Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trump will "debate" like he always "debates"', meaning he'll always be on the attack, ladle on the insults and be very vague on any actual policy proposals.
Clinton will try to nail him down, unsuccessfully, and they'll exchange barbs and basically talk over each other and try to talk directly to voters.
The Trump supporters will be thrilled with every insult and juvenile put down that he throws her way and think he wiped the floor with her. The Clinton supporters will think that Trump's lack of decorum and obvious lack of knowledge is disqualifying in itself.
The media will fact check everything that is said and probably determine that what she says is more factual than what he said. The verdict from the media will probably be that she is more qualified, but is she too despised by too many voters to be electable?
The crucial audience for the debates will be white college graduates. Trump is mopping up with white non-college voters, but he's in danger of being the first Pub candidate to lose college whites since 1952. Those are the voters that are going to be crucial in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Columbus, Detroit and Milwaukee, and all across the country. There are still more non-college white registered voters than college voters, but the college voters, young or old, have historically had the highest turnout rates of all voters. The higher the level of educational attainment, the higher the likelihood of voting. The turnout rate for college grads in 2012 was 77% and for advanced degrees it was 81%. In the Republican primaries it was the non-college white that propelled Trump. That was enough because there is virtually no minority vote in the GOP primary. Making the safe assumption that Trump will do little better, and probably significantly worse than Mitt Romney did among minorities, Trump has to do better among college grads in the general election than he did in the primaries in order to have a chance to win. The debates are his chance to re-audition for those voters and I think they'll be looking for signs of stability and competence instead of insults and bomb throwing.
I personally know 3 lifetime Republicans who will be voting for Hillary, voting Democrat for the first time ever. The others are voting third party. They can't fathom having a loudmouthed, disrespectful jacka** as president and are even willing to vote for Hillary so that he will not become president.
I think people are underestimating how many disappointed and upset Republicans there are out there.
Really, the polls have been saying different. For every Republican you think is voting for Hillary there are at least 3-4 democrats and independents voting for Trump. That's why Republicans have voted in record numbers in the primaries and Democrats voting numbers are substantially down. That's because many democrats and independents can't fathom voting for a pathological liar that couldn't tell the truth if you asked her what time it is.
She's terrified of press conferences. How do you think she views debates?
She has entire decomposing reeking corpses. Must I go into all the incredible "jack" moves she has pulled which have come to light? I wouldn't let Hillary walk my dog out of my sight.
Clintons speech was more of less a third term of Obama in contend and delivery. Trump is already pushing the nonsense Clinton claim since she thinks she is Queen already.
She wants to expand Gov and lead from behind , while increasing taxes to pay for it all.
Really?
The first debate will put here in here place. That is if she is not in prison. Noth new here and no one lives are expected to get better if Elected.
Wait just on moment,???? Obama has failed polices.
Clinton will find out she can not play for both sides with being caught, which she already has!
"CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Clinton about this at the end of May. She responded that she had “done nearly 300 interviews just in 2016” and that it was “important to continue to speak to the press as I’m doing right now.”
In [Washington Post columnist Margaret] Sullivan’s view, that’s not enough. “She gets her message out in ways that are completely controlled,” she wrote. “But American citizens deserve better.”"
You apparently favor clinton and that's fine but looking at this a bit objectively, at the very least a presidential candidate should be open/available to the press in an open format often, not just in a "completely controlled" format.
Red flag time for those who look at this objectively.
ha, is knowing something about foreign policy ignoring rules and having highly classified info on a basement server and claiming to know nothing about it all? The fbi director calling her "extremely careless" about it all and beyond?
Yeah, but let's wait for her words to spin it all at the debates as something wonderful and not pay attention to her "extremely careless" actions in reality.
The hil bots are beyond funny as always.
You DO realize that there is a difference between a press conference and a debate?
Trump calls for a 'press conference" every time he gets a fart caught crossway. Many times no questions are taken but he still refers to it as a press conference. It's ridiculous
Let's talk, then, about careless. Are you aware of how many Republican military advisors have said Donald Trumps's words are SO CARELESS that he is unfit for office?
And you must not have watched her go toe-to-toe with Trey Gowdy and others on that committee. She's the one who was cool as a cucumber after 8+ hours - it was Gowdy who was sweating.
I would be very surprised if more than a very few 'Independent' thinkers, if any, would be swayed to the Dem side of the ballot to vote for Hillary this election, even if they were moved to take a chance on Obama in 2008 and/or 2012. I suspect in states where it was necessary to be a registered Republican to vote in the primaries, they registered there and have already moved back to the 'middle'. The Republican party itself - the 'establishment' - is no more beloved than Hillary or the Dems are, by many of us.
I just don't think that Democrats yet quite fathom the depth of support for Trump among the masses they so disdain. People who don't vote regularly .. people who never speak up publicly .. I think most of those will be voting and much more vocal this election and not because they want Hillary to win.
Some women may still see 'just being a woman' as a primary qualification for the presidential office this time round - but I am pretty sure even more women who have traditionally voted Dem may surprise you this election because not just ANY woman will do.
If women vote for just ANY woman and she messes up (and this one has even without being elected as President) ... female candidacy in general could be set back decades in future. I ask myself .. would I want THIS woman as my boss? As my mother? As my friend? As the person with the highest office in the land? And I cannot, in all conscience, because I care about America, say yes. I am pretty sure I am not alone in that.
And many of us (once again) 'Independents' don't even really see Trump as Republican anyway - nor do we much care this (or any) time, what banner anyone runs under (just as we really don't care what color anyone is despite how you want to label us). If he was still who he is and saying what he has been saying, but was a Democrat ... I think a lot of us would have voted for him anyway. Too bad the Dems didn't snag him .. but apparently the idea of a wall is only good when you put it around your elite group to keep the riffraff of citizenry out - and apparently the idea of a good 'job' is only important when it is the one Hillary wants. I am not voting for a 'let them eat cake' candidate and I know I am definitely not alone.
I don't think debates, no matter who anyone thinks 'won' (and whoever that is depends on what one's bias is to begin with - few people get swayed by this kind of political forum) will matter one iota, one way or the other.
Just my personal opinion though ... on verra .. in November.
"CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Clinton about this at the end of May. She responded that she had “done nearly 300 interviews just in 2016” and that it was “important to continue to speak to the press as I’m doing right now.”
In [Washington Post columnist Margaret] Sullivan’s view, that’s not enough. “She gets her message out in ways that are completely controlled,” she wrote. “But American citizens deserve better.”"
You apparently favor clinton and that's fine but looking at this a bit objectively, at the very least a presidential candidate should be open/available to the press in an open format often, not just in a "completely controlled" format.
Red flag time for those who look at this objectively.
ha, is knowing something about foreign policy ignoring rules and having highly classified info on a basement server and claiming to know nothing about it all? The fbi director calling her "extremely careless" about it all and beyond?
Yeah, but let's wait for her words to spin it all at the debates as something wonderful and not pay attention to her "extremely careless" actions in reality.
The hil bots are beyond funny as always.
Uh- this topic is on the debates, not press conferences.
If you want to talk about that, start a thread of your own. It's nothing but a straw man here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hillary doesn't have skeltons in the closet
Fairy Tale Politics.
