oooo and Reddit just trolling fools. Public online polls are the least trusted polls out there, lol. So easily manipulated. Heck Time magazine put a public poll about who should be Time magazine man of the year and Kim Jong-un won. Lmao!!!! This is why you guys are always wrong. You get trolled too easy.
[h=6]- SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 -[/h][h=1]ICYMI: GIULIANI: TRUMP IS RIGHT ABOUT ‘STOP AND FRISK’[/h]
Trump Is Right About ‘Stop and Frisk’
WSJ
By Rudy Giuliani
September 27, 2016
Click Here To Read
One of the strategies that helped bring about an 85% reduction in crime in New York City between 1994 and 2013 was the careful and appropriate use of “stop and frisk.” This practice dramatically reduced the number of guns, knives and other dangerous weapons, as well as illicit drugs, in the city.
But according to candidate Hillary Clinton and moderator Lester Holt during Monday night’s presidential debate, stop and frisk is “unconstitutional.” They are wrong. In Mrs. Clinton’s case, it’s the usual misrepresenting she does when she does not know what she is talking about. As for Mr. Holt, if a moderator is going to interfere, he should do some homework and not pretend to know the law when he does not. Mr. Holt and NBC cannot overrule the U.S. Supreme Court.
…
During my administration, the U.S. Justice Department spent two years examining stop and frisk and it filed no case. After continued use of the practice during the administration of Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly, Judge Scheindlin found that the volume of stops and the focus on the African-American community made the practice not unconstitutional in general but unconstitutional as applied. This is the distinction that is so important—yet was misunderstood by Mr. Holt and misrepresented by Mrs. Clinton.
During the debate, Donald Trump described the history of the case correctly. He said that after the judge decided the case, the city appealed and asked for a stay of the lower court’s decision. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in a scathing opinion, criticized Judge Scheindlin for improperly steering the case to her courtroom. It issued an unusual stay to allow the Bloomberg-Kelly form of stop and frisk to go forward until the court could decide the appeal. And in a rare action, it removed Judge Scheindlin from the case.
…
Donald Trump was right. Hillary Clinton was wrong. Lester Holt should apologize for interfering and trying so hard to help Mrs. Clinton support her incorrect statement that stop and frisk is unconstitutional.
Click Here To Read The Full Article
“Donald Trump Was Right. Hillary Clinton Was Wrong.” – Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani
Trump Is Right About ‘Stop and Frisk’
WSJ
By Rudy Giuliani
September 27, 2016
Click Here To Read
One of the strategies that helped bring about an 85% reduction in crime in New York City between 1994 and 2013 was the careful and appropriate use of “stop and frisk.” This practice dramatically reduced the number of guns, knives and other dangerous weapons, as well as illicit drugs, in the city.
But according to candidate Hillary Clinton and moderator Lester Holt during Monday night’s presidential debate, stop and frisk is “unconstitutional.” They are wrong. In Mrs. Clinton’s case, it’s the usual misrepresenting she does when she does not know what she is talking about. As for Mr. Holt, if a moderator is going to interfere, he should do some homework and not pretend to know the law when he does not. Mr. Holt and NBC cannot overrule the U.S. Supreme Court.
…
During my administration, the U.S. Justice Department spent two years examining stop and frisk and it filed no case. After continued use of the practice during the administration of Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly, Judge Scheindlin found that the volume of stops and the focus on the African-American community made the practice not unconstitutional in general but unconstitutional as applied. This is the distinction that is so important—yet was misunderstood by Mr. Holt and misrepresented by Mrs. Clinton.
During the debate, Donald Trump described the history of the case correctly. He said that after the judge decided the case, the city appealed and asked for a stay of the lower court’s decision. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in a scathing opinion, criticized Judge Scheindlin for improperly steering the case to her courtroom. It issued an unusual stay to allow the Bloomberg-Kelly form of stop and frisk to go forward until the court could decide the appeal. And in a rare action, it removed Judge Scheindlin from the case.
…
Donald Trump was right. Hillary Clinton was wrong. Lester Holt should apologize for interfering and trying so hard to help Mrs. Clinton support her incorrect statement that stop and frisk is unconstitutional.
Click Here To Read The Full Article
[h=1]Memo: Fox News VP reminds staff that online debate polls 'do not meet our editorial standards'[/h]
Sean Hannity discussing the post-debate fallout on his program Tuesday night. Fox News
A Fox News executive sent a memo to television producers and the politics team on Tuesday afternoon reminding employees that unscientific online polls "do not meet our editorial standards."
Dana Blanton, the vice president of public-opinion research at Fox News, explained in the memo obtained by Business Insider that "online 'polls' like the one on Drudge, Time, etc. where people can opt-in or self-select … are really just for fun."
"As most of the publications themselves clearly state, the sample obviously can't be representative of the electorate because they only reflect the views of those Internet users who have chosen to participate," Blanton wrote.
As the Fox News executive pointed out, users who participate in such polls must have internet access, be online at the time of the poll, be fans of the website in question, and self-select to participate.
"Another problem — we know some campaigns/groups of supporters encourage people to vote in online polls and flood the results," she wrote. "These quickie click items do not meet our editorial standards."
At least three Fox News hosts cited unscientific online polls in the hours after Monday night's presidential debate to suggest Donald Trump emerged as the winner of the political showdown.
Trump had come out ahead in a slew of unscientific polls, or polls in which the sample of participants did not accurately reflect the sample of viewers who watched the debate. Such polls are almost always discounted by professional pollsters and analysts.
The only scientific survey conducted in the debate's immediate aftermath was the CNN/ORC instant poll, which showed that viewers thought Hillary Clinton handily defeated Trump. Respondents to a Morning Consult poll released Wednesday also said, 49% to 26%, that Clinton bested Trump in the debate.
"News networks and other organizations go to great effort and rigor to conduct scientific polls — for good reason," Blanton wrote in the memo. "They know quick vote items posted on the web are nonsense, not true measures of public opinion."
Blanton further pointed out that instant/snap polls "are DIFFERENT" from online polls but "can be used on air — with caution."
"Fox News policy is to focus on non-partisan telephone polls (with both landlines & cellphones) that use live interviewers, and random digit-dial sampling techniques — a methodology that enables everyone an equal chance of being interviewed," Blanton said.
Since the memo was issued, however, some Fox hosts have continued to cite the online polls, often failing to even note such polls were unscientific and conducted over the internet.
Host Sean Hannity, who has led the charge citing the unscientific polls, continued to do so Tuesday night, after the memo went out.
"You've got this list of polls, Donald Trump wins," he said during on segment. "You watch TV, Hillary Clinton wins."
Brian Kilmeade, a host of "Fox & Friends," also referred to the online polls during an interview with a Trump official Wednesday morning.
"The online polls show you guys won in overwhelming margins," he said, a comment for which Trump later thanked him on Twitter.
A representative for Fox News noted both Hannity and Kilmeade are hosts in the network’s lineup of opinion programming. The representative also pointed out that Hannity has publicly disclosed that he has endorsed Trump.
Hannity, in fact, stirred controversy last week when he participated in an official web ad for the Republican presidential nominee. A Fox News representative later told The Washington Post the person had "no knowledge" he "was participating in this" and that "he will not be doing anything along these lines for the remainder of the election."
Trump frequently touted online polls in the aftermath of the GOP debates to argue that he won. After the Monday face-off with Clinton, he continued the pattern, repeatedly touting polls that supporters had flooded to designate him the winner.
Not only were those polls contrary to the scientific surveys conducted, but focus groups also overwhelmingly selected Clinton as the debate winner.
:nohead::hahahahah
- 12h
- 104,289
- 59
A Fox News executive sent a memo to television producers and the politics team on Tuesday afternoon reminding employees that unscientific online polls "do not meet our editorial standards."
Dana Blanton, the vice president of public-opinion research at Fox News, explained in the memo obtained by Business Insider that "online 'polls' like the one on Drudge, Time, etc. where people can opt-in or self-select … are really just for fun."
"As most of the publications themselves clearly state, the sample obviously can't be representative of the electorate because they only reflect the views of those Internet users who have chosen to participate," Blanton wrote.
As the Fox News executive pointed out, users who participate in such polls must have internet access, be online at the time of the poll, be fans of the website in question, and self-select to participate.
"Another problem — we know some campaigns/groups of supporters encourage people to vote in online polls and flood the results," she wrote. "These quickie click items do not meet our editorial standards."
At least three Fox News hosts cited unscientific online polls in the hours after Monday night's presidential debate to suggest Donald Trump emerged as the winner of the political showdown.
Trump had come out ahead in a slew of unscientific polls, or polls in which the sample of participants did not accurately reflect the sample of viewers who watched the debate. Such polls are almost always discounted by professional pollsters and analysts.
The only scientific survey conducted in the debate's immediate aftermath was the CNN/ORC instant poll, which showed that viewers thought Hillary Clinton handily defeated Trump. Respondents to a Morning Consult poll released Wednesday also said, 49% to 26%, that Clinton bested Trump in the debate.
"News networks and other organizations go to great effort and rigor to conduct scientific polls — for good reason," Blanton wrote in the memo. "They know quick vote items posted on the web are nonsense, not true measures of public opinion."
Blanton further pointed out that instant/snap polls "are DIFFERENT" from online polls but "can be used on air — with caution."
"Fox News policy is to focus on non-partisan telephone polls (with both landlines & cellphones) that use live interviewers, and random digit-dial sampling techniques — a methodology that enables everyone an equal chance of being interviewed," Blanton said.
Since the memo was issued, however, some Fox hosts have continued to cite the online polls, often failing to even note such polls were unscientific and conducted over the internet.
Host Sean Hannity, who has led the charge citing the unscientific polls, continued to do so Tuesday night, after the memo went out.
"You've got this list of polls, Donald Trump wins," he said during on segment. "You watch TV, Hillary Clinton wins."
Brian Kilmeade, a host of "Fox & Friends," also referred to the online polls during an interview with a Trump official Wednesday morning.
"The online polls show you guys won in overwhelming margins," he said, a comment for which Trump later thanked him on Twitter.
A representative for Fox News noted both Hannity and Kilmeade are hosts in the network’s lineup of opinion programming. The representative also pointed out that Hannity has publicly disclosed that he has endorsed Trump.
Hannity, in fact, stirred controversy last week when he participated in an official web ad for the Republican presidential nominee. A Fox News representative later told The Washington Post the person had "no knowledge" he "was participating in this" and that "he will not be doing anything along these lines for the remainder of the election."
Trump frequently touted online polls in the aftermath of the GOP debates to argue that he won. After the Monday face-off with Clinton, he continued the pattern, repeatedly touting polls that supporters had flooded to designate him the winner.
Not only were those polls contrary to the scientific surveys conducted, but focus groups also overwhelmingly selected Clinton as the debate winner.
:nohead::hahahahah
Sep 28, 2016 at 3:48 PM
Election Update: Early Polls Suggest A Post-Debate Bounce For Clinton
By Nate Silver
Filed under 2016 Election
Bethany Heck / Getty Images
Want these election updates emailed to you right when they’re published? Sign up here.
Every scientific poll we’ve encountered so far suggests that voters thought Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump in Monday night’s debate. In fact, some of them showed her winning by a wide margin — wide enough to make it a good bet (though not a guarantee) that she’ll gain in horse-race polls against Trump over the next week or so.
But so far, we’ve seen just two polls released that tested Clinton’s standing against Trump after the debate. They have pretty good news for Clinton, but I’d recommend some caution until we get more data.
The first poll is from Morning Consult, which shows Clinton leading by 3 percentage points in a matchup that includes third-party candidates — that’s a 4-point swing toward Clinton from the 1-point Trump lead that Morning Consult showed before the debate. In a head-to-head matchup against Trump, Clinton leads by 4 points, up from a 2-point lead before the debate.
The other survey is from Echelon Insights, and it shows Clinton leading Trump by 5 percentage points. In theory, that would be consistent with a bounce for Clinton, since she led Trump by just 1 to 2 points overall before the debate, based on FiveThirtyEight’s projection. But it’s hard to know for sure because Echelon has surveyed the race only once before — just after the Republican convention, when they showed Clinton leading Trump by 1 point.
Apart from these polls, the only other data we have is from the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times and UPI/CVOTER national tracking polls, but I’d discourage people from paying very much attention to them. It’s nothing against the polls themselves — in fact, I’ve defended the USC/LA Times poll’s methodology in the past — it’s just a matter of timing. Each poll uses a 7-day field period, which means that only about one-seventh of their interviews were conducted after the debate. I’d wait a couple of days before making too much of these surveys — until they consist mostly of post-debate interviews.
There are other reasons to be cautious, too. Polls conducted over a one- or two-day period, like the Morning Consult and Echelon Insights polls, can suffer from low response rates, since the pollsters won’t have time to recontact voters who they missed the first time around. That could plausibly bias the poll toward whichever candidate has the most enthusiastic supporters at the time of the poll, making it less representative. Many traditional pollsters prefer their polls to be in the field for three or four days, and we won’t see any results from polls like those until Friday at the soonest.
Another complication is that it can be hard to separate voters’ reaction to the debate itself from their reaction to the media’s reaction to the debate. By that I mean: Clinton has had some tough news cycles lately, so getting some better headlines could help her, and that could plausibly also affect the polls. Or maybe not, since Trump has a knack for turning the news cycle on its head.
One last admonition: When evaluating a post-debate bounce, consider whether the poll was an outlier before. For instance, the most recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed Clinton ahead by 6 percentage points nationally, on the high end of her range heading into the debate. By contrast, the most recent Rasmussen Reports poll had Clinton trailing Trump by 5 points. Clinton is more likely to improve her numbers in the next Rasmussen poll than in the next NBC poll, but that could reflect reversion to the mean as much as a debate bounce.
Overall, there are some tentatively positive signs for Clinton — but not more than that, yet. At the moment, our polls-only model shows Clinton with a 58 percent chance of winning; polls-plus shows her with a 56 percent chance. But our forecast models don’t make any special assumptions about the debate, and they’ll take several days to catch up to whatever impact it has or hasn’t had. You can track the latest polls as they’re added to the model here
Election Update: Early Polls Suggest A Post-Debate Bounce For Clinton
By Nate Silver
Filed under 2016 Election
Bethany Heck / Getty Images
Want these election updates emailed to you right when they’re published? Sign up here.
Every scientific poll we’ve encountered so far suggests that voters thought Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump in Monday night’s debate. In fact, some of them showed her winning by a wide margin — wide enough to make it a good bet (though not a guarantee) that she’ll gain in horse-race polls against Trump over the next week or so.
But so far, we’ve seen just two polls released that tested Clinton’s standing against Trump after the debate. They have pretty good news for Clinton, but I’d recommend some caution until we get more data.
The first poll is from Morning Consult, which shows Clinton leading by 3 percentage points in a matchup that includes third-party candidates — that’s a 4-point swing toward Clinton from the 1-point Trump lead that Morning Consult showed before the debate. In a head-to-head matchup against Trump, Clinton leads by 4 points, up from a 2-point lead before the debate.
The other survey is from Echelon Insights, and it shows Clinton leading Trump by 5 percentage points. In theory, that would be consistent with a bounce for Clinton, since she led Trump by just 1 to 2 points overall before the debate, based on FiveThirtyEight’s projection. But it’s hard to know for sure because Echelon has surveyed the race only once before — just after the Republican convention, when they showed Clinton leading Trump by 1 point.
Apart from these polls, the only other data we have is from the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times and UPI/CVOTER national tracking polls, but I’d discourage people from paying very much attention to them. It’s nothing against the polls themselves — in fact, I’ve defended the USC/LA Times poll’s methodology in the past — it’s just a matter of timing. Each poll uses a 7-day field period, which means that only about one-seventh of their interviews were conducted after the debate. I’d wait a couple of days before making too much of these surveys — until they consist mostly of post-debate interviews.
There are other reasons to be cautious, too. Polls conducted over a one- or two-day period, like the Morning Consult and Echelon Insights polls, can suffer from low response rates, since the pollsters won’t have time to recontact voters who they missed the first time around. That could plausibly bias the poll toward whichever candidate has the most enthusiastic supporters at the time of the poll, making it less representative. Many traditional pollsters prefer their polls to be in the field for three or four days, and we won’t see any results from polls like those until Friday at the soonest.
Another complication is that it can be hard to separate voters’ reaction to the debate itself from their reaction to the media’s reaction to the debate. By that I mean: Clinton has had some tough news cycles lately, so getting some better headlines could help her, and that could plausibly also affect the polls. Or maybe not, since Trump has a knack for turning the news cycle on its head.
One last admonition: When evaluating a post-debate bounce, consider whether the poll was an outlier before. For instance, the most recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed Clinton ahead by 6 percentage points nationally, on the high end of her range heading into the debate. By contrast, the most recent Rasmussen Reports poll had Clinton trailing Trump by 5 points. Clinton is more likely to improve her numbers in the next Rasmussen poll than in the next NBC poll, but that could reflect reversion to the mean as much as a debate bounce.
Overall, there are some tentatively positive signs for Clinton — but not more than that, yet. At the moment, our polls-only model shows Clinton with a 58 percent chance of winning; polls-plus shows her with a 56 percent chance. But our forecast models don’t make any special assumptions about the debate, and they’ll take several days to catch up to whatever impact it has or hasn’t had. You can track the latest polls as they’re added to the model here
Josh Jordan Verified account @NumbersMuncher We now have four scientific polls on who won the debate: Morning Consult: Hillary +23 YouGov: Hillary +27 CNN: Hillary +35(he erroneously said +25) PPP: Hillary +11
[h=6]- SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 -[/h][h=1]TRUMP CAMPAIGN RAKED IN $18M AFTER DEBATE[/h]New York Post
'“We are grateful for the support of millions of Americans across the country. With this kind of energy and generous support behind us, we are going to have President Donald J. Trump in the White House,” ( Trump finance chairman Steven Mnuchin said in a statement).
The campaign claims the national fundraiser was coordinated by six distinctive teams: “Team YUUUGE,” “Team MAGA,” “Team IRREDEEMABLES,” “Team Deplorables,” “Team Trump Digital Fundraising” and “Team Trump.”
...
The teams were led by Mnuchin, Republican National Committee finance chairman Lew Eisenberg, Jets owner Woody Johnson, Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, digital director Brad Parscale, vice presidential nominee Gov. Mike Pence, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus and Trump’s children Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump."
To read more, click on the link:
http://nypost.com/2016/09/28/trump-campaign-raked-in-18m-after-debate/
"Donald Trump’s campaign announced a huge $18 million money haul in the 24 hours since the first presidential debate Monday night — coming from small- and large-dollar donors alike."
'“We are grateful for the support of millions of Americans across the country. With this kind of energy and generous support behind us, we are going to have President Donald J. Trump in the White House,” ( Trump finance chairman Steven Mnuchin said in a statement).
The campaign claims the national fundraiser was coordinated by six distinctive teams: “Team YUUUGE,” “Team MAGA,” “Team IRREDEEMABLES,” “Team Deplorables,” “Team Trump Digital Fundraising” and “Team Trump.”
...
The teams were led by Mnuchin, Republican National Committee finance chairman Lew Eisenberg, Jets owner Woody Johnson, Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, digital director Brad Parscale, vice presidential nominee Gov. Mike Pence, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus and Trump’s children Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump."
To read more, click on the link:
http://nypost.com/2016/09/28/trump-campaign-raked-in-18m-after-debate/
[h=6]- SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 -[/h][h=1]NEWT GINGRICH: ‘ENORMOUS, HISTORIC VICTORY’ FOR DONALD TRUMP[/h]Donald J. Trump Campaign
:
Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, said the first debate was an ‘enormous, historic victory’ for Trump. Senator Clinton tried baiting Trump with personal remarks to no avail. He showed he has a standard of decency, something Senator Clinton failed to display last night.
:
Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, said the first debate was an ‘enormous, historic victory’ for Trump. Senator Clinton tried baiting Trump with personal remarks to no avail. He showed he has a standard of decency, something Senator Clinton failed to display last night.
[h=6]- SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 -[/h][h=1]TRUMP’S ‘WINNING TEMPERAMENT’ DOMINATED FACEBOOK, TWITTER- BIG LEAGUE[/h]USA Today
"On Monday night, Donald Trump boasted that he had a winning temperament — and social media went wild.
...
Facebook reported Tuesday morning that 18.6 million people created 73.8 million likes, posts, comments and shares related to the debate Monday. There were also 55 million views of debate-related Live videos on Facebook.
For comparison: There were 7.4 million people using Facebook during the first GOP primary debate in August 2015 and they generated 20 million interactions.
Four out of five people (79%) were talking about Trump on Facebook compared with one-fifth (21%) who were talking about Clinton.
Twitter announced late Monday night that the debate was the most tweeted about in history.
Trump’s winning temperament was the most tweeted moment. His comments on the controversial stop-and-frisk police practice came in second. The exchange between Hillary Clinton and Trump over their plans to defeat the Islamic State came in third.
Twitter on conversations about Trump nearly doubled those about Clinton, 62% to her 38%.
On Tuesday morning Trump pointed out that #TrumpWon was also trending on Twitter."
To read more, click on the link:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ing-tempermant-won-facebook-twitter/91157680/
"“I think my strongest asset, maybe by far, is my temperament. I have a winning temperament. I know how to win,” Trump said."
"On Monday night, Donald Trump boasted that he had a winning temperament — and social media went wild.
...
Facebook reported Tuesday morning that 18.6 million people created 73.8 million likes, posts, comments and shares related to the debate Monday. There were also 55 million views of debate-related Live videos on Facebook.
For comparison: There were 7.4 million people using Facebook during the first GOP primary debate in August 2015 and they generated 20 million interactions.
Four out of five people (79%) were talking about Trump on Facebook compared with one-fifth (21%) who were talking about Clinton.
Twitter announced late Monday night that the debate was the most tweeted about in history.
Trump’s winning temperament was the most tweeted moment. His comments on the controversial stop-and-frisk police practice came in second. The exchange between Hillary Clinton and Trump over their plans to defeat the Islamic State came in third.
Twitter on conversations about Trump nearly doubled those about Clinton, 62% to her 38%.
On Tuesday morning Trump pointed out that #TrumpWon was also trending on Twitter."
To read more, click on the link:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ing-tempermant-won-facebook-twitter/91157680/
[h=6]- SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 -[/h][h=1]DID DONALD TRUMP DECONSTRUCT HILLARY CLINTON WITH MARGINAL VOTERS?[/h]Washington Examiner
"One way to look at Monday's night presidential debate: Both candidates were speaking, time and again, to marginal voters. Specifically, to young Americans, and for a considerable time to young black Americans in particular."
...
"She's been doing this for 30 years," Trump said near the beginning of the debate, while talking about trade. The number's not quite accurate: Clinton has been a national figure for only — only! — 25 years, since Bill Clinton began running for president in 1991, but she was also, as speakers at the Democratic National Convention mentioned over and over, a public policymaker starting at least when Bill Clinton was first elected governor in 1978, 38 years ago. "And Hillary, I'd just ask you this," Trump said some minutes later. "You've been doing this for 30 years." There's no clear antecedent for "this" — Trump was riffing about energy, debt, trade — but the point was made again.
...
Much later in the debate, he chimed in on ISIS. "So she talks about taking them out. She's been doing it a long time." And near the end of the debate, he chimed in, "Hillary's has experience, it's bad experience."
...
Trump also went after her on flip-flopping, which is to say, sincerity. He brazenly predicted that she would push the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement she's currently and then recalled, accurately, "You called it the gold standard of trade deals." Young people, it seems safe to say, value sincerity and dislike candidates who switch positions for political reasons.
...
Trump missed a chance to skewer Clinton for her secret email server in response to a question on cybersecurity, but earlier, when moderator Lester Holt (otherwise mum on the emails) asked her to respond to Trump's mention of them, he said, "That was more than a mistake. That was done purposely. OK?" At which point he repeated the previous two sentences. "When you have your staff taking the Fifth Amendment, taking the Fifth so they're not prosecuted, when you have the man that set up the illegal server taking the Fifth, I think it's disgraceful"."
To read more, click on the link:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/d...-clinton-with-marginal-voters/article/2603043
"One way to look at Monday's night presidential debate: Both candidates were speaking, time and again, to marginal voters. Specifically, to young Americans, and for a considerable time to young black Americans in particular."
...
"She's been doing this for 30 years," Trump said near the beginning of the debate, while talking about trade. The number's not quite accurate: Clinton has been a national figure for only — only! — 25 years, since Bill Clinton began running for president in 1991, but she was also, as speakers at the Democratic National Convention mentioned over and over, a public policymaker starting at least when Bill Clinton was first elected governor in 1978, 38 years ago. "And Hillary, I'd just ask you this," Trump said some minutes later. "You've been doing this for 30 years." There's no clear antecedent for "this" — Trump was riffing about energy, debt, trade — but the point was made again.
...
Much later in the debate, he chimed in on ISIS. "So she talks about taking them out. She's been doing it a long time." And near the end of the debate, he chimed in, "Hillary's has experience, it's bad experience."
...
Trump also went after her on flip-flopping, which is to say, sincerity. He brazenly predicted that she would push the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement she's currently and then recalled, accurately, "You called it the gold standard of trade deals." Young people, it seems safe to say, value sincerity and dislike candidates who switch positions for political reasons.
...
Trump missed a chance to skewer Clinton for her secret email server in response to a question on cybersecurity, but earlier, when moderator Lester Holt (otherwise mum on the emails) asked her to respond to Trump's mention of them, he said, "That was more than a mistake. That was done purposely. OK?" At which point he repeated the previous two sentences. "When you have your staff taking the Fifth Amendment, taking the Fifth so they're not prosecuted, when you have the man that set up the illegal server taking the Fifth, I think it's disgraceful"."
To read more, click on the link:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/d...-clinton-with-marginal-voters/article/2603043
[h=6]- SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 -[/h][h=1]TRUMP DESERVES TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY AFTER SURVIVING ROUND ONE[/h]New York Post
"It was a silent statement that she, the mature adult on the stage, was showing the stoic forbearance of a saint against an unruly child.
But the unruly child didn’t cooperate with her plan. Donald Trump was a brawler from start to finish and played very rough, but was never wild, and was nowhere near the monster she needed him to be.
Maybe now she will take him seriously. She’d better if she wants to be president.
...
Chalk the mistake up to Clinton arrogance. As it did with Bernie Sanders, who almost grabbed the Democratic nomination from her, Clinton’s team never took Trump seriously. They assumed that general-election voters wouldn’t, either.
Even more amazing, they apparently still believe that if only they keep describing him as unqualified, the public will get on board and the Trump candidacy will collapse. Just the other day, Clinton asked union supporters, “Why aren’t I 50 points ahead?,” suggesting she still doesn’t understand why the race is even competitive, let alone a dead heat.
At the same time, her own problems — an image of being dishonest and untrustworthy — are not things she can fix or control. Her only hope is that Trump would come off as too risky for most voters, and the smile would be her way of saying, “I told you so.”
...
No surprise, she did benefit from the decisions of moderator Lester Holt. He asked only one brief question about her email scandal without mentioning the FBI investigation, and never raised the family foundation scandals.
Fairness dictated Holt should have pressed Clinton more, especially because he asked Trump about two hot-button issues: the Obama birther issue in the context of race, and why he hadn’t released his personal income taxes.
But even that imbalance ultimately might serve Trump. The test was survival, and media bias is fuel for his movement."
To read more, click on the link:
http://nypost.com/2016/09/27/trump-deserves-to-be-taken-seriously-after-surviving-round-one/
"Her smile betrayed Hillary Clinton. It was too long, too frequent and obviously planned."
"It was a silent statement that she, the mature adult on the stage, was showing the stoic forbearance of a saint against an unruly child.
But the unruly child didn’t cooperate with her plan. Donald Trump was a brawler from start to finish and played very rough, but was never wild, and was nowhere near the monster she needed him to be.
Maybe now she will take him seriously. She’d better if she wants to be president.
...
Chalk the mistake up to Clinton arrogance. As it did with Bernie Sanders, who almost grabbed the Democratic nomination from her, Clinton’s team never took Trump seriously. They assumed that general-election voters wouldn’t, either.
Even more amazing, they apparently still believe that if only they keep describing him as unqualified, the public will get on board and the Trump candidacy will collapse. Just the other day, Clinton asked union supporters, “Why aren’t I 50 points ahead?,” suggesting she still doesn’t understand why the race is even competitive, let alone a dead heat.
At the same time, her own problems — an image of being dishonest and untrustworthy — are not things she can fix or control. Her only hope is that Trump would come off as too risky for most voters, and the smile would be her way of saying, “I told you so.”
...
No surprise, she did benefit from the decisions of moderator Lester Holt. He asked only one brief question about her email scandal without mentioning the FBI investigation, and never raised the family foundation scandals.
Fairness dictated Holt should have pressed Clinton more, especially because he asked Trump about two hot-button issues: the Obama birther issue in the context of race, and why he hadn’t released his personal income taxes.
But even that imbalance ultimately might serve Trump. The test was survival, and media bias is fuel for his movement."
To read more, click on the link:
http://nypost.com/2016/09/27/trump-deserves-to-be-taken-seriously-after-surviving-round-one/
[h=6]- SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 -[/h][h=1]PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE ILLUMINATES VOTERS’ STARK CHOICE[/h]Wall Street Journal
"If presidential debates are supposed to illuminate differences and get candidates to engage directly and critically, this one did its job almost from the outset.
...
Mr. Trump, in turn, delivered his simple, even blunt formula for reviving the economy: “Our jobs are fleeing the country” because Mexico and China are stealing them, he said. “They are using our country as a piggy bank to rebuild China.”
He would fix trade injustices that politicians such as Mrs. Clinton have spent decades either creating or ignoring, he pledged. “You have had 30 years” to fix such problems, he told Mrs. Clinton repeatedly. Meanwhile, he promised that his tax cuts—big tax cuts—would do for the economy what Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts did for it three decades ago.
...
(Mr. Trump) pledged that he would release his tax returns when (Hillary Clinton) finds the 30,000 emails deleted from the personal email system she used while secretary of state. And by the way, he said, creating that private email system wasn’t a “mistake” as Mrs. Clinton has said, but rather done intentionally to hide what she was doing. Mrs. Clinton, he charged, is afraid to use the words “law and order,” while he is more than prepared to do so.
He made no apologies for his argument that allies, including Japan, have to pay more for their own defense, relieving the U.S. of the burden.
...
If nothing else, though, the debate clarified the very real choice, and the contrast in style, substance and background that this election has produced."
To read more, click on the link:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/presidential-debate-illuminates-voters-stark-choice-1474948751
"(Donald Trump) proclaimed himself ready to rip up trade agreements that the “hack” politicians love, and who would stand directly in the path of companies that want to move overseas. His opponent, he said, has both a bad track record and bad judgment: “Hillary has experience, but it’s bad experience"."
"If presidential debates are supposed to illuminate differences and get candidates to engage directly and critically, this one did its job almost from the outset.
...
Mr. Trump, in turn, delivered his simple, even blunt formula for reviving the economy: “Our jobs are fleeing the country” because Mexico and China are stealing them, he said. “They are using our country as a piggy bank to rebuild China.”
He would fix trade injustices that politicians such as Mrs. Clinton have spent decades either creating or ignoring, he pledged. “You have had 30 years” to fix such problems, he told Mrs. Clinton repeatedly. Meanwhile, he promised that his tax cuts—big tax cuts—would do for the economy what Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts did for it three decades ago.
...
(Mr. Trump) pledged that he would release his tax returns when (Hillary Clinton) finds the 30,000 emails deleted from the personal email system she used while secretary of state. And by the way, he said, creating that private email system wasn’t a “mistake” as Mrs. Clinton has said, but rather done intentionally to hide what she was doing. Mrs. Clinton, he charged, is afraid to use the words “law and order,” while he is more than prepared to do so.
He made no apologies for his argument that allies, including Japan, have to pay more for their own defense, relieving the U.S. of the burden.
...
If nothing else, though, the debate clarified the very real choice, and the contrast in style, substance and background that this election has produced."
To read more, click on the link:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/presidential-debate-illuminates-voters-stark-choice-1474948751
[h=6]- SEPTEMBER 26, 2016 -[/h][h=1]CONWAY: TRUMP SHOWED GREAT RESTRAINT IN THE FACE OF LIES[/h]Donald J. Trump Campaign
Campaign Manager, Kellyanne Conway said Mr. Trump showed great restraint in the face of Senator Clinton’s lies on stage. He displayed presidential virtue in spite of having no political experience.
Campaign Manager, Kellyanne Conway said Mr. Trump showed great restraint in the face of Senator Clinton’s lies on stage. He displayed presidential virtue in spite of having no political experience.
ointer:
