"Meh" is my reaction.... you know what this debate reminds me of?

[davidn3600]

This was billed as the "Debate of the Century" and 100 million+ viewers. and it will decide the election, etc, etc..

But the reality...It was overhyped. It reminds me of the Mayweather vs. Pacquiao fight.

(For those that don't know....Mayweather won the Pacquiao fight. He knew how to score the points to win. But it was boring to watch and many who put out a lot of money to watch it were disappointed.)

I know people will disagree, but I didn't see any knockout punch. Trump was Trump and Hilary was Hillary. Did Hillary win? Yeah. But she was supposed to. Everyone expected that. She controlled the debate. When Trump made pitches, Hillary hit a lot of singles and a few doubles, but I don't feel like she ever hit a home run. That can be OK. Singles can win a baseball game. But there is no point in this debate where I said, "WOW!!!" or "BINGO!!" On the other hand, Trump didn't do well at all. He chased every bait, and he missed several opportunities to get punches in because he got so off track so often. But he did what he's always been doing. That wasn't unexpected either. The guy is a blowhard. And everyone knows it.

It was ultimately a boring fight. Hillary Clinton easily won on points, it was a blowout. But it wasn't the TKO that everyone wanted.

The debate talked about a lot of things that I am not so sure voters are really that passionate about this cycle. Immigration was never mentioned. Race didn't get enough attention at all. They spent too much time on emails, tax returns, and birtherism. Having scandals in there is fine...it was just too much time on that for a 90 minute debate on how to fix our problems. This was supposed to be a debate about prosperity, security, and the future. Not much at all was discussed concerning infrastructure or education or student loan debt. I fault Lester Holt for that. His questions were lame. They failed to target the issues people ultimately care about.

Ultimately I don't believe that this really would have changed many minds in any direction. I think people watched and saw what they thought they would see and probably didn't get what they wanted. Not many details were revealed that were not already known and talked about. Neither candidate really put a human face to their policies. They ran off bullet points and failed to provide human details that can connect a voter to the plan. And even David Axelrod alluded to that on CNN. The early flash polls show Hillary clearly won, but not many minds were changed.

I understand many will disagree with me and will flame away at me. But just my honest analysis... I just wasn't that impressed with the questions/topics and feel they got too far off what people wanted to hear. Hillary won. But like I said, that was widely expected. The bar was placed much higher for her than Trump. So really his crappy performance won't have as much negative effect on him as it probably should. He's not a traditional candidate. And this is not a traditional election.

Again...just my $0.02. There is still 2 more rounds. Maybe those will have what people are looking for.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

1. I'm shocked you're downplaying this

Really, I am.

[obnoxiousdrunk]

5. Me too . +1 ... n/t

[stopbush]

2. Actually, this is a very traditional election.

To believe otherwise is to slurp up the RW spin that is designed to provide cover for their horrible candidate.

[Justice]

3. Meh for you but I thought she was perfect.

Clinton could have said more, but it would have been too much. She was solid, deft, capable. She is playing long game. 3 debates. Pace is important.

As you said, Trump chased every bait, and he missed several opportunities to get punches in because he got so off track so often. I was shocked by how bad he was - probably more than being impressed by Hillary.

Trump needed to change minds of a small sliver of electorate - he did not. He reinforced what people already believe. He doesn't need to sway his supporters - he needs to sway women (did not do that), African Americans and Latinos (did not do that). In fact, his worst moments were answers related to these voters - and Hillary's best moments were answers related to these voters.

[MFM008]

4. Did you happen to notice

She couldn't get a word in edge wise half the time.
Also the moderator wouldn't steer the conversation ?

[Glassunion]

6. Let everyone know what we can do in the future to bring the entertainment level up for you.

[Kingofalldems]

7. Not even a good try.

[True Dough]

8. You mention that they didn't address immigration

Based on your posts here at the DU, I'd say you are more closely aligned with Trump on immigration than Hillary, David. Would you agree?

[davidn3600]

11. Not sure that I agree with either one

Trump wants to build a wall and do mass deportations. I don't favor that. Too expensive. Too stupid. And impossible.
Hillary believes everyone in the world has a right to immigrate to the US. I don't agree with that either.

I just want common sense. Apparently that's too much to ask for. It's seems with these two candidates it's either the borders should be wide open and locked tight. There is no common sense. There is no middle ground.

[uriel1972]

13. The middle ground...

is not always the best solution. Sometimes one person is right and the other wrong. As for common sense, it seems to be the person's particular prejudice more often than not.

Building a wall and mass deportations, too expensive, too stupid and/or impossible, maybe, but what about inhumane and potentially lethal, don't those factors matter. Is your wallet all that matters?

[davidn3600]

14. You want the border wide open?

I dont favor the idea of just throwing open the gates and letting anyone in who wants in. Germany is doing that right now and Angela Merkel is finally admitting it was a mistake since her party is about thrown out by the voters. You want to do that here? Seriously? You think that's a good idea?

You got to have some element of control over who's coming in. The purpose of a border is security. You got to be able to control who's coming into your country that could potentially do you harm. I can't travel to any country in the world without a passport. I went to Europe last year and was asked for my passport a bunch of times when I crossed borders. Are you suggesting we shouldn't be doing that? That we should just let people roam around the Earth as they please? That's insane. No country on this planet lets you just walk in and set up shop. The world doesn't work that way. There is a legal and vetting process that must play out. And for many countries you need visas to get entry. That's nothing new. That's not a right-wing idea. That's how its always been!

There needs to be immigration reform. There needs to be a better path for immigrants to seek citizenship. Im on board with that. My cousin married an immigrant and went through that maze of paperwork and a LOT of money. There needs to be change there. But I'm sorry, I don't agree with a open border policy like what Germany and other European countries are doing. The United States has too many enemies for that. That's insane.

[uriel1972]

17. Okay...

I'm interested in this idea that Hillary Clinton wants to dismantle the US borders... I hadn't heard of it until you mentioned it.
I am far from suggesting that any country do away with the idea of sovereignty.

What I was trying to point out that calling for 'common sense' and the 'middle ground' is not necessarily a good thing and in a world which has shifted far to the right 'the middle ground' is basically Reaganism.

It also bewilders me that the wealthy countries in this world are so afraid of refugees when the overwhelming majority of refugees are housed in poor countries and are likely to stay that way. By all means have your checks and balances, I agree with that, but I would like to see compassion as well.

[True Dough]

18. Hey David, Politifact called and the news isn't good!

Hillary doesn't want everyone in the world to have the right to immigrate to the United States. That's a wild exaggeration.

Here's Hillary's stance on Syrian refugees:

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said Sunday that the United States should accept 65,000 refugees from Syria to help alleviate the humanitarian crisis created by the war there.

"We're facing the worst refugee crisis since the end of World War II and I think the United States has to do more," the former secretary of state said Sunday on CBS' "Face the Nation." "I would like to see us move from what is a good start with 10,000 to 65,000 and begin immediately to put into place the mechanisms for vetting the people that we would take in."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-u-s-should-take-65000-syrian-refugees/


In addition, this comes directly from Hillary's campaign website:

Enforce immigration laws humanely: Immigration enforcement must be humane, targeted, and effective. Hillary will focus resources on detaining and deporting those individuals who pose a violent threat to public safety, and ensure refugees who seek asylum in the U.S. have a fair chance to tell their stories.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/immigration-reform/


Oh, and let's not forget what's been happening with Mexico. Between 2009 and 2014, the net migration pertaining to Mexico was -150,000. That's right, over five years 150,000 more Mexicans left America than entered America. Doesn't sound like the floodgates are open except going south.

[Kaleva]

9. With Trump disemboweling himself, HRC didn't need to hit home runs.

These debates are more about not committing gaffes and errors then about hitting one or more out of the park. Hillary was clearly prepared while Trump appeared to be someone out of his league.

The debate did convince my Republican wife to switch from planning on voting for Trump to casting her ballot for Hillary.

[lame54]

10. Any manager will take singles and doubles any day

[Dirty Socialist]

12. I agree

I think Hillary won the debate on points, but it was not a knockout.

[geek tragedy]

15. this isn't a baseball game or boxing match.

it's literally impossible to have a debate knock a candidate out of the race.

we don't know how the debate will translate into numbers of voters yet, that will take several days

[davidn3600]

16. My biggest complaint as I noted is mostly with the questions and moderator

Holt was terrible at keeping the discussion on track and on schedule. And his questions didnt blow the socks off anyone. Once they started talking about tax returns and emails and birther stuff...I started losing focus. And if I was losing focus I am sure a lot of other people were also. DU obviously loved those exchanges because here are political junkies. But I have yet to find anyone in real life who gives a damn about who started a birther rumor 10 years ago. Seriously, is that even a discussion among average Americans?

My point is that the debate was what you expected, but nothing extra. On top of that, the moderator sucked. Did it move the needle? My prediction is that that Hillary will get a bounce by a few points by maybe pulling some undecided voters over. But this wasn't the "Debate of the Century" that it was billed as. Trump didn't gain any voters, but he also didn't lose any.

[eleny]

19. It was death by a thousand cuts

Fine with me since he has many faults. I don't need a knockout punch. I was glad to see her cause him to reveal the stench of his personality.

[LWolf]

20. I don't disagree with you at all.

A student asked to share her thoughts after watching the debate. I said she could if she could do so without bias, and that I knew that would be the hardest part of the task.

She said, "Clinton clearly has more knowledge, more experience, and much better debating skills. Trump knows how to rile people up."

I thought that was a good summation of the whole thing.

There wasn't any inspiration on that stage, but there didn't need to be; it was a foregone conclusion that she'd win.

[anamandujano]

21. The salient point is that it was all on TV and many voters introduction to what's happening.

They saw a doofus trying to debate a calm, well spoken, well studied, intelligent woman who is prepared to be our President.

So now you know.