The First Presidential Debate of 2016

Post Reply
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 12:41 am

The First Presidential Debate of 2016

#1 Post by ArgueMax » Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:43 am

The first topic brought up in the debate was "jobs". Lester Holt presented the opening question in a way that favored the Democratic party by making sure he gave good news about the current job growth thus painting the current presidential administration in a good light. This was one of many instances I found where I felt that this was not a real debate. This was a staged performance with rehearsed actors and the only performer who was not in in the fact that this was staged and rehersed was Donald Trump

The first thing Hillary said that stood out to me is that she wants to make "the economy fairer". This is troubling to me and should be troubling to everyone. Life is not fair. The role of the government should not be to make life fairer. The role of government is not to intrude and impact upon our lives. This is the ideology of The Hard Left. If you want a good reason why Hillary should not be the President of the United States, Hillary herself will give you those reasons. You only have to listen carefully.

When it became Trump's turn to talk about jobs, he talked about the international realities about American Jobs and the fact that so many jobs are leaving the country. Hillary never discussed this. Hillary's turn was taken up by her pitching her Left Wing Socialist agenda. But Trump did not. Trump discussed the fact that we are in a crisis and our jobs are leaving the country and other nations are succeeding more than we are and to our expense. Trump made more sense than Hillary. He specifically mentioned companies that are leaving the USA.

Hillary's response to Trump was claiming that Trump's plan is "trickle down economics", but it was not. There was nothing that Trump had said that should give anyone the idea that his plan he described is "trickle down economics". It seemed that Hillary was only looking for a reason to use the buzz words "Trumped Up Trickle Down Economics".

Hillary also did not make any sense. The Liberal mind seems to imply things without outright saying it -- because the idea itself is absurd. Hillary talked about how Trump's father gave him a loan. The implication is that this minimizes his success, but that does not make sense, and so Hillary never outright says it. That is not the only non-sequitur. She also pulled an appeal to emotion logical fallacy by talking about her father's work ethic.

Then Trump made a very good point. Trump said that if Hillary had good ideas and good plans, she had had thirty years to do it. This makes a lot of sense. It is troublesome to think that Hillary could have done something outstanding and noteworthy as a senator, but she did not. It is troublesome to think that Hillary could have done something outstanding and noteworthy as a Secretary of State, but she did not. In fact, John Kerry did more in about two weeks than Hillary did as four years as Secretary of State. Frankly, a Secretary of State can be thought of as having virtually president power. It is an important to note that if Hillary would really make a good president there would be many presidential accomplishments to her credit already. But there is not. In fact, he tenure as Secretary of State is riddled with mediocrity. Mediocrity and under accomplishments should not be rewarded. Hillary does not deserve the job promotion into the presidency.

Proof that Hillary Clinton did not accomplish anything noteworthy can be seen by simply reading a book written by one of her suppoters and someone appointed to work under him about her tenure as Secretary of State. Kim Ghattas' book "The Secretary" -- which is supposed to show Hillary's job as Secretary of State in a favorable light -- ends up being more about her, Kim Ghattas, rather than about Hillary because Hillary's list of accomplishments is too lacking to even fill the pages of the book.

What is more is the fact that Hillary did not want the job to be Secretary of State. This fact is outlined in Bob Woodward's book "The Obama Wars". Hillary did not want the job at all. She had to be convinced to take the job in order to pad her resume with international experience in a future pitch to run for president. She had to be convinced to take the job by her daughter and by her campaign manager.

Now, I ask you this. Doesn't this fit the pattern of someone who wants all the glory and power but does not want to work for it or earn it? Doesn't it fit the most negative stereotype of Hillary? Hillary wants badly to be president but had to be convinced into taking the job of Secretary of State where actual work and good decision making is required.

Hillary brings up the housing collapse. I do not see how this belongs in the debate. Donald Trump did not create the housing market collapse. This is something that has been gone over extensively and there has even been a movie made about it called "The Big Short". Coincidentally, this topic happened to have been brought up recently at a party I attended. I will repeat what I said at this gathering of friends. The housing market happened because of the sense of entitlement that Americans have in the USA and the fact that they feel that they should own a house even when they can not afford it. Shrewed and deceptive mortgage lenders took advantage of this and scammed them. So the housing bubble was not the fault of any politician or any political party. For Hillary to bring it up in the debate and suggest that Donald was a bad player in the event is not ethical. Hillary Clinton is doing what many Liberal Democrats like to do. She likes to pretend she is a one of the good guys in a stage play and the Republicans are the bad guy. This is called scamming us. She is playing us for fools. Hillary says "in fact Donald was one of the persons routing for the Housing Crisis. He said back in 2006, 'I hope it does collapse. Then I can buy some and make some money.' Well, it did collapse". This was a grossly unfair tactic and Hillary is appealing to emotion. She then quotes statistics of the number of persons who lost their homes. She does not outright claim that Trump had anything to do with it. But saying that Trump profited from others misfortune is a deceptive attempt to paint him as a villain.

Thankfully, Trump saw what Hillary was trying to do and immediately said "it is called business, by the way".

Next, Hillary fired off a cheap shot. She said that financial experts and analysts have examined both her and Trump's economic plans and they have concluded that her plan is better. This is very deceptive and it is frustrating to me because I know most Americans can not see how this is a deceptive cheap shot. You see, this is a logical fallacy called "Argument from Authority". Understanding logic is part of my profession. Let me explain why what Hillary is doing is dishonest and deceptive. Anyone can say that experts have examined their information and have concluded that there is some legitimacy to what they are presenting. Mormons are quick to say that some highly respected authority on the English language has concluded that The Book of Mormon is an ancient book and not a contrivance of Joseph Smith. But that is not playing by the rules of logic and reason. One has to show why something is legitimate or why it is true. Just saying that some authority says something is true is not good enough.

Birthers also play this game. They have said some court appointed hand writing expert says that the digital copy of President Obama's birth certificate is fake. Birthers have presented this to me. I have to give them a lesson on recognizing logical fallacies and the scientific method.

The point I want to make here is that Hillary is doing a similar kind of thing by attesting that "experts" have determined her economic plan is superior. Well, that is deceptive also beaus economists are not wizards who can predict the future. Their evaluation (if there ever really was one) would have to be subjective. Also, one can be sure that they would be hand picked. Right Wing economists would not be in the lot of selected experts that Hillary would make use of.

One can easily assume that Hillary's experts are wrong. Experts have been saying that Donald Trump would, first, never run for president, then, never get the nomination.

The next cheap shot Hillary makes is her statement: "Donald thinks climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese". What Hillary must be talking about here is a this tweet by Donald Trump:


Let's be clear here. Hillary said in the first presidential debate this month in 2016, "Donald thinks climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese". This is a lie. Hillary is lying. What someone initially thinks or assumes about a topic is often not what they finally conclude about something. Hillary used the present tense of the verb in her sentence. She says "Donald thinks...". If she was telling the truth, I am sure Donald would say that this is how he thinks today and would probably be proud to explain it to the astonishment of the masses. But this is not what he believes today. Hillary is basing her lie on an observed comment Donald made in 2012.

Oddly enough, Trump's comment in 2012 demonstrates some clever thinking and an interesting theory. I would prefer that kind of mind to be in the White House instead of Hillary.

One of the most important tasks that a president must perform is to be The Commander In Chief. Some argue that the presidency is a military job because "Commander in Chief" means specifically "Commander in Chief of the Military". I have tried to arrange an interview with Hillary Clinton to specifically find out if she has the proper military aptitude for the job and to determine if she has any sense of valor. This first presidential debate proved to me that Hillary Clinton does not have the proper aptitude for the job. It was revealed by Donald Trump that Hillary has made public her plan for "dealing with ISIS" on her web site. This is disturbing. For the record, and as a military veteran myself, let me say that this is not acceptable and makes Hillary unfit for command by telling our enemy how we plan on dealing with them. What is more disturbing is that Hillary is completely blind to the fact that this is not acceptable. She responds with "at least I have a plan, Donald".

A lot was said during this debate and if I would be writing a long time if I gave my opinion on everything said. So I will just touch on a few items here that I feel rise above average banter and demand to be addressed.

There were instances during the debate where Hillary sported a huge grin or even laughed. After years of studying and watching her I have reached the conclusion that she does this whenever she is cornered or caught being guilty and she uses this as a trick to get out of a tricky situation. She laughs sometimes and does nothing more, or sometimes she laughs to give herself some extra time to come up with a clever retort or even change the subject. Sometimes she makes a joke about a question. The trick often works. Her supporters do not want to know what the truth is. They want to feel good about her. This is what she delivers or at least tries to. She did this during the debate when confronted the 300 thousand emails. She switched the focus to Trump's tax returns.

"That Makes Me Smart"

Hillary honed in on the fact that there is evidence that Trump did not pay anything in tax returns a couple of years. Trump said "that makes me smart". I have to agree. Rich persons can get deductions in their taxes by contributing to charities that they believe in. This is actually a good system. Individuals should be able to decide how to use philanthropy and it can be argued that smart persons can better decide where money goes rather than the government.

Gun Control

Hillary says she has a plan. I have read some of her plans on her web site. They are not really plans at all but goals. During the debate, she said that we need to get guns out of the hands of the people who should not have them. How can this be done -- By magic? Who decides who should and should not have them -- A benevolent Big Brother type over reaching authority tyranny?

Hillary tells Red States that she is not wanting to repeal The Second Amendment. But Hillary has told Blue States something completely different. Her comments showed she admired and favored it the Australian gun buy-back program. If she wants to be president, she has to swear an oath to uphold the constitution and the second amendment is part of the constitution. This is why the Right Wing paramilitary groups can not be brushed off and thought of as just a bunch of red neck misogynist.

During the debate, Hillary said "the gun academic is the leading cause of death of young African American men" as if the guns themselves are flying around and shooting young black teens on their own. She said "we have to tackle the plague of gun violence". Donald Trump was correct when responding to this by saying what we need is "Law and Order".

Many people have stated evidence that gun control and "Gun Free Zones" do not work and they are not the same sort of thing as "Drug Free Zones" and places in the country with stricter gun control laws have more gun violence than communities where The Second Amendment is honored and more people carry fire arms.

She Sees Black People

Hillary is a racist. If you doubt me, please read this this page (Click Here). As a racist, Hillary assumes that everyone else is a racist too. On several times during the debate, Hillary kept bringing up "black people", "black communities" and "young black men". Donald Trump did not. Yet, Hillary constantly assumed that Trump did. Hillary "but words in his mouth" When Trump talked about the dire situation in Chicago, Hillary responded that it was a shame that Donald did not have anything good to say about "black communities".

Implicit Bias

The moderator asked Hillary if she thought the police were implicitly biased against black people after reading a quote Hillary had made. Hillary said that implicit bias is a problem for all people, not just the police. No, Hillary, many people are not racist to the core like you are.

The Birther Movement

There were many indications to me that this was not a real debate but, instead, a staged performance structured to favor Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. One indication was seen in the fact that the moderator was determined to dig up things from Trump's past whilst ignoring current scandals that Hillary was involved in.

An example of this was when the moderator brought up The Birther Movement. The irony was that Hillary Clinton and her people created The Birther Movement during her 2008 campaign against Obama. Hillary's campaign manager, Patty Doyle, actually went to Kenya to get a birth certificate to destroy Obama's campaign and failed to find one. But the point is that there was a massive email campaign suggesting that Obama was born in Kenya that had been traced back to servers located at Hilary's campaign office.

Being Sued for Racial Descrimination

We are a nation of laws. We are not a nation of rumors. Persons are to be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of laws. What is more, people in the USA sue people as a way of life. Trying to find a way to sue rich people or wealthy companies and organizations is a way of life for some people. Once Eddie Murphy said in an interview on Larry King's show that if he made a movie that made a lot of money, it was a guarantee that someone would sue him claiming that they had had the idea for the screen play first. I can cite an another example. I once interviewed for a job at the headquarters for Fry's Electronics. I was shown that the headquarters had a small office employing paralegals whose job it was to handled the paperwork for the fact that they were constantly being sued. The fact that Donald Trump is sued is not proof of his guilt. The fact that Donald Trump is sued is not proof of his success and wealth.

Also, the fact that Trump was sued as a landlord means only one thing. It means he was a landlord. I know that landlords are sued constantly simply because they rent to Americans.

Hillary tried to bring up the fact that Donald Trump was sued by African American renters of his property as proof that he is a racist. Donald explained that the law suit was sweeping across the country by the Justice Department and he said that the suit was settled without any admission of guilt.

So Hillary leveled a false claim during the debate.

Russian Cyber Attacks

I need to make another BLOG soon explaining why Hillary Clinton is unfit for command simply because she is stupid person. During the debate she said that "there is no doubt now that Russia has used cyber attacks against all kinds of organizations in our country." That is a lie. First of all, there is a lot of doubt. I doubt it, for one and this makes Hillary's absurd proclamation an outright lie. Secondly, Hillary lacks the comprehension of how the internet works to make such a bold claim. She thinks deleting her emails off of an unsecured internet server erases the existence of those emails and removes evidence of their transactions.

Hillary is a relic from the Cold War. She still thinks that Russia is the eternal enemy of the United States and is out to destroy us as if they were the Soviet Union. It is highly unlikely that Russia is engaged in an on-going cyber war against the USA.

It is obvious to me that Hillary is trying to make Russia the proverbial boogieman and, out of fear, we should join her in fighting them.

But the Cold War is over. Proof of the Cold War being over (apart from simply googling this fact) can be seen in the fact that Russians and Americans are involved in joint scientific endeavors and they collaborate on the International Space Station without fanfare and without anyone regarding this as being noteworthy.

The Cold War is over. There is no longer a Soviet Union. Russia is a democracy and their leader was elected democratically into power. There is no ideological reason for any hostilities between Russia and The United States.

In fact, we should be close allies. Russia and The United States should be close friends because we both share the same enemy in Islamic Terrorism.

If Russia does not like The United States, it is probably the fault of the United States since, after the Cold War, Russia was struggling economically and it was our duty and obligation as the winners of The Cold War, to provide friendly assistance to Russia. The least we can do is be friends with Russia now.

Ironically and tragically, Hillary Clinton does not see the reality of this and is critical of Trump for being friendly to Russia and seemingly friendly to Putin.

I tell you, friends, if this is the case, than Trump is correct and Hillary is wrong.

Among the many countries that should be friends with us, we can add Russia to the list of countries who hate Hillary Clinton. I have written an blog on the problem Hillary has with Russia. See it by clicking here.

An Invitation to Putin?

The entire debate is riddled with exaggerations and lies from Hillary that I fear the American Electorate will not catch. Hillary accused Donald Trump of inviting Putin to hack Americans and American internet systems. I assume this myth is rooted into the fact that once, during Hillary Clinton's lengthy email scandal, Trump assumed that Russia must be one of the players in the world who must have already seen all the incriminating emails that Hillary had deleted. No, that is not an invitation by Trump to hack into Hillary's servers.

Trump's Endorsements

During the debate, Trump mentioned that over 200 admirals and generals to lead the country. He did not mention other facts such as his endorsements by special forces and other military groups. This is impressive and unprecedented. A large part of being president is to be The Commander in Chief. The Commander In Chief means The Commander In Chief of the military. It is important to the fabric of the country and the moral of the armed forces to have a Commander In Chief that the military has respect for. This is a huge weight in favor of Trump over Hillary.

Hillary's Plan to Defeat ISIS

The first thing Hillary said after Trump mentioned his endorsements was to brag about having a plan to defeat ISIS. This is interesting because of two reasons. The first reason is that she volunteered this information without being asked about it (it must be because she rehearsed this many times without seeing any fault in it). The second reason why this is noteworthy is the fact that she had already brought this up in the debate and Trump rightly mentioned how this was unethical to make public a military plan to attack an enemy. This shows that Hillary Clinton is incapable of learning.

To my horror and dismay, Hillary also then verbally presented some of the details of her plan here, during the debate, on international television broadcast over the world.

Hillary Takes Credit for Killing Osama bin Laden

Hillary took credit for killing Osama bin Laden during the debate. That is historically inaccurate. She just happened to be Secretary of State when the actual persons who hunted down and found Osama bin Laden actually found him and just happened to be Secretary of State when the commandos executed the mission to kill him.

This fact should be disgusting enough and be a bad enough example of stolen valor, but it gets worse. The actual Navy Seal who who factually shot and killed Osama bin Laden has gone on record saying that he has personally met each person in the infamous photo of The Situation Room except for one person -- Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The Invasion of Iraq

Now we come to the most fascination trick I noticed during the debate. It is apparent to me that the debate was nothing more than a Hillary Clinton production and was very thin on facts. In fact, they managed to present an alternative reality that departed from the truth.

Hillary supported the invasion of Iraq. This is a fact. In fact, this is why Susan Sarandon has left Hillary as one of Hillary's supporters.


But, somehow, the Main Stream Media has been successful at convincing us a flipped version of reality. They want us to believe that Trump supported the invasion of Iraq and Hillary didn't, instead of the other way around.

My memory was that Trump first say "maybe" he was against the invasion. But that seems to be what the main stream media has focused on and reinterpreted as being for the invasion.

Trump Has Not Insulted Muslims

Both Hillary and Donald Trump have never read the Quran or has studied religion generally and Islam specifically like I have. The crowing crescendo of the clownish nature of the debate occurred when Hillary insisted that Trump has insulted Muslims (a people) by being critical of Islam (an ideology). Trump has not insulted Muslims. In Hillary's racist and bigoted mindset, one insults a people simply by insulting their ideology. I suspect this is due to the fact that her closest aide, Huma Abedin, has convinced Hillary that Islam good and noble -- maybe like all religions -- and is due respect as part of an integral fabric of humanity. I also suspect that Hillary acknowledges the importance of religion as a political tool and the line is blurred between what she really thinks and what she feels she must say. As the great Roman philosopher Lucretius (94 BC - 49 BC) once said, "All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher".

But wait, there is more. I draw a line between a person and his beliefs. Hillary does not. Hillary Clinton lacks the ethics and intelligence I have. I have friends who are Mormon, Christian, and Muslim. I do not disdain a person whose faith differs from my own. Also, most Muslims are illiterate and are not even aware of the violent passages in the Quran. Frankly, I can say the same for Christians about the Bible.

It is possible to hate a belief and yet love the person who has those incorrect beliefs. This, I assume, is an idea that is alien to Hillary. For example, if Islam Fundamentalism is the cause of Islamic Terrorism, the wisest approach is to convince Muslims to become Apostates. This is how you win by respecting the individuals. In this case, Islam should be treated like an illness that some people have and you do not cure the illness by killing those or hating those who have the illness.

But wait, there is even more. I have added an entry into the dictionary web site, urban dictionary dot com and my definition for the word, "Fucktard" was approved and granted. The definition I provided is recognized as an official definition of the word, "Fucktard" and I received official recognition by email and this is it:


This means, officially, Hillary Rodham Clinton is a fucktard.

Iran and North Korea

Trump made some good points towards the end of the debate which demonstrated he can think outside the box and deal with other nations unlike any other politicians. He brought up the fact that Iran had dealings with North Korea which should have been on the negotiation table over the last nuclear deal.

Trump is Right about Nuclear Weapons

Nuclear weapons are only a deterrent to war if our enemies believe we are willing to use them. Once a president proclaims that she is not willing to use nuclear weapons, they stop being a deterrent and we are all less safe.

"Where Did You Get This?"

In the final moments of the debate, Hillary Clinton said that Donald once told a Latina contestant in a beauty contest "Miss House keeping". Trump was shocked and asked "where did you get this?" because, I believe, he does not remember it. Trump does not know where Hillary got this comment but I know. Shortly after it was determined that Donald Trump was the Republican Nominee, one of Hillary's PAC hired a team of volunteers to go over every second of recorded video tape available with Donald Trump in it to find anything objectionable they could find. "Cherry Picking" is a logical fallacy for good reason. One cherry picked comment that Trump made does not accurately determine what kind of man he is. This is the main issue but not the only issue here. We don't know for sure if Trump really made that comment or if some volunteer working for a Hillary PAC only heard it because it was what she wanted to hear it. Maybe it was a comment he made without thinking, or maybe he said something else far off microphone and the Hillary PAC volunteer interprets it this way. The problem is that Trump does not remember saying it nor does anyone else at the time remember it. We are only relying on what someone says he said who is on Hillary's team.

For this to be mentioned during a debate signifies that Hillary's Camp have vague and unsubstantiated occurrences to attack Trump with. On the other hand, actual, tangible and incontrovertible facts can be used to show Hillary is unfit for command.

If you are a Hillary supporter and you think I am wrong, show me where I am wrong right now. This is a web forum and anyone can register, become a member, and post a reply right here.


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest