Tuesday, September 27, 2016

Clinton v Trump

The Letdown at Hofstra
The View from the Middle

Why did 100 million people watch last night’s debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump?  Let’s be honest!  Why do so many people watch the Indy 500?  Some people are just huge car fans and love to see the 200 mile-per-hour chess game being played out on the two and a half mile oval at Speedway, Indiana.  Many, especially the TV viewers, however, are attracted by the real-life possibility of a cataclysmic accident.
And such was the audience last night.  Some were political issue nerds like me who really want to sort through the positions of the candidates in order to decide who to vote for.  Others watched on the off chance that Hillary would collapse into an epileptic-like seizure and writhe on the debate floor, while others wanted to be watching when The Donald stepped across the stage and slapped Hillary across the face.  I’m not sure any of these viewers where satisfied last night.
First, there was no fireball apocalypse in the fourth turn of the Hofstra 500 last night.  The event was relatively civil, maybe even boring by Republican debate standards, and Hillary looked healthy and happy in her fire hydrant red pantsuit, so the catastrophe hopefuls were disappointed.  That left us with the issues.  So, how did that go?
While neither side will admit it this morning, there really were no fireworks in this area either.  Trump dominated the first part of the debate as the two candidates talked about taxes and the economy.  He looked and sounded like the businessman who will bring some common sense reforms to governing this nation.  He says he will reduce taxes and regulations and most business people in America understand that concept.
Hillary called this “Trumped up trickle down” economics, a totally planned line that I think fell flat.  She claimed that this has never worked, but Ronald Reagan was a big “supply side” economic advocate and many of us remember the Reagan recovery and economic expansion positively.  It really was “morning in America” as Ronald Reagan made us proud and safe and prosperous.  Donald didn’t say that, but my guess is he will say it next time.
Hillary was then successful in getting The Donald tangled up in his own personal shorts.  She forced Donald to spend too many minutes defending his refusal to release his tax returns, his business practices and his treatment of women.  Imagine that!  Hillary Clinton lecturing anyone on inappropriate treatment of women.  She defended her husband as 17 different women accused Bill of rape or sexual abuse, and then she and her surrogates performed character assassinations on every one of those same women. 
There were moments for each candidate.  The Donald skewered Hillary as the ultimate political insider who has been in Washington for 20+ years and done nothing.  I actually thought Hillary’s big moment was when she smiled and shimmied after a Trump onslaught about her temperament.  I’m sure this was a planned tactic, but it was effective.

I predict two things will happen in the wake of this debate.  Both sides will spin a victory for their candidates and the polls will change very little.  Second, Trump will learn more from this debate than Hillary.  He left a lot on the table (Benghazi, The Clinton Foundation and Hillary’s emails) and Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s campaign manager, will not allow that to happen in the next debate. 

6 comments:

  1. Lucid insights Mr. Canfield! Gawkers will be looking on as they hit the speedway again. Stay tuned!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yep.no suprised here.And I didn't even watch a minute of it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Excellent assessment, Kevin. I think Mr. Trump missed some knockout opportunities during the first debate; for example: 1) During the discussion of cyberspace security, he should have reminded her of the FBI’s findings relative to highly classified documents contained in her server and who knows what the 30,000+ e-mail she scrubbed contained. Having served in the Navy for five years after college, I would have been court marshalled for less; 2) During the discussion on income tax returns, he should have brought up the Clinton Foundation’s money-laundering scheme and what personal income is being derived from that; and 3) During the discussion on the black community, he should have reminded her of her statement about respecting the vision of Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. The primary purpose Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood was to eliminate the black race (her “Negro Plan”). Unfortunately, PPH is succeeding in doing that: 1 out of every 2 black pregnancies ends in abortion while 1 out of every 4 white pregnancies ends in abortion (both sad testimonies of our time).
    It appeared to me that Mrs. Clinton was throwing small jabs, most of which Mr. Trump should not have tried to counterpunch. I think he should have taken notes, not interrupt her, and then counter with key issues. He obviously needs a debate coach before Debate No. 2 takes place in St. Louis.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good stuff! I'm enjoying these blog posts. I have a reply to a Facebook post, that I crafted earlier today, but in fact, did not post, that I should let you read. I can't decide if I should post it as a reply, or as a status post, or not at all. I really wish that the nation would take this more seriously, instead treating it like a UFC match.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Glad you are enjoying. And you're right about the UFC comment.

    ReplyDelete