Yes, she did handle that very well. I suspect we won't here the stamina issue next debate. Trump's comeback on her experience being bad experience was fairly good too, though.
He responded even better with "bad experience" Donald is owns one of the wealthiest franchise and has as much travels and responsibilities as her, and isn't faltering. He burned her with 30 years of "bad experience" and her being part of the regime of failure
I will tell you exactly why anyone out there who, under any other circumstance would say that Trump was a disaster, is saying that Trump performed better in that debate. It is simply because he or she is too entrenched at this point. There is no point in any of us being exasperated at this point with RocketsLegend or anyone else who ignores what they see before their own eyes and create this narrative that Trump was better. It's not very difficult to do. You see, I'm convincing myself right now that James Harden is an elite defender. I've got those 5 plays over the last 3 years in the forefront of my mind- they are in a loop, over and over and over again. I'm convinced. I'm not just saying Harden is an underrated defender, I'm saying that Harden has a really good shot to make the 1st-Team All-Defense this year. And I'm equally convinced that Dwight Howard is going to develop a consistent jump shot in Atlanta. I've watched that Olajuwon practice video over and over again, and I'm thinking that this is finally the year Howard hits that 15-foot jump shot regularly. All it took was going to Atlanta.
Huh? Donald is owns one of the wealthiest franchise? What does that mean? Is he also a Papa John's franchisee? He responded like someone who didn't have a response. He might as well have said "I know you are but what am I?"
We'll see who 'won' when the polling comes out in a few days. It doesn't matter how whomever performed. All that matters is how voters will vote. I expect to keep hearing about it. I think Trump hopes to get a lot of mileage leveraging a subconscious bias for tall, large, robust-looking men over small, frail-looking women. She doesn't look particularly frail, but if he can keep hammering away on the idea that she has health problems he might create an association that will undermine her appearance as a strong leader (which is totally irrational since there are many more reasons to doubt his health than hers). He thought he hit a jackpot when she had her fainting spell. I think it contributed to his competitiveness in the polls. From what I've seen of the debate (not much) though, Clinton seems to have done a pretty good job of looking healthy and strong and made good verbal defenses of her stamina as well. I think that will mitigate some of the hit from the walking pneumonia scandal. If Trump is lucky, she'll show symptoms of something to create doubt all over again -- of course, it may be more likely he suffers something himself, given his risk profile.
Liberal arts degrees are good degrees. However, I will say that I do believe that data/statistical driven fields like psychology, sociology, and economics offer more value for students when it comes to job prospects. While I'm no big fan of our resident Silicon Valley-dweller, Northside Storm, he does sort of prove the point that persons with liberal art degrees can apply themselves toward technical fields. Also, I know plenty of people who have played in music bands, pursued sports up-to the collegiate level, painted and sketched for a number of years, and they are very much functioning members of society. People with liberal arts degrees will struggle, not for a lack of ambition, drive or talent, but for a lack of trust that industries like Silicon Valley show very little intention of practicing. We need to believe in ourselves, again.
That's questionable, but the rumor is that after the election, Trump will start Trump TV to be to the right of Fox and Hannity will be the first name he signs. From the New York Magazine: Many people I spoke with believe that the current management arrangement is just a stopgap until the election. “As of November 9, there will be a bloodbath at Fox,” predicts one host. “After the election, the prime-time lineup could be eviscerated. O’Reilly’s been talking about retirement. Megyn could go to another network. And Hannity will go to Trump TV.” The prospect of Trump TV is a source of real anxiety for some inside Fox. The candidate took the wedge issues that Ailes used to build a loyal audience at Fox News — especially race and class — and used them to stoke barely containable outrage among a downtrodden faction of conservatives. Where that outrage is channeled after the election — assuming, as polls now suggest, Trump doesn’t make it to the White House — is a big question for the Republican Party and for Fox News. Trump had a complicated relationship with Fox even when his good friend Ailes was in charge; without Ailes, it’s plausible that he will try to monetize the movement he has galvanized in competition with the network rather than in concert with it. Trump’s appointment of Steve Bannon, chairman of Breitbart, the digital-media upstart that has by some measures already surpassed Fox News as the locus of conservative energy, to run his campaign suggests a new right-wing news network of some kind is a real possibility. One prominent media executive told me that if Trump loses, Fox will need to try to damage him in the eyes of its viewers by blaming him for the defeat. http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...took-down-roger-ailes.html?curator=MediaREDEF (Where did the quote button go?)
It's with the Spoiler button now. Click the [+] sign between the Media button (looks like piece of film) and the Save button (floppy disk).
Wow this is so anti-capitalist . . . I expected someone like you to love the idea of things existing for the mere fact that people will buy them. Well, I'm sure you have no problem with corporations selling beer or OHV's or guns, but selling liberal arts bothers you, coz it's like different, coz why again? coz if Trump was selling the classes instead of a "real university," it would seem like a cool business move by Trump, coz he was REALLY selling crap and getting money for nothing--cool!--but actually you expect something more than lowly profit-motivated behavior from universities. Bravo to you expecting more from universities than simple business and profit!
Clinton did well with her response to the Stamina question. She obliterated Trump on that one. She really did a nice job hammering Trump about the the "Ms. Housekeeping" comment. Her line about preparing for the debate as well as President could have fallen flat, except that Trump showed last night he wasn't prepared at all. So it made the line particularly effective. Trump was a miner leaguer trying to compete with a major leaguer. He was fighting out of his weight class, and he couldn't handle it.
WTH are you babbling about? My point was we shouldn't be giving free college education or subsidizing liberal arts degrees....or any degrees. I also stated liberal arts should be part of science degrees in some form or fashion. The real pathetic part to this whole conversation is that we will not be giving free college education in the distant future. This is just hillary trying to garner up support from the millennials. Democrats love getting support by offering bogus promises of free free free. Its called bait and switch, and in the business world, a person or business would have a lawsuit slapped on them.
You advising people on how to get a college degree is like Trump advising Obama how to act with dignity and grace. It just doesn't work if you don't have it.
Well I can't blame Trump, as anyone that does coke sniffles constantly. I'd imagine it'd be embarrassing to notice a film of white powder under your nostrils during a Presidential debate.
Honestly can't say either won. Depends on what you want to see. Neither really had bad parts. I support Trump and I thought he did well.
