353 thoughts on “First Presidential Debate Between Hillary Clinton And Donald Trump (OPEN THREAD)”

  1. I’m more interested if the moderator will be fair compared what the candidates will be saying. I know the media covering the debate will be biased for Hilary. Please post any bias by moderator or media covering the event.

    1. I was a huge trump guy for a while until he started cozying up to isreal/nethanyahu so this debate will show us whether he is LEGIT or just controlled opposition. I really hope the former, but looks like the later.

    2. Not. The coughing fit might end her but I am sure she is well medicated.
      All shall be revealled

      1. That’s what my wife told me as well (nurse). She’ll be hopped up on so many meds that her heart rate is going to peg 180 and she’ll be dancing around like a meth ridden squirrel.

  5. Eh…man I love the manosphere so much but I am really skeptical of trump. I hope he proves me wrong tonight by going after the bitch, but I fear he is going to be like an obama – big talk / cult of personality and then does nothing but let alt right die.

    2. Agreed. I hope Trump really has turned over a new leaf from being a former liberal (ya’ll did know that right?). I do believe in second chances, and that’s why I’m giving Trump one.
      Albeit. . .in my gut, I can’t help but feel that he’s a shill — setting up Hillary for domination. They were friends after all. Their attitude towards each-other in this debate (which btw is the FIRST time we’ve seen them together on-screen since their friendship days) was way too friendly IMO. We were expecting bloodlust, but I saw none of that in their body language.

    2. All the fallacy measurement sources consider all the common myths from the wage gap to CO2 caused “global warming” to be true. They’ve never actually looked at the data to see how they aren’t true. So that will score as truth.

  9. Trump should stop talking about this financial bullshit and should just start talking about his giant beautiful wall.

  10. So far it’s the same ole’ shit we’ve heard but with the “I know you are but what am I” slams.. when they get past this initial spat, we can make some crush points hit the Libs.

  12. So Trump is against TTIP and Clinton is for it? Or is she against it now? Wtf?
    I’m against it, btw. It would be a bad deal for germany and all opponents of GMO.

  13. “Look away from the debate and go to my website and read my talking points without retort”

    1. Trump is not letting Holt or Clinton drive the typical empty narrative type issues. He’s a bull in a china shop and breaking all kinds protocol and will be better for it. He’s not going to let Hillary get more than maybe 30% of the talk-time.

    2. in game-speak terms, he came off desperate, needy, qualifying himself to her instead of the other way around, and the more/faster he talked, the worse he came off, regardless of what he was saying.

  15. He was trying to break up the pace/plan of the debate to disrupt and irritate Clinton, causing her to lose perception of “temperament.” He needs to keep on it though…he is letting up.

  16. I’ll read about it tomorrow from an unbiased news source. I’d rather have another dozen 16mm kidney stones than listen to Shrillary screeching for more than 3 seconds! And the media and moderators are going to do their damndest to make her look wonderful and Trump a chump.

        1. Well, if the voters who carry this election are sound bite voters, then it doesn’t matter who wins as anyone can be persuaded with kindergarten level answers to simpleton questions.
          In that case, I’ll support free college education, healthcare, daycare, food, hybrid cars, $25/hr minimum wage, 99% tax on the rich and exceptional paying jobs in the solar industry to rebuild the middle class while at the same time saving the planet by reversing global climate change, and refreezing the polar ice cap with giant air conditioners produced under the the new TPP trade deal.
          PrepZ for president in 2020.

        2. the voters who carry this election are sound bite voters
          This is precisely the problem.
          The great majority of those who identify as ‘independent’ and ‘undecided’ watch a single debate (or less) and make a decision on a limited / slanted presentation or emotion.

        3. He should be waxing the floor with that witch. Reagan never had a moderator as well behaved Holt.
          ***
          He is missing slow pitches.

        4. Yes. i totally agree. This is why democracy doesn’t work in the long-run, and apparently even a democratic republic doesn’t last even that long because of the ability to vote yourself money payments from other people’s pockets.
          If anyone has the audacity to not have made a decision yet about who they’d vote for, I call them attention whores looking for everyone to court them for their vote. But I’m sure at least 50% of “undecided” voters are simply too dangling shiny objects to pick a side and stand up for a position until they enter the voting booth.

        5. Sure, but it’s his first at-bat in the major leagues. Remember he’s got two more at-bats, and he’s going to get a whole lot of coaching before the next one. He’ll learn which balls to swing at, and which ones to let go. It’s apparent he’s getting suckered by some real junk balls by both Clinton and Holt.
          The fact he didn’t completely strike out might be a whole world of worry for Shillary next time around. I see this expectation like that of wall street punishing a profitable stock for missing analysts’ expectations.

        6. Sound bites aside, Trump seemed too agitated and nervious, speaking in broken thoughts, going off on tangents. This was horrible. It’s obvious Hitlary’s people coached her well on everything including demeanor and posture etc. Trump should know better.

        7. Hillary is playing “matador” to Trump’s bullish argumentative style. He can end that really quick by bringing up Bill’s affairs. He said to Hannity afterwards that he held back because Chelsea was in the audience, which is respectable. But he needs to take the gloves off these next two debates.

        8. He made a point to speak when he wanted and for how long he wanted.
          But he can’t rely on that if he wants to play the alpha game.

        10. Exactly. “You can’t beat Santa Clause” as Sandy Beach on WBEN AM930 has said for year, then Rush appropriated.

        11. Yes, but WHICH debate? Looked like a tie to me….I watch CSPAN in case Hillary topples over or coughs too much.

        12. Also, I wish Trump had said “College education is not a magic key to wealthy anymore, learn a fucking trade instead of comparative femminine hygine studies”.

        13. Hellary is a horrible public speaker. She sounds like she is doing an oral presentation in high school and when Trump talks she has a terrified look on her face with a deer in the headlights look in her eyes. So insincere, that phony smile and laughter

        14. These problems were noted 2500 years ago, by Plato, he basically said that the people who vote “will fill their bellies like the beasts”. The meaning was that they would vote for the one who promised them more money, back then by ransacking nobles, surprise surprise the rising merchant class was quite supportive of it.

        17. The only Republic that have proven to have worked is the Aristocratic Republic of Venice that lasted over 1000 years.
          But if the population has too many idiots then its better that the country is ruled by a monarchy.

        18. Let’s not be delusional – unfortunately Hitlary still kicked Trump’s ass. Trump has to do better.

        19. This was not the time to change tactics. He stopped doing what had helped him, and continued to do the things which had harmed him.

        20. Let’s hope.
          ***
          I take a bit of solace in knowing that Romney beat Obama badly during the debates and went on to lose the election.

        23. This! So debates and post-debate polling bummps don’t mean much. This election is the most galvanized polarized election I can remember in all my years back to 1968 until now. This debate is just giving ammunition to each side to further attack the other. It didn’t sway anyone away from their candidate of their position except for 2 brainless twat undecided voters in Montana (sorry to do that to an otherwise beautiful state). But it’s moot.

        24. So true, and good call on the historical perspective. Now I for one prefer a benevolent dictator to a monarchy, but to each his own.

        25. Exactly! Nice catch on history. The ancients had this shit all figured out. But simply because we have horseless carriages and silly phones we think our generation is wiser than all those before it and immune to the forces of selfishness that rot every society from within, whether aristocratic nobles, or the multitude of peasants at the voting booth.

        27. I was just referring to this the other day!
          forgot why now…
          That movie had a couple of good Bits in it!

        28. All true. I wish it had been a philosophically consistent beatdown of Hillary, but that sort of consistency is a rare commodity.

        29. Exactly how? It was two on one and the questions he was asked were non sequitur. Is name calling and ad hominems the best they can do?

        30. Depends on what you consider to be “better”. If you find her indignated face and female “morality” impressive, then yeah. I quite liked his attitude. He also got some big cheers from the crowd.
          What I didn’t like was that he didn’t even point out that black folks are statistically more violent etc. Found that disingenuine.
          He also seems to have gotten some facts wrong. Oh well. I’m not a fanboy anyway. I still enjoyed his cool “performance”.

        32. I’m referring to the short zinger retorts that the media love and stupid voters mistake for substantive debate. Taken from their point of view, she did better. It can give the impression of being better prepared and being able to think quickly on your feet. And indeed, that analysis is what the media here is basically saying in the aftermath.

        33. I’m pretty sure that’s what the media would be saying anyway. It’s all a power game. You don’t expect the MSM to say much favorable about Trump, no matter how good he was, do you? At least nothing exceeding normal politeness.

        1. Simple observation.
          ***
          Please don’t get me wrong. I want to see him win.
          ***
          He seems to be having some sort of breathing problem.
          ***
          While she is lying constantly, to the uninitiated, her answers seem to have more depth than his.

        5. They were both very shallow. Outright lying on her part does not give her depth, only the appearance of depth.
          ***
          Did you really not understand what I was saying?

        7. Being vague does not give you any credit.
          I asked you a precise question, you’re not even able to give one precise example.
          Can, the initiated that you claim being, point where his answers have more depth than hers?
          So can you or not? It’s quite simple. Trying to insult me is not an answer.

        8. You are claiming I have said at least two things which I have never said.
          ***
          So how much of your day do you spend trolling?

        9. Berzactly, Shep. I’m sure you remember how “deep” the guy who mind-numbingly repeated “hope” and “change” was portrayed as being.

        11. I do. I have a romantic view of man. I like to think we can do better.
          ***
          For about 20 years I can see little difference in our electoral politics and the satisfaction of the ancient Roman mob.

        14. Way (waaaaaay) less time than you reassuring yourself in a community which reinforce your confirmation bias and filling ego insecurities counting the number of likes on your comments.

        19. I’m not even American. If Trump wins, I would feel really bad for your country and it will obviously have consequences in the rest of the world.
          But not as much that people think.
          So maybe that’s what you need to realise how much he is the reflection of what your country became: uneducated, approximative, suffering of superiority while having low capabilities.
          I care more about the emergence of Africa or South-East Asia. Honestly I understand the feeling when Trump said that it was good business when the economy collapse so he could buy for cheap, in the exact same logic, Trump in charge would be a bless for other emerging markets and economy.
          And yeah I just created this account. And I have 28 posts, is this that much? Ain’t you use to write and read that much?
          You replied 3 times to the same comment with:
          * one meme and a lame attack
          * another meme about me being the only being able to perceive something (yeah I’m use to actually to notice things that most people don’t, it’s called having developed observation and analytical skills… you should try)
          * trying to attack me on my account (oooouh) and another lame attack trying to imply I’m politically biased (soooo defeated)
          Yeah I’m the troll.
          I’m rarely offended by people you don’t display much intelligence in their answer… so please keep trying.
          Now if we can come back to the initial topic: the shallow or depth of the candidates.
          Let’s take another example of the debate, what about this article:
          http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/grading-the-presidential-candidates-on-science/
          You know I will play fair game, I’m not gonna give my opinion or arguments on that. I let you the opportunity to read it, and tell me what you think of Trump’s answers (the full answers), their sense, their length, and their credibility.
          Or you can also reply by an image if you get overwhelmed by the number of words.

        21. You are showing at least half a dozen tells of being a Democratic social media hack.
          ***
          Ever hear of the Leadership Institute?

        27. I’ll be interested to see how your defected logic works and what is the relation between my answer and a Google search in your mind.

        29. Damn where you waiting for me?
          You’re awfully online a lot.
          What? The wife is bored and the kids think you’re getting old?

        1. I’ve seen a couple voter polls (not that they’re any kind of reliable) and they’re all swinging with Trump.

        2. She is boring and was reading off her notes. We are rewatching the debate now and it is obvious Holt was going after Trump and Trump did not back down, Unlike Romney and McCain. The people saying Trump was going to debate the moderators were correct. “Let me interrupt” was all Holt said to Trump.

      4. Here’s the fundamental mootness of that assessment — will you vote for HIllary if Trump didn’t kick her ass as expected or even hoped for?
        If the answer is “no”, then who cares if Hillary “kicks his ass,” whatever that means to you. And does it even matter to anyone? Does it matter to those unicorn undecided voters who are so weak minded they can’t even flip a coin and choose, as if these so-called debates are really essential to decide who they’re going to vote for. That’s why it’s moot.
        If you want to move mindless undecided twits on who to vote for, please convince them to stay home and NOT vote at all, as their contribution to the democratic process is as moot as the performances of the two candidates.

      5. Keep in mind this is Trump’s first rodeo. Shillary has been doing this for a looong time. Trump is going to go back to his campaign staff and handlers and get calibrated on how to handle her snarky sound bytes the next go around.
        If the old saying is true, “third time’s the charm,” then She’s got a whole lot of Trump-thump in her future.

        2. Absolutely, especially for the “undecided” bozo’s out there as they can’t seem to recall anything about the last 25 years of either candidate’s life or public record. How could they possibly be expected to be influenced by anything more substantial then the weather conditions on November 1st.

        3. Trump hammered her to the wall when they were “allowed” talk about the economy. The problem is, as soon as Trump gained traction, the moderator switched the discussion to minorities and women’s rights.

        4. No doubt. Lester Holt is an agent of the libtard left and kept implying things about trump’s record and policy through his questions (indictments) while tossing Shillary a few nerf balls that didn’t have any followup or questioning as to her past record.
          Trump will learn to call out the hypocrisy and, if need be, leave the stage and sink the whole debate, thereby taking away the networks’ revenue.

        6. “Trump-thump” is the working title of the porno his son in law got Don’s daughter to star in

        9. Well, here’s the gambit for Trump then. Rather than try to get Clinton voters to his side, all he has to do is drive them into the Gary Johnson camp alleging that the Libertarians, while not true-blue Democrats, are the best alternative to the disenfranchised rebel alliance that put Bernie Sanders on the map.
          Trump doesn’t have to worry about his galvanized base going to the other side as much as Shillary needs to worry about losing her fair-weather late-sipping liberal millennials, minorities, and precious undecided twats with delicate sensibilities being driven into the arms of a much more appealing Johnson. If Trumps can drive even 3% of the Clinton herd off her ranch, she’s done for.
          So, Trump can and should go back to the Trump that simply attacks Clinton to drive off her supporters without the unnecessary contortions to become a presidential politician to try to win their votes. By being the caustic alpha male he’s been during the primaries he should be able to drive off 3% of her sheeple without losing his hard-core base. And, can avoid the trap and awkwardness of playing the part of an establishment-styled politician to Clinton’s polished persona.

        11. I hope so.
          Interviews after the 1960 election said voters who listened to the debates on the radio, voted overwhelmingly Nixon… Those who watched the debates on TV voted overwhelmingly Kennedy.
          Hillery undoubtedly hired top notch communication experts to help polish her delivery. Trump needs to follow suit and take advantage of non verbal cues. I can’t get over how slouched his posture appeared last night.

        12. That is all within the realm of possibility.
          ****
          I was dismayed with the ease he experienced as he threw the NRA under the bus.

      6. He brought up her emails, and how ISIS is basically her creation to some extent. He also mentioned the iran nuclear deal (disaster) and reminded the viewers that hillary has been involved in politics for the past 30 yrs, and she’s contributed to the mess we’re in today.

        2. All correct, and all good points on his part. He did not drive them home. She was able to simply blow them off.
          ***
          To her credit, she is well documented as a being a very skilled liar. She was more convincing in her worst lies than he was on any of his points.

      7. Unfortunately, but I feel that everything she said had been ultra-rehearesed. The second she started answering a question, you could tell she was acting.
        I guess that’s what she’s been doing all through last week… rehearsing her pre-fabricated debate questions.
        Trump did land a few good punches though, and dished out some rants that I liked, but he was nowhere as aggressive as he should have been. Too defensive, not offensive enough.
        I did like that he didn’t let the moderator get away with interrupting him or talking over him.

        1. That was the strategy. The goal of Trump was to get the votes of the people who want to vote for him, but feel a bit scared about “he’s the new Hitler” propaganda. So he had to look less scary, more pacific, he had to let Hillary be the aggressive one. And that’s what he did.

        3. Keep in mind that the presidents most people point to as the greatest in their generation depending on their politics are Regan and Clinton — both consummate actors.

          [holding Marty’s video camera] No wonder your president has to be an actor, he’s gotta look good on television.
          Dr. Emmett Brown

        4. That’s one way to see it, but do you think it worked?
          Next time, I still really want him to come down hard on her for the e-mails and Bill’s rape stuff and how she was complicit to it.
          Better not save that for the 3rd time, either, because what if she feels she did a good enough job on the first 2 debates, and just weasels out of the 3rd one.

        5. Just think about that: if he wouldn’t, would you change your mind? would you support Hillary instead?
          I know what you want, but you’re not his target right now. You know what he sells and you already bought it. He’s adquiring new customers. And that’s the clever thing to do.

        7. …after re-watching parts of it, it’s obvious that you’re right. Even at the beginning he was telling her things like “I just want to make sure you’re happy, it’s very important to me.” At first I thought “wtf was that about?”.
          He even finished by saying something like “there was something I was thinking of bringing up, but I didn’t because it wouldn’t have been very nice” (or something to that effect).
          In retrospect, he’s clearly virtue-signaling to the crowd to make himself appear non-scary. I just hope it worked.

    2. Well, from my armchair recliner here’s the gambit for Trump then.
      Rather than try to get Clinton voters to his side, all he has to do is drive them into the Gary Johnson camp alleging that the Libertarians, while not true-blue Democrats, are the best alternative to the disenfranchised rebel alliance that put Bernie Sanders on the map.
      Trump doesn’t have to worry about his galvanized base going to the other side as much as Shillary needs to worry about losing her fair-weather late-sipping liberal millennials, minorities, and precious undecided twats with delicate sensibilities
      being driven into the arms of a much more appealing Johnson. If Trumps
      can drive even 3% of the Clinton herd off her ranch, she’s done for.
      In fact, his campaign would do well to form an alliance with Johnson and put their collective TV budgets to persuading Dem’s to get on the Libertarian band wagon headed for free everything ala Bernie Sanders, including decriminalization of cannabis at the Federal level. In exchange Johnson gets a sweet cabinet position or appointment to, ready, to head the DEA. Yeah baby!

    1. It’s not. The Dilantin, Valium, Ativan pump/patch has been installed. Dr. FeelGood has d/c’d the cough inducing ACE inhibitor.

    2. That’s the only reason I’m watching, either that or Trump will make her go off the grid on camera.

  19. The greatest thing that would come from Hillary losing the election is that she’s too old to run again and maybe I wouldn’t have to listen to her screeching anymore.

    1. She’ll just slide into the key-note speaker tour. Blabbering about bullshit and really saying nothing. Fools and their money.

  20. Jesus. Shillary doesn’t need a teleprompter because she nothing more than a parrot in a pant suit parroting back memorized sound bites. She supports all kinds of things but can’t demonstrate one example of how her role as a guber employee or even as first lady has led to any action or improvement in the things she supports.

  21. Trump addresses Clinton with “secretary Clinton”. She addresses him with “Donald”. That alone speaks volumes.

    2. The habit of calling people by titles of office they do not have is not American. I despise it from all political parties. If somebody “was” an office, and they no longer are, then don’t address them by that title. That shit pisses me off.

      1. Sometimes people who used to hold such positions keep receiving salaries after they have left. That’s more troubling.

      2. Disagree. Mark of acknowledgement and respect. I’ve got no problem referring to Jimmy Carter as President Carter.

        2. Woodrow Wilson and LBJ were worse. There’s an argument for FDR in there somewhere as well.

        3. That sentiment is fine. If I can approach it from more of a tribalistic sense, I’ve had no trouble calling people by their pinnacle title, from retired coaches (mentioned by Bernd), retired law officers and firefighters, just men that did different and earned the respect of those around them at the time they worked.
          President Reagan is President Reagan.
          President Clinton is President Clinton.
          President Bush is President Bush.
          President Obama is President Obama.
          If we don’t like where this is heading, it’s time to change the definition of President, not the man and what he did.

        4. Hey I wonder if he looks at his wife as he goes to bed and says “now I’m SECOND worst=phew!”.

        5. Saying “Former President” is fine, because it’s true. Referring to him as a President, when he’s not, is granting him an honorific title of government office. That’s not how the game is supposed to be played.

      3. I thought I was the only one that hated that. These life time titles of nobility. From “coach” on up.

      4. I found he used it with quite a tint of amusement. I mean, somewhere at the beginning, he said something like “With all Respect, Secretary Clinton, I want nothing more than you to be happy” in a just slightly too serious manner. That was such a nice and not-so-covert show of disrespect that it made his use of the title almost a sketch in a comedy. I did not for a second think he was being serious about it, rather appealing to her narcissism in a clever way.
        Also, note how at the end, when they shake hands, he pats her back. Body language, heh.

    3. Thing is Hillary is Secretary of State.
      Donald is nothing in politics.
      Should have she called him Candidate Donald?
      Also he called her “Crooked Hillary” for months, that speaks volume too, but maybe you have deafness episodes?

      1. First, she could call him “Mr. Trump”.
        Second, it’s one thing two people to flame each other on the Internet. Having a debate in front of the whole world is an entirely different matter.

        1. First, why would she called him by her last name, when he calls her by her first?
          Second: pfff HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!! So you think it’s normal to insult someone as long that it’s done on Internet? Edifying answer “Mr Nobody”

  23. I really wish Trump would stop the debate and point out how he’s continually calling Clinton by her name and title out of respect for both her and women in general, and then ask that she address him as Mr. Trump.

        1. I didn’t mean you to delete it. I was pointing out in a joking manner that we think alike. But anyway, good to know I wasn’t the only one who noticed it.

  25. There is a ten second delay between the NYT stream and the Canadian one. The Canadian stream is live and the NYT stream is delayed and could be open to editing.
    The gold market which I’m watching in real time indicates Hillary is winning.

    1. Television is an emotional medium, outside of some quotable soundbites the content does not really matter. Body language will say more than mere words. I watched the debate with the sound off and on my second screen I watched gold in real time. The market indicates Trump lost. Trump started strong but Hillary threw him off his game at the 20 min mark. At that point Don’s body language became frantic and he spent most of his time trying to regain his frame. If Trump had won the debate gold would have soared…it collapsed.

      1. Totally agree with you.
        He leaned over towards the mic too often, while she stood up straight. Could have just been because she’s short but I noticed it.
        Also, he shifted colours from his typical red to blue tie, while she was in an all-out red outfit. Red is a powerful color and is typically associated with Republicans. This set the mood wrong in my head from the very beginning as dumb as it sounds.

        1. Not dumb at all Clark. Plus, he was holding the podium and leaning on it…bad form. Leaning over the mic is great for emphasis but should be used sparingly. If he kept his body language consistent from the get go he would have won no matter what he said. I’m sure he’ll get it right during the next debate.

    1. She’s like one of those robots from Westworld, with a stick up her but and a cable coming out going to the controller…

  27. Did you see that fact check on the screen? Or was it only on the al jazeera stream? Unbelievable how they are manipulating the shit out of this debate. As if the moderator wasn’t biased enough.

  30. Wow, another Factcheck on the screen, this time about climate change statements by Trump. Al Jazeera really tries to push him under the bus big time.

  31. I’m sure it’s just good TV production value, but Clinton’s pane on the TV screen is adjust to have her as tall, or even slightly taller than Trump at moments.

    1. They gave her a shorter podium so the height difference between her and Trump wasn’t as obvious.

  32. I don’t like how Trump is interrupting his own statements by throwing useless words and clauses into it. That’s what I call word fog. And on the other hand Clinton is responding by ridiculing him and beginning her 2 minutes with jokes.
    He shows insecurity while she is showing amused mastery.
    Tbh he performs way worse than I would have expected.

    1. Normally being straight to the point and alpha is Donalds strength. Today he is building too long sentences with too many statements about his properties and media in it.

      1. Yes this debate is sketchy to say the least, I thought he was doing fairly decent at first but, has played into her hand it seems. On point with the amused mastery comment.
        Unfortunately Clinton is a slick idiot and some undecideds are probably eating her shit up right now.

        1. And normally Amused Mastery is Trump’s strength, too.
          Just think about this ‘Only Rosie O’Donnell’ comment.
          Today he is so weak.
          I would have made a better job.

        2. He is correct to pound his business experience down her throat, to an extant. To mention your condos in every shitty city you wanna fix could turn some moderidiots off. He needs to convince some of the people that will fall for the inequality and other liberals lies. How he does this I’m not sure but, this debate I’m positive will not do it. Such is the qualms of democracy.

      2. in game-speak, he was qualifying himself to her most of the time, instead of the other way around

      3. Ya he has to talk slow, use small words and short sentences so the dumb sheep can follow along because he “unpacks a lot” according to Obama junior.

  33. I think that this is Trump’s strategy:
    Debate #1: Be less offensive to garner more support and make people more open to him, mention lots of key states to gain their support
    From here on, go full on offensive and call Hillary out on her shit to destroy everyone’s faith in her and simultaneously sweep up the on-the-fencers

    1. I’m of the belief a spending and advertising blitz is going to kick in closer to the election in the key states. There will be a full on offensive, maybe not from this point on, but possibly just before the third debate … ?
      He is doing remarkably well for having spent merely a fraction of what she has. My thesis is if he wants it enough, he has plenty of room to buy it.

      1. I got that impression as well, he made a point to mention he has not attacked her with ads. I felt like he was trying to lull her into a false sense of security for his eventual attack.

        2. I think he was holding back to an extent. He let several opportunities go that he could’ve leveraged. I think he’s learning from Romney to not shoot all your ammo in the first minute.

        4. Eh, I think you forget just how badly Romney massacred Obama. There were campaign staff ready to quit because they had so little faith in O after that shellacking.

        5. Eh, at this point Romney is such a non-entity that yeah, I probably forgot. I always thought Paul Ryan had done a decent job against Biden though. But then again, it is Biden we’re talking about…

  35. So let me conclude:
    – no mention of Clinton foundation scandal
    – no mention of Hillary’s health problems
    – in general only hard questions for Trump
    – Al Jazeera live on screen factchecking the shit out of Trump while not one factcheck on Hillary. And there were some strange fact checks like ‘The internet wasn’t invented in the United States’. Is that even true? From my knowledge the internet was indeed invented in the USA.

    1. I learned it was invented by our military, this is news to me if the internet was developed elsewhere.

      1. Yep, the Internet was an ARPA project attempting to improve survivability of comms in nuclear war (which is why internet security is shit in many ways).

        3. The nuke war thing is an old urban myth that goes back before the web. The distributed nature of TCP/IP and other functions just plain made things work better.
          Simply put there was no need for security when the protocols were originally developed. Between 1989 and 1995 it was a very different place.

        4. No, there was no concern for robust built-in security because the assumption was the means of communication would already be secured. The ARPA project focused robust information transfer, making sure the messages got where they were supposed to with as few errors as possible, especially in the face of subordinate-network losses.

        6. No? Huh? That’s what I wrote. Between 1989 and roughly 1995 it was a very different world. It was a pretty small club. Access was through multiuser machines as a rule. This meant a lot of sysadmin control. Some BBSes and AOL brought people into the internet around 1993 as I recall. But they were limited to what AOL and the BBS administrators allowed them to do.
          The nuke war thing is just an urban myth that’s nice to believe. But as you say all people cared about was getting the data from A to B. With such a small club and multi-user systems if someone misbehaved in a serious way odds were pretty good to find out who did what from where.

    2. Al Jazeera
      Holy hell. At least ignore the extreme bias, if you can’t find the raw stream on the internet. Is this the only possible outlet in Deutschland to watch?

      1. ARD and Phoenix were airing the debate but with german language and I wanted to see it with original voices so I went for the jazeera stream.

        1. If your listening English is good enough, then you did the right thing. Ignore the product of the producers. No US voter watched the Al Jazeera stream. It was available on every single broadcast station here, so even those who cannot afford cable or internet could watch it.
          The remainder of your concerns: Apparently, having a conflict of interest (Clinton Foundation, or Trump’s businesses and family) is beyond the attention span the American media believes the American public is capable of understanding. As to health problems, that isn’t something that can be addressed equally in a “debate”.

        3. Hillary’s campaign in the primary against Obama was the one who started the birther issue. Trump did keep bringing it up long after most people tired of it. It’s reasonably fair.

        4. But the factcheck said that she didn’t bring it up.
          The factcheck should be renamed into the propagandacheck.

    4. If they’re using Google to check their facts, that obviously won’t work. See the threads from the past few days here.

      1. Yeah, I thought the same 😀
        Internet? Invented in africa.
        Smartphones? Invented in africa.
        Cars? Invented in africa.
        We have to learn from the africans!

    5. What does one call the internet? TCP/IP?
      The joining of the old networks together?
      The HTTP language and the web?
      One can define the internet to arrive at whatever answer they want practically.
      ARPANET was the start of the internet conventionally but many people think the web was, and Mosaic came out of CERN but it was developed on NeXT cubes (made in USA). So…. it’s a flexible thing.

      1. “One can define the internet to arrive at whatever answer they want practically.”
        “What does one call the internet?”
        – TCP/IP? Nope, that’s a communication protocol
        – The joining of the old networks together? That’s more the idea but not quite.
        – HTTP language and the web? HTTP is not a language, it’s a protocol (HyperText Transfer Protocol. Wasn’t THAT hard to guess), the language you’re thinking about is HTML.
        The web is not Internet, the Internet existed before the web, and can exist still without.
        Put simply, Internet is a network of computers.
        The Web is a network of pages.
        Mosaic was the first graphical browser but the first browser was created 3 years before, by the very own father of HTML and the WWW (and W3C) at CERN indeed, Sir TBL.
        “So…. it’s a flexible thing.”
        Only if you don’t really know what you’re talking about.

        1. You totally missed my point in your quest slice up a post and to be critical of typographical issues like HTTP language instead of HTML. I’ve been using the internet since 1989. Ever use BITNET? USENET? I know what’s what, but the public doesn’t. That’s the point.
          People have widely different definitions of what the internet is. My point is very clear if you take my comment as whole and digest the point I was making instead of slicing it into little pieces as if each line was a separate point. It’s not. It’s to point out how flexible it can be to people. Each person can and does come up with their own little definition. That’s the point I’m making with the various lines. I am not arguing any of them are true, I intentionally chose technical falsehoods to make my point. I am presenting the various definitions I’ve seen over the years.
          Media sources are going to define the internet in a way that suits them. AlJezera is going to define it in a way that takes the USA out of the picture because that’s their bent. They can do this because people define the internet in flexible ways. I am making a social observation, not a technical point.

        2. “You totally missed my point”
          As you said I sliced up 98% of your post, in your point is not in it, maybe you failed to mention it clearly.
          “I’ve been using the internet since 1989”
          Like that was an argument. Nowadays most people have been using Internet for at least 15 years, and still most of them confuse Internet and web.
          “I know what’s what”
          Obviously you don’t.
          “People have widely different definitions of what the internet is.”
          Yeah.. due to lack of technical knowledge and enough curiosity to learn it.
          People have widely different IDEAS of what the Internet is, most of them are inaccurate.
          The definition of the Internet doesn’t change depending what people think.
          “Each person can and does come up with their own little definition. ”
          They can, and they’ll be wrong, as you are.
          “Media sources are going to define the internet in a way that suits them.”
          Hardly, as actual professionals of Internet industry can easily confront them, I mean just look at our exchange.
          “AlJezera is going to define it in a way that takes the USA out of the picture because that’s their bent.”
          You’re losing it.
          “I am making a social observation, not a technical point.”
          Well, let me put it this way: your observation skills are as much developed than your technical knowledge.
          Now, you can actually learn something, or keep being pissed at me.

        3. It is quite obvious you cannot comprehend something where the meaning takes more than one line and follow a thread or you’re trolling. I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt thus far that you simply lack these skills. These are basic internet discussion skills. Learn them.
          The person I initially replied to was referring to a comment made on AlJezera yet you respond as if it came out of the blue. Perhaps that’s a big reason why you could not read and comprehend my post as a whole while nobody else in this discussion showed any trouble doing so. You not only sliced it into small segments because your mind apparently doesn’t have the bandwidth for more than that you also removed it from its context due your one post retention limit.
          “Like that was an argument. ”
          It’s a fact, not an argument. A fact which means I’ve been at this since before you probably even heard of the internet.
          “Nowadays most people have been using Internet
          for at least 15 years, and still most of them confuse Internet and web.”
          That was the point. You can shout out from the rooftops whatever technical definition of the internet you have in your mind and it doesn’t mean jack shit in politics.
          “Yeah.. due to lack of technical knowledge and enough curiosity to learn it.
          People have widely different IDEAS of what the Internet is, most of them are inaccurate. ”
          You’re finally grasping the point. What you don’t grasp is politics. This is politics, it’s about people’s feelings, ideas, etc, not facts. Facts do not matter in a presidential debate.
          “The definition of the Internet doesn’t change depending what people think.”
          This is politics. You might have noticed the title of the article upon which this discussion thread starts? Politics is about what people feel not facts.
          “Hardly, as actual professionals of Internet industry can easily confront them, I mean just look at our exchange.”
          Great. Go confront them. Then they’ll go right out and do it again. They don’t care. Unlike you they know politics is about emotion, not facts. What about the female wage gap myth? Has confronting the media with the facts stopped them from repeating it? There are countless narratives that the facts contradict. Confronting the media doesn’t stop them from repeating these over and over again. The media’s owners and probably many working in it know its bullshit, but they keep doing it to achieve political objectives.
          “Well, let me put it this way: your observation skills are as much developed than your technical knowledge.”
          I wasn’t offering technical knowledge. If you could have controlled your jerking knee long enough to digest the post as whole you might have realized it like everyone else. Then again, considering your attitude probably not.
          “Now, you can actually learn something”
          You haven’t imparted any knowledge.
          ” or keep being pissed at me.”
          So are you a moron or a troll?

        4. “So are you a moron or a troll?”
          Well I’ll be the troll, since you already took the moron part.
          “The person I initially replied to was referring to a comment made on AlJezera yet you respond as if it came out of the blue.”
          I noticed.
          He said: “From my knowledge the internet was indeed invented in the USA.”
          You said: “it’s a flexible thing”
          I said: “No it’s not”
          “It’s a fact, not an argument. A fact which means I’ve been at this since before you probably even heard of the internet.”
          You probably started argumenting before me and I’m still better than you at the exercice.
          “I wasn’t offering technical knowledge.”
          Agree, you were throwing here and there technical terms that you have a vague concept.
          “You haven’t imparted any knowledge.”
          I actually did. You ask questions, I answered accurately. That is knowledge.
          “Politics is about what people feel not facts.”
          You just describe all Trump’s campaign. If you don’t ask for evidences, if you don’t confront facts, obviously you’ll go nowhere.
          Maybe you live in a world where “everything is whatever people want to believe in their mind”, in my world a cat is a cat, and we don’t take things personally when an information get rectified.
          So you replied “ARPANET was the start of the internet conventionally but many people think the web was”
          And it is wrong.
          Internet is the result of electronic computer development et data transmission who started at difference places accross US indeed but also Europe, and way before ARPANET (“conventionally” agreed in the industry of professionals which are experts on the topic).
          People can think whatever they want, the Web is not, has never been, and will never be Internet. PERIOD.
          The mention of Mosaic is totally of topic.
          So your point is: you cannot answer a simple question which was
          “there were some strange fact checks like ‘The internet wasn’t invented in the United States’. Is that even true?”
          Correct answer is: “Yes Straightalpha, this fact is true. Internet is the result of … (yadiyadiyada see above)”.
          Confusing answer is: “Well, you know, depends what people think, and everyone got a different feeling, and maybe the media gonna create propaganda and stuff, therefore History and technical details will magically change. I’ve been using it since middle-age and I still don’t get it really so if I don’t get it you bet that’s flexible”
          “I am presenting the various definitions I’ve seen over the years.”
          Well next time, take a book and get the correct one for yourself. Especially if you can’t stand someone pointing out you’re wrong when you are.
          Sorry for the knee-jerk, here an heart <3

        5. “Well I’ll be the troll”
          That means you knew the point I was making and decided that you’d be an ass. Find your entertainment elsewhere.
          Everyone but you was able to comprehend the point I made and you just pretended not to. So your critique of my post is simply more nonsense.

        6. If caring about correct information is being an ass, damn yes I’m one.
          Never met someone who was defending that hard his will to be approximative and inaccurate, but hey, good for you buddy.
          But know that you can also make points with accurate information. Ain’t this a great news?
          (Also “Everyone” is in your head, you must have quite a party up there)

        7. The ancient usenet game of nitpicking from caring about correct information is not what you are doing. You’re not caring about correct information. You are deliberately trying to aggravate people with a disqus account created specifically to troll. If you cared about correct information you would have put it forth right from the get go and several posts later you still haven’t. At least make plausible claims for quality trolling.
          Like I stated previously, I gave you the benefit of the doubt of being a moron. Now I am just enjoying keeping you in this thread branch diverting your efforts.
          (Oh heavens, I forgot to type the whole thing out that time. Everyone else in the discussion. Classic old, boring, usenet technique, if someone doesn’t type out what is obvious to infer, even though it has been typed out in previous instances, jump on it.)

        8. I pointed out every single one of your misinformation and provided the corrected them.
          Now you can think it’s personal, but you’re not that important.
          You’re just another guy on Internet trying to sound smartass on a topic that he fails to understand, failing to provide an accurate answer to a simple question. Therefore spreading misinformation yourself.
          You decided that my answer was a personal attack: you don’t need me to feel aggravated obviously.

        9. Classic. The troll projects its own traits on others. You’re the one being a smartass so you project it on me. You understood my quickly made point and decided to be a smartass troll about it. Slicing posts into little pieces and jumping on not spelling out the obvious contextual aspects of the english language as used in an internet discussion forum. It’s all so tiresome and old but you apparently think you’re new and witty. Trolls have been doing this act since the 80s and possibly earlier.
          Furthermore you’ve yet to offer your great and wonderful wisdom of your definition. Yet to be imparted is your wonderful technical knowledge. A sure sign of a troll. But I’ll keep draining your troll time away from your manosphere targets.
          “You decided that my answer was a personal attack”
          On the contrary, I’ve decided you’re a troll after having given you the benefit of the doubt of being a moron. If I thought it were personal I would have said so directly. It’s clearly not personal. You’re just troll using a worn out playbook. I’ll keep you going just to see what else you can pull out of that ‘Trolling for Dummies’ Book from 1991.

        10. I gave the technical definition of what is Internet and I also corrected what it is not.
          It is THE definition, not MY definition, as it’s not up to personal belief.
          That’s the important concept you seem to still not understand: what accuracy is.
          I can see that you’re as much confused of what is a troll than what is Internet, but since you’ve been keeping repeating it over and over, I guess you’ve got really nothing else.
          I guess your last option is to decide that your a superior moral being.
          Your replies are more to reinsure yourself than to converse with me as if I was really a troll and you’re such an expert you would know the very first rule which is: “don’t feed the troll”.
          You can think whatever you want of me (especially since it has been establish that your beliefs and actual facts were two separate things) , but I don’t kick a man already on the floor.
          Sorry I hurt your ego.
          Obviously you’re failing at hurting mine.

        11. I don’t believe in not feeding trolls. Trolls can be fun to play with. I often enjoy playing the trolls. Seeing how long I can keep them at it. It’s sort of like playing with those phone scam people who pretend to be from the IRS or microsoft. You’ve been so concerned with my emotional state, your tone, everything you do is done in classic troll style. It’s like taking a time machine back 25 years. It’s so amusing to see what you come up with next.
          You have yet to offer a single point of technical definition or anything else. You dance around never ever doing so because that’s how good classic trolls behave. Sure you kind of infer it but you never type out anything that’s definitive. A classic troll playing the game you are is always critical of others but never actually offers anything which might expose it to being wrong. Oh so predictable. Your attempt at a hackish usenet format was a nice throw back too.
          Hurt? How could I be hurt? I’m having fun as you go through each chapter of trolling for dummies. Nor am I am aiming to hurt your ego another example of your projection. You think other people have the same aim as you do. I told you my aim. To waste and divert your time and to be amused. Like keeping that phone scam guy on the line. This is actually your second projection of that one reply. It’s quite unremarkable you think of yourself as a superior moral being. Many trolls think they are.

        12. You know the guy is hurt when he has to write 3 paragraphes to convince you he’s having fun.

        13. I should have put a prediction in writing! You’re so predictable. hahaha!
          Three paragraphs is nothing for me. It’s like one sentence for you.

        17. I actually laughed out loud both times, more the second. You’re a riot. I wonder how long I can keep you replying.

        20. Tired is not the accurate word, but I guess I can only expect approximation from you.
          Are you ready to face your feelings now?

        24. You so obsess with having fun and entertainment. Is that because you’re an old sad lonely man?
          And hurt.

        27. yes, you project your emotions, motivations, etc on to me and probably everyone else you interact with.

        28. I just have to read your comments.
          Old, lonely, distrusting woman due to rejection, trying to impress but being barely noticed, finding a blame for what you can’t achieve.
          All your replies are an attempt to impress, but the data you’d collected through your online lectures are no deep understanding neither expertise.
          You’ve got the dots, at least some, you’re just not that good to link them.
          If I was projecting myself on to you, I wouldn’t see such a weak man so pushed in a corner that his only response is, literally, a childish “it’s not me, it’s you”.
          Though, it shouldn’t be much a surprise since the tantrum you’ve thrown when I corrected your approximative and confused, when not plainly incorrect, understanding of Internet.
          You could have take the high way with something like: “right, my first answer was maybe to hasty, in my precipitation to make a point.”
          See? It’s not that hard.
          I’m glad if at least I entertained you. I’m a bit sad for you to see your expectation of entertainment, but I guess that when someone get that bitter, you can’t really expect much of him.
          Let’s say you win. Ok?

        29. Now you’re simply babbling. In long form. What was it you wrote earlier about long form posts?
          So damn concerned with “my” emotional state along with of course the choppy vague critical statements because to do anything more would require you actually make an argument with all the inherent risk there of.
          You’re the only one in the discussion that missed the point and you did so deliberately because you wanted to play troll.
          Someone who has to troll for its entertainment making value judgments. That’s hilarious.

    7. Yes completely unbiased moderation by Cuckster Holt. He put Trump on the defensive with completely irrelevant questions and continuously interrupted him without asking any questions regarding Shillary’s dealings. WTF was that ending? An hispanic maid, nothing will convince me that she didn’t already know any of the questions ahead of time. Believe me, Trump’s performance was less than enthusiastic. However, all Trump has to do is stay the course, act presidential, and refrain from gaffes. Hillary continues to lose support the more she is forced to be exposed to the public and there are two debates left and an October surprise.

    9. I thought Arpanet was first..and invented by algore….also I hear soon the UN will take over the internet so a court order will not be required to take down a dissenting website..this from Catholic Radio, a pretty cool news source…

  36. Only watched the last 30ish minutes or so, I thought he did well. His comment on the inner cities being dominated by democrats for a 100 years and blacks being let down really stood out as a fact that is always overlooked. Also the loudest applause of the night came when he said her experience was bad experience and that he is either beating her or tied in polls.

    1. I don’t know what everyone’s talking about. All things considered, I thought he did rather well. He wasn’t at his best, to be sure, but Hillary was certainly no better.

      1. He did good for tonight. I think he will have to step his game up later which is probably his plan anyway. Although it can be dangerous, I would like to see him defeat those little punchlines like trickle down economics, etc…call em out, prove em wrong with facts

  37. Lol at the trending hashtag debatenight.
    Only tweets from Clintons account to see.
    Nice propaganda, twitter.

  38. Its pretty obviously hillary spent all her debate prep just memorizing one liners somebody else wrote for her. I dont think donald looked at the top of his game tonight. The one thing he has going for him is hes not a politician and hes never had a serious debate before. Hes not expected to win a debate.

    1. “Trump just criticized me for preparing for this debate. You know what else I prepared for? Being president.”
      This is so obviously memorized.

      1. All of her lines had zero authenticity. She wishes she was witty enough to come up with lines like that on the spot.
        She also looked like she was on drugs. Had that benzo kinda look going on.

        2. Trump felt honest and authentic. I felt a similar thing from Ron Paul at the 2012 Republican debate.

      4. trump should have come back with “you dont prepare yourself for the presidency by hiding in a cave. I was out meeting with the people of this great country. you, Hillary, were not.”

    1. Go on writing articles. Wasn’t anything special. Just MSM trying to help Hillary as much as they can, like they always do.

  40. Thought he got better body-blows, thought she looked more ‘presidential.’ He royally screwed up the final question though.

    1. Hey, that’s your new corporate overlord you’re conned into thinking you’re voting for. Show some respect.

  43. What bothers me the most is that Trump could not let loose in a debate with 100 million viewers, or at least that he would not and did not. In this debate both Holt and Shillary set the table for him nicely a few times, he could have very easily broken out facts that we take for granted aroumd here, but the GP has never heard. Case in point, the wage gap, or her completely ridiculous idea that we can power every home in the nation by solar. You know and I know that Trump KNOWS the reality behind these lies. If I’m him, I’m swinging for the goddam fences. You’re all in at this point bruh. Don’t play it safe anymore. Drop that science and blow people’s minds. I can understand letting the wage gap comment slide (no I can’t) but for him to not utterly take her to task over bullshit like mass solar power? Fucking guy blew it right there.
    Think it’s time I start writing my piece about how we’re going to turn this loss into a win. Sure I hope he can pull it out….but it might be tough now.

    1. Yes, I forgot that. That was great! Maybe I was a little critical. Now only if in the next debate he says to audit the Fed, that would be better.

      1. I don’t understand the obsession with auditing the Fed, when you can find Fed audits online as public documents.
        And what do you think another gratuitous audit would accomplish? If it doesn’t turn up anything untoward about the Fed’s operations, the advocates for the extra audit will look like fools.
        But suppose this audit finds all kinds of problems, like the audit of the veterans’ healthcare system a few years back. Then what? The veterans’ hospitals have stayed open for business any way. And the same thing will happen for the Federal Reserve Banks.

        1. The Fed has never been properly audited by congress since its inception. Neither our elected officials nor the people have any knowledge of its inner workings. It’s practice of usury, printing money out of nothing then charging interest, should be enough to spark protest in this country. It may not bother you that an private, international Jewish bank controls all our money and that is fine you can be a happy little sheep but, some want truth and justice and will not settle!

    2. Nothing has ever happened to the Fed after all the criticisms and conspiracy theories about it over the years. You can spend your whole life condeming the Federal Reserve like Ron Paul or G. Edward Griffin, and no one in power will retaliate by causing you to lose jobs or pressuring you to humiliate yourself in public by apologizing for and disavowing your beliefs about the Fed. Our elites just don’t feel vulnerable through the Fed, so why do people keep wasting their time in attacking it?

      1. knowledge is power. I’m much more likely to barter, use bitcoin, collect PMs, grow my own food, and interact with like minded people…now that it is all exposed. who the fvck cares what the elites do or think? not my circus.

    3. lets call a spade a spade. trump was absolutely terrible. i’m really disappointed. he had so many chances to destroy her and he missed all of them. his entire team should be replaced. it’s so obvious what he should have focused on: emails & foundation period. benghazi and hound on the fact that the stock market only looks great now because the fed is helping hillary by dragging out raising interest rates till after the election. he brought up that last point but didn’t hammer it so that it was really felt by the the undecideds. anyway, just awful performance by trump. he was reactive, emotional, inarticulate… SMH. so disappointed

    4. I forgot about that. The FED is a political entity, propping things up. The minute they raise interest rates, the stock market will tank.

  46. I think the most cringeworthy thing of whole debate was trump goes off on her for a while and then she is like ‘well’ and kind of shakes her body back and forth for a while like the ‘well well well’ type of thing you see females do when they think they are badass. Really pissed me off her presumptuousness.

  47. Trump would have done better had he let a few of her obvious lies slide, and instead ignored them, and nailed her with logic that squashes her play ground antics. Now I know it’s very hard to have someone directly in front of you spewing lies about you to your face, however, him constantly “reacting” to much of what she said, made him seem he was too often on the defensive, rather than the offensive.
    He had some offense, don’t get me wrong, but he didn’t own the debate in a clear omni-potent way. We’ll see how this progresses. Some solid general points he made that were logical were showing how long she’s had her title yet accomplished very little, and in fact, fucked things up worse by far. I especially like how he mentioned the 5.5 Trillion+ squandered recently could have rebuilt the infrastructure twice. Not sure where you guys live, but half our fuckin state of Ohio is under road construction and closed down.. so bad so I quit working out at my gym and just do home workouts now (traffic deficit of my time w/work)… are these the “shovel ready” jobs clown Obama promised 8 years ago? And hmmm, in an election year?

        1. Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !ik399f:
          On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
          !ik399f:
          ➽➽
          ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash689HomeSourceGetPay$97Hour… ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!ik399f:….,….

      4. Same here. pop-ups should go. The pop-ups freeze my browser and I just opt to close down everything instead of reading more ROK. I used to read ROK every day. Now its like once a week at best.

    4. Agreed, I’ve already opted in and still keep getting this popup. Fix the display settings. Also don’t think Deus Vult is the best CTA since a lot of people likely don’t know what that means (I had to look it up at least).

    6. I’ve disabled it on mobile. For desktop, is it showing every time you load up a page? It should be only displaying once per 30 days per device.

        6. You should be able to change the settings on the popup so that once someone’s opted in they won’t get it anymore. That’s a standard function on most any email optin plugin.

    7. To whoever is responsible: can you stop fucking posting these popups? If I wanted to sign up I would have done it by now.

    8. You guys are making me feel better for having bitched about it myself. But hey, don’t knock the man’s hustle. They’ve got to make some money here.
      It is definitely better without it popping up on mobile today.

    9. At least it doesn’t have one of those guilt-trip no-thanks boxes. “No thanks, I’m not interested in keeping up with the best news articles on the planet and wish to remain ignorant of all things!”

    1. Ghetto blacks will fuck anything, and if it has white skin all the better, don’t matter if it’s 300 pounds.
      You boys gonna start organizing over there, or what?

        1. Haha, you see fat coal burners, I see the heart of Christendom but, my ancestors left that continent long ago so if y’all don’t care, I have no place.

  50. Such is the problem with democracy that it even has to be this way but, if Trump hammers the fed, Wall Street, money in politics, multi national corps, and our failing foreign policy he can swing Bernie sanders supporters his way.
    Not all are Marxist some were just ignorant and fooled by Bernie’s talk.
    Edit: I may have underestimated the idiocy of those who believe equality is still our biggest problem. They may not be able to look past liberal tag lines. Another reason democracy is unreliable.

        2. Democracy where only land owning, business owning, or sufficient tax paying men can vote would be an improvement on our situation, wouldn’t you be inclined to agree?

        3. Agree only with “sufficient tax paying” of your statement. Most people in the US don’t own land or a business. That sounds like a constitutional monarchy to me.

        4. Well we were supposed to be an agrarian nation from sea to shining sea but, that plan was quickly subverted. So yes I see the issue it could have with, as you say, our current situation. Either way it couldn’t come without a struggle, not nessecarily violent, and with that struggle, land reform and manufacturing reform!
          A monarchy to me doesn’t sound too bad by the way, provided it was righteous and not tyrannical.

        5. A righteous, non tyrannical monarchy that is successful is extremely hard to come by. There have only been a handful in recent memory, and even those treaded on some freedoms America holds dear. Examples: Singapore, Oman. Great standard of living but not too open to freedom of speech or critisizing goverment.

        6. Yes what you lose in freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, and ultimately what we have now, freedom of degeneracy and perversion. You gain in a righteous upward facing community.
          I would look more towards the Spanish empire, Holy Roman Empire, Tsarist Russia as better examples.
          What if life stayed the way it is with all our technological advances and you kept all our individual rights, but you had a righteous monarchy looking out for you, sounds much better than mass democracy for a central government like what we have now. Or only men vote and we decentralize, either or works for me.

        8. Ah! I can’t believe I used that Marxist democracy word!
          Yes you are absolutely correct sir, constitutional republic. One where the state legislators still select the US senators.
          I despise how people call our country a democracy, though it has lost most of what made it a republic, good correction.

        9. A city state. Preferably ran by a laissez faire capitalist entity. Dubai, Singapore, and Monaco come to mind.

        10. Those work due to size. You couldn’t extrapolate that kind of control over a nation America’s size.

        13. The 10th Amendment allowed problems to be solved on a local level until the increasing centralization of federal power in the 20th century.

    2. Democracy is just mind fuck for sheep, all it takes is 51% to get your way regardless of what or how evil that way is. If you can manipulate enough people to get 51% of the vote, you got your way.

      1. Democracy never existed. Athenian “democracy” was a plutocracy.
        Stuffing the ballot box always happened.
        Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch
        Benny F

  51. I think barring any massive fuck up or major statement that pisses off his devout supporters, whoever’s voting for Trump is already pretty much locked in, as well with Hillary.. just a party-side vote, no matter who the puppets are. The people Trump swayed were swayed way back during the primaries.

    1. Yeah, I would vote for trump if he told Holt to go pound sand and asked Hillery how many STD’s she caught from Bill.

  52. As of now. Trump is winning the majority of online polls for “who won the debate” .BB ,DRUDGE ,Time, NJ Heavy . Fortune is tied. Cnbc losing.

  53. Commenters here WAY more honest with themselves than over at Breitbart. With red pill comes brutal honesty. Trump disappointed me. He got some good punches in but there were way too many opportunities lost. I hope he regroups and destroys thecunt like Obama destroyed a cucked Romney.

    1. I’d have to imagine most of you here would be against that kind of babysitting.

  55. god this was hard to watch. i’m voting trump but he demolished himself. she just had to stand there and smile while he tore himself apart w his uncontrolled and terribly articulated rhetoric. why hasn’t his team beaten the word “tremendous” out of him already?

  56. The elites are cheering. The Mexican peso rose nearly two percent tonight. Finally, they think, Trump is done for and they can look forward to Hillary’s spending the next eight years emasculating and expropriating anybody who remains a threat to their rule—along with driving all religions but Islam from public life.
    They’re in for quite a shock November 8.

  57. Posting this commend twice here, so please withold the banning.
    Mr. Lolknee I might need your help if these guys ban me !
    After a few days spent into research I would like to ask the fellows who actually give a shit the following questions:
    1. Who killed Kenedy ?
    2. Who organized the muslim invasion of Europe ?
    3. Who coordinates the security failure of Europe ?
    4. Where are these coordinates made from ?
    5. What do the above 4 questions have in common?
    The answers are fucking out there while we sit around discussing how to have sex with women.
    Being stupid has reached a new level.
    Lust is a fucking sin, gentlemen, ROK needs to be become a beacon, a lighthouse, a torch of truth and knowledge.
    Truth and knowledge is dangerous.
    Do we dare ?
    Or do we keep our heads in fucking sand.

    2. Lolknee won’t help you.
      He said himself said he want all antisemites to be shot, therefore he is a cuckservative.

      1. what is an antisemite ?
        There are two types of jews…the ones that respect the old testament and thus respect the Torah and the other type, that created communism, Russian Bolshevik ,,Revolutions” and French ,,revolutions” through genocide.
        What is an ,,antisemite” – a made up word that includes different type of ethnic humans put together into the same word.
        antisemites need to be labeled anti-murderdom.

        1. Well, there are some famous jews like Freud who think that supressed sexuality is leading to antisemitism and that therefore the sexual restraining needs to be broken down.
          On the other hand Nietzsche states in ‘Zur Genealogie der Moral – 3. Abhandlung über das asketische Ideal’ that a philosopher can only exist with sexual abstinence.
          Therefore most of philosophers must be antisemitic.
          If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.

        2. If Freud said that, it was worthy of ridicule. ,,Suppressed Sexuality” what the fuck is that ?
          Sounds like devilish spouts to me.
          …and when you think this little Lucifer is called ,,The Father of Modern Psychology”.
          Makes you go bonkers.
          Nietzsche is correct on what you mention.

  58. I didn’t watch as it was on too late in my timezone, but from the brief posts and 5 minutes of checking the net I can deduct: Don dissapointed fans by not demolishng her- but held his own; Hillary’s week of preparing paid off; the polls haven’t really moved anywhere (or at least the few I have seen indicates gains for Trump).
    I don’t think people who can be swayed by these debates actually watch them and they would be too few to begin with.

    1. It is also of note that Trump had to debate two people and not just the Witch. And I think it’s pretty clear that the Witch was handed the questions last week to prepare.

      1. She knew the questions and I am sure the moderator ran interference for her.
        I will watch the debate tonight when I knock off work.

    1. Cool. I am now armed with the knowlege Pope Francis -before he was Pope-said liberation theology was “violent Marxism”. Thank you.

      1. An article needs to be written to cover this subject.
        It is masked in different forms and has dissidents of different colors.
        We need a sparkle of light into this profoundly immoral and wicked invention of ,,liberation theology”.
        I hate to admit it, but most ROK readers are sleeping in their boots.
        Lust is not a mortal sin for nothing gents, it’s mortal in the way that it makes you completely blind to the truth. The truth falls on blind eyes and deaf ears.
        Hearts need to start beating again. Minds need to sparkle.
        Ignite your thirst for the truth. It’s still forbidden, and many people died for you and I to discuss it openly.
        with respect to all….
        …..except for the genocidal murderers…

  60. By all traditional debate markers (poise, clarity of argument, grounding to examples the public can relate to), Clinton won this debate…not by a wide margin, but she did win. He may draw her at the last debate, at best. He just doesn’t have the tools and experience to outperform a career politician in a political venue like a debate. I’m still voting for Trump, but I don’t think he wins this on the debate stage. He is going to have to out-hustle HRC on the campaign trail in swing districts in swing states.

  61. Dear Roosh-please stop the Dues Vult popups…it disabled my computer at the library! On CSPAN at about five minutes before the debate the moderator said “wait-what? =you’re breaking up” then the sound was cut for a couple minutes! Then the sound came back up…anybody know what that was? Some security thing most likely I suppose…also, at the end my wife tells me “Look the Clintons are popular!” because they greeted the crowd at the end….at the end I kept waiting for Hillary to pitch forward into the crowd and saw her handlers always at the ready, preparing to catch her….and loving Bill takes her offstage, arm in arm….what a load of balony! My wife claims Hilary had a smoother debate than Trump (I will admit but I would call it slimier) and Trump got more “attack” questions that were statements (You initially supported the war in Iraq in 2002-the record shows it when in reality the record is a little murky and I heard one week in he was AGAINST the war…so the moderator was fucking with him…)….Although Hilary appeared to be “a strong (lizard) woman” Trump had the facts on his side and convinced me he would bring back jobs using realpolitik,,,,and stop fucking over our country like the sold-out slimebag political class that are bought and paid for. Hope he can do it.

  62. Trump is the savior, he supports the NYPD violationg constitutional rights through “stop and frisk” plus banning people on the bs “no fly list” from buying guns. People on the no fly list = people not convicted of anything who wrote something on the internet the dictatorship doesn’t like. Voters are such blue pill, beta, pillow biters

    1. NYC is already a kinda constitution free zone anyway…Chicago also…what’s the diff? So some gangbanger gets frisked, fuck them,

      1. Indeed. You want to own a hand gun in those holes, you need permission from the corrupt city beaucrats.

  63. Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !ik399f:
    On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
    !ik399f:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash689HomeSourceGetPay$97Hour… ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!ik399f:….,…..

      2. What should he use as an impartial news source? Aside from maybe the AP, I’m not sure there is such a thing.

        1. For the most impartial leanings as far as the election is concerned, the Vegas betting line.

  65. It’s a chatter battle so no surprise the woman sounded better and won it. Trump’s voice was weak almost squeaky at some points. He didn’t look confident – so much about the praise that this place has been singing about his aloofness and supposed alphadome.
    But let me tell you something. Hillary has been faking her illnesses and during the 9/11 incident she even used a body double. She’s been doing it to deceive the enemy that she’s weak and losing it and also I bet she managed to raise more money for her campaign from her previous backers. Tactically, brilliant!
    On this debate, she looked healthy, very confident, smiled a lot more than Trump and she was in control.
    Trump lost but I still think that he’s the elite’s favorite and for the record – I don’t support either as democracy is a sham.

  66. Look I don’t want to use the word “racist” here, but I’m curious as to what the gang thinks about the idea of Ben Shapiro running, down the road someday? I know some of you guys kinda distrust Jewish people, but that guy’s knowledge and his ability to speak are absolutely the top of the heap. I’d vote for him in a second, over just about anyone else I can imagine. Do you think he could bring it home for us?

    1. Li’l Ben? Distilled cuck and Trump-hater, white knight beta cuckmaster. Zero chance of support, irrespective of his heritage.

      1. Well, I was hoping to hear some opinions, and that’s definitely one…but what I really wanted was thoughts. I know he’s a Trump hater, sure. But what leads you to those other statements? If he’s a white knight, distilled beta cuck, I’ll stop supporting him; however I’ll need you to cite your rationale in addition to the name calling. Facts run the game for me. So, share the ones you have?

        1. OK, fine. It’s a lot of material to catch you up on. Shame on you for not paying attention to your hero:
          * How about the whole Michelle Fields affair, leading to L’il Ben’s resignation from BB?
          * His history with Vox Day
          * His adherence to bold cuckservative ideas
          It’s pretty simple; he’s a cuck. I don’t have to provide links, you can easily do a google search, e.g ‘ben shapiro vox day’, ‘ben shapiro michelle fields’, ben shapiro breitbart’.
          Again, onus is on you to know your hero, not me to do tons of research on shit I already know, and provide a dossier to you on a silver platter.

        2. Ahhh – yeah that Michelle Fields thing. I absolutely admit, I’ll never understand that. The best I can think is that he just kind of used it as a way to get out of Breitbart when he felt the time was right for him to go. And maybe the time WAS right…but yes you’re correct, it was a flimsy story, at best. As for the other things you cited…well, I don’t know about his history with Vox or all these cuckservative ideas you mention. I’ll at least check into the VD side of that…but anytime somebody says cuckservative to me I just get a little leery. I myself am far from a hard-line super far right soldier, I consider myself more of an extreme centrist who just wants to see the pendulum move from the far left where its hanging now, back towards the middle where things are best. Feel free to call me all the names you like, I just don’t go for many extreme positions. They’re important bc they push the boundaries of thought in both directions, but I think they lack the flexibility to griw and evolve when one side or the other actually does cook up a useful idea…and believe it or not, that has happened, once or twice.
          Thanks for stopping back to reply. That’s good shit, and it’s the reason I’m part of this community. Not too many crybaby fagets round these parts.

        3. Interesting that you said, “call me all the names you like” when I never called you any names. And, overly concerned about what others think of Ben. I called Ben “cuckservative”, not you, so maybe you’re Ben and you let it slip with that comment. Nice to meet you Ben. I still don’t think you’re a thought leader in the ‘Sphere though.

        4. A)Dude, who cares
          B) Name’s not Ben. Definitely not Alyosha Fyodorovich Karamazov, either though. Somewhere in between.
          C) I expect to be called names here by lots of cats, bc there’s lots of cats here that call each other names the moment anyone suggests a less-than-extremist position. It’s the Internet. I should think I’ll be OK.
          D) also dgaf about being a thought leader in the ‘sphere. I enjoy contributing positively to the conversations, but for now, that’s all (EFS). I’m much more interested in being a thought leader in MY sphere; that is, the people I see and interact with in the real world regularly. There, I’m quite successful, with what you might call a high conversion rate. This is the power of positivity. I can sit down with lifelong leftists & bring them to the center because, like the old saying goes, people don’t care what you know until they know that you care.
          At any rate, the lawn needs a mowing, so best of luck to you, I look forward to having the depth & breadth of my knowledge continually expanded by lots of dudes calling everybody cucks.

  67. I am an impartial observer here with no horse in this race. I will say, however, I noticed something funny this morning. There are 4 main NY papers. The WSJ and NY Post are conservative toilet paper and the NYT and daily News are liberal toilet paper. Two conservative papers announced a trump win. Two liberal papers said Hilary won.
    I hate to say it but taking this election even kind of seriously is pretty hilarious

    1. SCOTUS appointments are in fact important, and the next sitting President may have upward of 4 replacements to nominate. That’s why it matters. Everything else is silly and pointless.

      1. I still can’t be convinced of that. It’s ok. We agree on other things

        1. There’s nothing to convince. It’s a simple fact of the matter. 4 Leftist judges means that we turn into a police state within 10 years. While you may have a devil may care approach and will simply kill yourself if you can’t get your concierge service, these kinds of things mean something to other people. Because generally, people hate living under tyranny and dictatorships, especially ones towing the Feminist line.

    1. Did you read this article before posting the link?
      This kind of vague referencing throughout the article would have gotten me a failed grade in any writing class. This shit reads like a gossip rag.

  69. As far as the debate is concerned, I think Trump won. Maybe not on a point for for basis, but the mere fact that he’s not a politician and he was able to hold his own. The presupposition was that he would go into the debate with his ‘style’ and get obliterated. But rather he kept that strategy and it actually turned out to be viable, so hopefully he’ll tweak it for the next one.
    He’s Rocky, she’s appollo creed and that was the first match. Maybe he didn’t win, but he definitely had her on the ropes. She and her people are wondering why they didn’t get a knock out in the same way she couldn’t understand why she isn’t 50 points ahead. If its a win for Hillary, then it’s a technical win based on what the ‘judges’ interpreted.
    All that with heavily biases questions favoring Hillary. The point that the news media is missing about Trump’s business dealings is that those decisions that are being made as a business man. He’s not the one making the rules he’s simply playing the game. And for that he is ‘smart’. But try explaining that to people who never had a real job thier whole life. The point is lost on them.

  70. Hi everybody! 👋🤓
    Btw…I think I should be reinstated back into the RVF..how ’bout it Roosh?

  71. Scott Adams: Clinton won the debate. Trump won the election.
    “By tomorrow, no one will remember what either of them said during the debate. But we will remember how they made us feel.
    Clinton won the debate last night. And while she was doing it, Trump won the election. He had one thing to accomplish – being less scary – and he did it.”

    1. Read it too.
      He claims Trump has to control himself sufficiently to win over lots of voters in the middle who secretly like him and want to vote for him but to whom he seemed too scary so far.
      I tjhink he could be right.
      Adams was spot on so far.

  72. Fake crowd.
    Pretty much silent until the end. Listen carefully during one of the final bits about Hillary’s stamina. She attacks Trump, and the crowd goes wild (no boos by the opposition crowd). Then suddenly cuts out by Lester’s hand gesture (as if people will listen in unison?) Seconds later, Trump hits back (mildly), and the exact same crowd cheers.
    Here’s a link below. Start at 1:30:35. The crowd lasts 6.5 seconds. The very next crowd (for Trump) sounds exactly the same, and is the same length – 6.5 seconds.

    P.S. You can see Lester slip up on trying to cover his bias at 1:31:14. He slips a smile towards Clinton as if to say, “Oh yes please my queen, please interrupt me and respond at your will.” While he continuously bashed Trump everytime he tried to interrupt.

  73. My favorite part is where she talks about boosting the economy and supporting the middle class, and directly in the next sentence (as if those statements were perfectly connected), that the gov needs to invest in those clean-energy corps to finally have “green energy”. I mean, green energy is surely an interesting debate, but WTF does it have to do with boosting the economy? If anything, that is something that will dampen the economy by raising energy prices. Smh

Comments are closed.