(10-19-2016 10:30 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:28 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:55 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:51 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I frequently read these wrong, but I'm not seeing DJT making up any ground tonight. I think he lost (and I thought DJT won - barely - the 2nd debate) this debate.

Trump's body language was awful too. Don't discount that. And DJT's refusal to accept the election results is so bad, that it will destroy any potential gains anywhere in the debate.

I see you already got your talking points from NBC


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MSM is all in the tank. All of them had the exact same immediate talking points post debate. Hillary was flustered the whole night, voters don't live in a bubble.

She did seem irritated the whole night.

She has trouble with controlling her subtle expressions when she is not talking. She tends to look haughty.

Her smirks really do not leave a good impression. She's not as over the top with her reactions, but she is every bit as out of control as Trump.

(10-19-2016 10:30 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  When an election like this has had so many illegal goings-on by the DNC why should Trump concede the election if he loses. It's obvious the Demons are not playing a legal and ethical game. By asking this stupid question that's just like asking for the tip by a waiter before they even serve your food.

Even horse face Meghan is against him and she WORKS at Fox.

MSM knows massive voter fraud occurs so they, all of them, attacked Trump on in it. They were all texting each other during the debate. But again USA voters don't live in that bubble.

(10-19-2016 08:27 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  Donald choked....lol

Twice

(10-19-2016 10:24 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:48 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Holy Shnitke's??? Some of you actually believe he won that? You can't possibly be that naive?

Remember these guys said the "you should be in jail" comment from debate #2 was "the best singer in debate history"

Every pundit said that was his low point of the night.

So don't take the cons on here seriously

first of all, it's a "zinger". the best singer in debate history was probably stephen douglas, who reportedly had a lovely tenor voice.

but you're both getting sand in your gavinas over what is ultimately a retarded question -- which is only slightly less retarded than fussing over what has-been "pundits" think. punditry died the day pundits started reporting on what was trending on twitter. period. their corpses have been moldering in open graves ever since. ******* dinosaurs that just haven't fallen in to a tar pit yet.

anyway, "who won the debate" is irrelevant. "who captured more undecideds" is all that matters in any election at this point, and in this particular election cycle, if you're still undecided, you're either mentally defective or clinically indecisive. whichever the case, these people aren't normal.

I don't know what would capture the undecideds at this point . . . and neither does anyone else. but here's what they're NOT doing; closely scoring televised debates. so, quit fingerbanging yourself over the niceties of forensics; it's simply not relevant.

If you can't understand why people could be undecided, you are incapable of rational thought and shouldn't really vote, no matter who you are for.

How dare does Donna Brazille show her face after it was proven she feeds debate questions to HRC?

CNN poll says HRC won in a landslide

He's getting destroyed on national news casts. Extraordinarily actually.

52 to 39

(10-19-2016 10:39 PM)john01992 Wrote:  CNN poll says HRC won in a landslide

Im sure it did.

MSM has no credibility anymore.

(10-19-2016 08:46 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:45 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:45 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:44 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Hillary won't add a cent on the debt?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do people really believe this ****? Are they that stupid?

Well they are voting for her... so that should answer your question


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Too stupid to breed.

The truth is that both plans blow up the debt. Supposedly, Trump's plan is worse at doing that. Given his growth projections, he probably also blows a hole in the debt worse than Clinton would.

Has the government actually provided proof that the Russians hacked the DNC? Like tangible proof?

I think educated people see how dangerous this guy really is. So they are no longer pulling punches.

(10-19-2016 10:41 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:46 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:45 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:45 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:44 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Hillary won't add a cent on the debt?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do people really believe this ****? Are they that stupid?

Well they are voting for her... so that should answer your question


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Too stupid to breed.

The truth is that both plans blow up the debt. Supposedly, Trump's plan is worse at doing that. Given his growth projections, he probably also blows a hole in the debt worse than Clinton would.

But that's not what she said, she said that she won't add a cent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(10-19-2016 10:43 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:41 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:46 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:45 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:45 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Do people really believe this ****? Are they that stupid?

Well they are voting for her... so that should answer your question


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Too stupid to breed.

The truth is that both plans blow up the debt. Supposedly, Trump's plan is worse at doing that. Given his growth projections, he probably also blows a hole in the debt worse than Clinton would.

But that's not what she said, she said that she won't add a cent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How dare you question Miko!! Haven't you heard, he was objectively watching this debate and no preconceived notions of who won or lost.

Wow. Donna Brazille.
Caught red-handed feeding questions to HRC before a prior debate and blames the Russians for hacking.

(10-19-2016 10:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:24 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:48 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Holy Shnitke's??? Some of you actually believe he won that? You can't possibly be that naive?

Remember these guys said the "you should be in jail" comment from debate #2 was "the best singer in debate history"

Every pundit said that was his low point of the night.

So don't take the cons on here seriously

first of all, it's a "zinger". the best singer in debate history was probably stephen douglas, who reportedly had a lovely tenor voice.

but you're both getting sand in your gavinas over what is ultimately a retarded question -- which is only slightly less retarded than fussing over what has-been "pundits" think. punditry died the day pundits started reporting on what was trending on twitter. period. their corpses have been moldering in open graves ever since. ******* dinosaurs that just haven't fallen in to a tar pit yet.

anyway, "who won the debate" is irrelevant. "who captured more undecideds" is all that matters in any election at this point, and in this particular election cycle, if you're still undecided, you're either mentally defective or clinically indecisive. whichever the case, these people aren't normal.

I don't know what would capture the undecideds at this point . . . and neither does anyone else. but here's what they're NOT doing; closely scoring televised debates. so, quit fingerbanging yourself over the niceties of forensics; it's simply not relevant.

If you can't understand why people could be undecided, you are incapable of rational thought and shouldn't really vote, no matter who you are for.

I can't understand why people that are undecided in this election aren't institutionalized. Moreover, I would like to fix that. I would like to round them all up and put them all in detention camps until after the election, because there's no telling what these retards are about to do.

(10-19-2016 10:42 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think educated people see how dangerous this guy really is. So they are no longer pulling punches.

just for the sake of argument, I'll entertain your utterly self absorbed and condescending concept for a moment -- I think if they were truly educated, it wouldn't have taken this long for them to figure it out.

just because they're in your teevee thingy doesn't make them "educated", sparky.

(10-19-2016 10:42 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think educated people see how dangerous this guy really is. So they are no longer pulling punches.

Dangerous?
Far as I know no one has died on Trump's watch.
HRC can't make that claim.

Donna Brazile is dangerous. What a stuttering and deflecting imbecile. When there is smoke, there is fire.

(10-19-2016 10:56 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:42 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think educated people see how dangerous this guy really is. So they are no longer pulling punches.

Dangerous?
Far as I know no one has died on Trump's watch.
HRC can't make that claim.

Boom! Close this damn thread, oh and somebody get Mach some water for that burn, he will need it!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk