lightening to wipe both of them from this planet... Meteor perhaps? Please oh gawd spare us from either of these two....

I have voted against the other canidate before but never would I have ever thought I would be voting for the person lease likely to cause a train wreck

[ChrisF1987]

I think this is right. Most people in their busy lives don't have time to think about these things in detail or they lack the language to express how they feel, 'angry' is the easy substitute.

There is a presumption that social liberalism is the majority view. I know our countries are not the same but you will struggle, after Canada, to find something closer. Recent polls have revealed that in fact social conservatives are the majority and by instinct the majority do not like concepts of mass migration from different cultures.

There was a time, when multiculturalism was in its pomp, the virtue signalling you allude to was fashionable. It is a movement running out of time and one that increasingly looks like code for attacking white people. Obama was its high priest, anointed to usher in a new dawn of post-racial politics. It has been anything but and Clinton, the heir, doesn't look like she will make any concessions to Obama doctrine. Does America's white population, and especially it's working class, want another 5 years of being disadvantaged morally, economically and socially, or do they want someone to rig the game in their favour instead? Have enough people seen through to the reality of what has been happening. That is the key question this election will answer.

In the US social conservatism is not really used in reference to those who oppose immigration. Social conservatives (at least here) is used more to refer to the Ted Cruz style opposition to gay marriage, abortion, etc. Supporters and opponents of "mass immigration" are found in all fractions of the Republican Party.

The UK has a very different set of demographic realities but the US will be a majority-minority nation by 2050 - with or without "mass immigration" - it cannot be stopped. Even if Trump were to win and every last illegal immigrants was deported, and all legal immigration halted it would still happen. Non-Hispanic Whites (aka "White people") are already down to 59% of the population. White people are not having enough babies.

[Escape2Victory]

In the US social conservatism is not really used in reference to those who oppose immigration. Social conservatives (at least here) is used more to refer to the Ted Cruz style opposition to gay marriage, abortion, etc. Supporters and opponents of "mass immigration" are found in all fractions of the Republican Party.

The UK has a very different set of demographic realities but the US will be a majority-minority nation by 2050 - with or without "mass immigration" - it cannot be stopped. Even if Trump were to win and every last illegal immigrants was deported, and all legal immigration halted it would still happen. Non-Hispanic Whites (aka "White people") are already down to 59% of the population. White people are not having enough babies.

Note sure what your point is here - that America is majority social liberal? Well maybe and if Clinton wins, that majority is confirmed.

Unless you can provide a link, your 59% figures looks wrong. However, the demographic trends are running against whites, it is true. If Clinton wins, she will draw heavily on immigration from cultures that vote Democrat (everywhere but Europe) and accelerate these trends. These longer term trends are a story for future elections though. Sometimes something abrupt and surprising happens to break the long term trend. Who knows, perhaps in 2050 the hispanic southern States break away from the Union and aren't America anymore.

[Daemon of Decay]

Note sure what your point is here - that America is majority social liberal? Well maybe and if Clinton wins, that majority is confirmed.

Unless you can provide a link, your 59% figures looks wrong. However, the demographic trends are running against whites, it is true. If Clinton wins, she will draw heavily on immigration from cultures that vote Democrat (everywhere but Europe) and accelerate these trends. These longer term trends are a story for future elections though. Sometimes something abrupt and surprising happens to break the long term trend. Who knows, perhaps in 2050 the hispanic southern States break away from the Union and aren't America anymore.

The social conservatism element comes back into play when considering those demographics, however. If the GOP were to make concessions and reevaluate their image amongst Hispanics, they'd have a treasure-trove of voters: Hispanics are overwhelmingly Catholic and share a lot of common beliefs with the social-conservative element of the GOP (abortion, gay marriage, etc.).

[Gixxer86g]

Yes the massive media conspiracy, all getting together to omit any wrongdoing by Clinton and make up negative quotes by Trump. They even get a double to do all the sound bites where he makes his outlandish/ridiculous remarks.

Why doesn't that sound ridiculous when you have it going through your head? Why don't you think about it, toss it around, feel if it makes any sense. How does anyone get that much power...especially someone not holding an office. Someone whose husband screwed up royally and must have broken many good relations in D.C.

If, and this is a big if, she is slick than the same goes for Trump. He's a billionaire who has screwed many people, abused many women, been sued countless times, and has just as many skeletons as anyone, and the money to make the mess go away. He talked about making campaign contributions for the very reason of buying favors; that's the way it is done. I can't believe she would be capable of anything he is not...unless he is stupid. Look what he did about the beauty queen. He didn't deny that he abused her emotionally in public he just turned it around to make her look bad. It is her fault. She is no angel, she made a sex tape, etc. None of this should matter in a sane world but in his demented, abusive and sexist world these things matter. Of course she never made a sex tape, but that doesn't bother him, he'll attack her anyway.

The people that support him vary from the sexists, racists, fearful and xenophobes (and more) and they are all downright insecure. The fact that no living president from either party will support him should mean something and I have to wonder how you view that.

Stick to the subject. We're talking about the Clintons. The most openly corrupt people I've seen near the Whitehouse up to this point.

Do you honestly believe Willy and Loretta were discussing grandkids?

Concerning former presidents; they're just two sides of the same tarnished coin, they are the status quo, something Trump is not. They feel threatened by an outsider.

However, I do wish that outsider was someone other than Trump.

[GMan88]

Thoughts?

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/p...t-into-podium/

[craven]

Thoughts?

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/p...t-into-podium/

another conspiracy for the past 16 years post debate someone always making accusations

I think GW had an ear bud in one of them

cant rember who was supposed to have cheated in the last election debates

[ChrisF1987]

Note sure what your point is here - that America is majority social liberal? Well maybe and if Clinton wins, that majority is confirmed.

Unless you can provide a link, your 59% figures looks wrong. However, the demographic trends are running against whites, it is true. If Clinton wins, she will draw heavily on immigration from cultures that vote Democrat (everywhere but Europe) and accelerate these trends. These longer term trends are a story for future elections though. Sometimes something abrupt and surprising happens to break the long term trend. Who knows, perhaps in 2050 the hispanic southern States break away from the Union and aren't America anymore.

Secession is illegal. Period. Even if 100% of the population of say Arizona voted to rejoin Mexico it would still be illegal. Furthermore, there is a certain island that is 98% Hispanic that has over 95% of it's population supporting pro-union political parties. America is not about a race or a language, it's about ideals that go beyond someone's skin color or the language they speak.

The social conservatism element comes back into play when considering those demographics, however. If the GOP were to make concessions and reevaluate their image amongst Hispanics, they'd have a treasure-trove of voters: Hispanics are overwhelmingly Catholic and share a lot of common beliefs with the social-conservative element of the GOP (abortion, gay marriage, etc.).

IMO after this election, they are not going to have much of a choice except to change their positions. Sure, the hardliners will dig their heels in but eventually even they will throw in the towel.