****OFFICAL**** Trump Hillary Debate 2016.09.26 Thread****

[Pokesan]

your dick is way too small to satisfy my insatiable cocklust

go back to synagogue you bitch

[entruil]

lmao wtf...


i imagine following link was pre-configured...

[Pokesan]

that post is a mess! sad!

[Chaboo_Cleric]

yeah apparently you can't splice quotes and copy and paste it anymore.

Too lazy to fix. Cheers

[Baler]

What really bugs me is how hill dog attacks donald trump for being a business man in the past. But she ignores all the problems that have been going on while she was steadily involved in government and did nothing to fix those problems.
But now that she is running for president she claims she wants to fix these problems. Not to mention she plays the "My husband" card way too fucking much.

[R Flair]

The "proof" that Trump was for the war where he said ".... ya... I guess..." when asked about the war on Howard Stern.

That is technically an affirmation, but elsewhere he was against it.

I say what difference does it make what someone without the intel thought about the war. The people who had the real intel like Hillary were for the war. Those who actually believed there was credible intel were rightly for the war. That was most likely the only info the Don had, like the rest of us. Yet he was still dubious on Stern and outright against it according to Hannity and several interviews which took place after the war began.

We of course now know there was no credible intel.

Chaboo is drinking far too much MSM kool-aid.

Hillary looked robotic and scripted in the debate, obv knew the topics in advanced, and Trump still dominated and had more compelling arguments and solutions, even if he struggled to stay on topic. When they got down and dirty, she looked level headed but more wrong than right.

Also have to say Trump is dead wrong about using lists like "no-fly lists" or "terrorist watch lists" to remove 2nd amendment rights. These circumvent the constitution without do-process and only offer a foothold towards banning gun-ownership for everyone.

[Chaboo_Cleric]

Originally Posted by R Flair [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The "proof" that Trump was for the war where he said ".... ya... I guess..." when asked about the war on Howard Stern.

That is technically an affirmation, but elsewhere he was against it.

I say what difference does it make what someone without the intel thought about the war. The people who had the real intel like Hillary were for the war. Those who actually believed there was credible intel were rightly for the war. That was most likely the only info the Don had, like the rest of us. Yet he was still dubious on Stern and outright against it according to Hannity and several interviews which took place after the war began.

We of course now know there was no credible intel.

Chaboo is drinking far too much MSM kool-aid.

Hillary looked robotic and scripted in the debate, obv knew the topics in advanced, and Trump still dominated and had more compelling arguments and solutions, even if he struggled to stay on topic. When they got down and dirty, she looked level headed but more wrong than right.

Also have to say Trump is dead wrong about banning 2nd amendment rights using arbitrary lists like "no-fly lists" or "terrorist watch lists". These circumvent the constitution without do-process and are nothing but a foothold to circumvent the 2nd amendment.

I'd say Howard Stern is more intelligent than Hannity. LOL , point being mentioning Hannity was hilarious. I get it caters to the average idiot person who watches fox , but the reality is Hannity is a joke when it comes to conservatism. Guy is a blade of grass who just blows wherever the wind blows. No talent, college drop out , who banged on walls.

LOL Hannity has Ted Cruz on his show. That's like the Michelle Bochman of the right LOL

Again, Trump choked hard on that topic. It was evident, and it was pretty funny.

Not as funny though as the " Doesn't have the look", oh! It's Stamina!! LOL

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by Chaboo_Cleric [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

LOL Hannity has Ted Cruz on his show.

I listened to that live. You obviously didn't even listen to that. You think that all was a good thing for Cruz? lol
Dude, really, you are coming off as so leftist atm. Why wouldn't Hannity have Cruz on? Sounds something like a very leftist comment. Though hilarious thing is it turned out terrible for Cruzer, he should have just stayed in bed that day lol

[Doors]

Feel like Trump lost but honestly tonight was a 2 on 1. Lester Holt may be a registered Republican but I'm calling bullshit on the host considering not one question was posed towards Clinton about her email server, Benghazi, pay to play, etc.

These debates won't be good for Trump. Clinton's an automaton robot of political jargon bullshit. She's been playing this game her entire life.

If Trump wants to win or gain ground in the debates he needs to focus on Clinton's corruption and the fact that she's been in politics for 30 years with little to show for it outside of her 125 mil estimated fortune.

[R Flair]

Originally Posted by Doors [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Feel like Trump lost but honestly tonight was a 2 on 1. Lester Holt may be a registered Republican but I'm calling bullshit on the host considering not one question was posed towards Clinton about her email server, Benghazi, pay to play, etc.

These debates won't be good for Trump. Clinton's an automaton robot of political jargon bullshit. She's been playing this game her entire life.

If Trump wants to win or gain ground in the debates he needs to focus on Clinton's corruption and the fact that she's been in politics for 30 years with little to show for it outside of her 125 mil estimated fortune.

Ya, I think you're right about how he should play it. I think he really wanted to try the calm policy debate approach, but I expect from here on out the gloves will be off from the word go.

In the future, I expect he will bring up every law she has broken, and allegation of corruption that even remotely relates to any topic brought up.

The deck is really stacked against her. For all the faux-scandals they love to bring up on Trump, Congress doesn't feel like any of them are worthy of investigation like her emails and benghazi (and her foundation in the future).