Poll: Hillary Clinton wins first presidential debate

[Crabtownboy]

Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton took the stage on Monday night for the first presidential debate, and viewers were quick to weigh in with their thoughts on which candidate was winning.

According to a poll conducted on AOL.com during the debate, Clinton was the winner. Of respondents who voted during the debate, 55.4 percent said Clinton won, while 44.6 named Trump.

http://www.aol.com/article/news/201...nton-wins-first-presidential-debate/21479827/

 

[carpro]

It was expected that, no matter how the debate actually went, Hillary would be declared the winner by the in the tank media.

 

[Zaac]

It was expected that, no matter how the debate actually went, Hillary would be declared the winner by the in the tank media.

It was expected that Trump would think he could use the same lack of substance approach he used in the GOP Primaries to try and skate through this with no preparation.

Guess he met expectations and failed as miserably as could be expected.

According to a poll conducted on AOL.com during the debate, Clinton was the winner. Of respondents who voted during the debate, 55.4 percent said Clinton won, while 44.6 named Trump.

Sadly CTB those numbers show just how partisan the country is and most would say their candidate of choice won no matter what. How that many people could have watched that debate and thought Trump actually did a better job is just loopy. But those are right about the numbers that the popular vote will probably show on election night.

 

[Don]

It was expected that Trump would think he could use the same lack of substance approach he used in the GOP Primaries to try and skate through this with no preparation.

Guess he met expectations and failed as miserably as could be expected.

Sadly CTB those numbers show just how partisan the country is and most would say their candidate of choice won no matter what. How that many people could have watched that debate and thought Trump actually did a better job is just loopy. But those are right about the numbers that the popular vote will probably show on election night.

I'm curious, Zaac; surely you're aware that CTB is an ardent Hillary supporter. Yet, you've proclaimed that you refuse to vote for her (and we know that you will never vote for Trump). Are you simply supporting CTB here because you're so adamantly against Trump, although supporting CTB is supporting Hillary?

I'm not trying to "zing" anyone; I'm trying to understand why you seem to continually, through many different threads, seem to support Hillary.

 

[Crabtownboy]

I'm curious, Zaac; surely you're aware that CTB is an ardent Hillary supporter. Yet, you've proclaimed that you refuse to vote for her (and we know that you will never vote for Trump). Are you simply supporting CTB here because you're so adamantly against Trump, although supporting CTB is supporting Hillary?

I'm not trying to "zing" anyone; I'm trying to understand why you seem to continually, through many different threads, seem to support Hillary.

I have said that we have two candidates who are flawed. However, to me Trump is much more flawed than Hillary.

By the way, even conservative columnist David Brooks rips Trump in his editorial published today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/27/opinion/an-ugly-campaign-90-minute-version.html?_r=0

 

[InTheLight]

It was expected that, no matter how the debate actually went, Hillary would be declared the winner by the in the tank media.

"It's rigged."

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Zaac]

I'm curious, Zaac; surely you're aware that CTB is an ardent Hillary supporter. Yet, you've proclaimed that you refuse to vote for her (and we know that you will never vote for Trump). Are you simply supporting CTB here because you're so adamantly against Trump, although supporting CTB is supporting Hillary?

What on earth are you talking about supporting CTB? He hasn't said anything to support. He posted the link to an article that said Hillary won the debate. How is acknowledging that SHE won supporting CTB? It sounds like you're adamantly anti-CTB because of his stance.

I'm not trying to "zing" anyone; I'm trying to understand why you seem to continually, through many different threads, seem to support Hillary.

For the same reason that folks probably think I seem support black over white. I support what's right and will generally speak against the status quo if it's wrong even if every one else thinks it's right.

Should I say that Trump won just because Christian political conservatives are looking for something positive to make them feel good about supporting another anti-character of Christ candidate for President and then thinking folks are supposed to believe them when they talk about God saving the country or the country needing a revival?

 

[Don]

I have said that we have two candidates who are flawed. However, to me Trump is much more flawed than Hillary.

By the way, even conservative columnist David Brooks rips Trump in his editorial published today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/27/opinion/an-ugly-campaign-90-minute-version.html?_r=0

Word play. You're planning on voting for Hillary over Trump; how is that not supporting Hillary?

 

[Don]

What on earth are you talking about supporting CTB? He hasn't said anything to support. He posted the link to an article that said Hillary won the debate. How is acknowledging that SHE won supporting CTB? It sounds like you're adamantly anti-CTB because of his stance.

You addressed CTB in a conversational tone that indicated agreement; or that you think/believe you and he are in agreement. When agreeing with someone, in front of a crowd or a body of readers on a message board, agreement implies consent/support. Even you know this.

And you are in agreement with CTB -- against Trump. You haven't communicated publicly with CTB regarding Hillary; because of this omission, you've provided the impression, inadvertently or otherwise, that you tend to think Hillary is the better candidate.

For the same reason that folks probably think I seem support black over white. I support what's right and will generally speak against the status quo if it's wrong even if every one else thinks it's right.

If you support what's right, does that mean you support Clinton? (We both know you don't.) Speaking against the status quo doesn't mean you have to give the impression of supporting another wrong.

Should I say that Trump won just because Christian political conservatives are looking for something positive to make them feel good about supporting another anti-character of Christ candidate for President and then thinking folks are supposed to believe them when they talk about God saving the country or the country needing a revival?

Of course not. But if you truly think Hillary is just as bad a choice as Trump, how about giving equal time speaking against both candidates?

 

[Zaac]

You addressed CTB in a conversational tone tndichat iated agreement; or that you think/believe you and he are in agreement. When agreeing with someone, in front of a crowd or a body of readers on a message board, agreement implies consent/support. Even you know this.

Seriously? Did you just wake up this morning with a penchant to argue because that's just dumb. To save you the trouble of continuing to make such statements, I'll explain something again for you. If I want to say it, I can say it. I don't need your help.

And you are in agreement with CTB -- against Trump. You haven't communicated publicly with CTB regarding Hillary; because of this omission, you've provided the impression, inadvertently or otherwise, that you tend to think Hillary is the better candidate.

Oh gosh. She's definitely the better candidate. I'm not afraid to admit that. I think some of you are and will continue to be disingenuous to that fact because she's a Democrat. But of the two candidates and their ability and readiness to be President, his resume shouldn't even get a half of a second glance in comparison to hers.

In terms of who he is as a person, he presents himself as a person who doesn't care about other people. He's crass and condescending and thinks he's smarter than he actually is. He's misogynistic. He's bigoted and narcissistic.

In all her shortcomings and flaws, she still comes across as sane. He doesn't.

But I'm not voting for her either.
To say that she isn't the better candidate is based in nothing but partisanship.

If you support what's right, does that mean you support Clinton? (We both know you don't.) Speaking against the status quo doesn't mean you have to give the impression of supporting another wrong.

Let me say it again if it let's your mind feel at ease. I'm not voting for her either.

Of course not. But if you truly think Hillary is just as bad a choice as Trump, how about giving equal time speaking against both candidates?

Umm, I don't think she is as bad a choice as Trump. He's the worst candidate for President in so many ways that I've seen in my lifetime. She could be caught in a lurid affair the day before the election and it still wouldn't come anywhere close to what this man has said and done.

So I don't have to give her equal time. The rest of you have got that covered.

 

[poncho]

POLLS: TRUMP WON FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE – HANDS DOWN!

Trump fared better than Clinton in several polls across the web. Out of more than 30 websites surveyed, Hillary won only the NBC News, WCVB (Boston) and the CNN/ORC polls.

Check out our survey of more than 30 sites below:

Continue . . . http://www.infowars.com/poll-who-won-the-first-presidential-debate/

 

[Zaac]

POLLS: TRUMP WON FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE – HANDS DOWN!

Trump fared better than Clinton in several polls across the web. Out of more than 30 websites surveyed, Hillary won only the NBC News, WCVB (Boston) and the CNN/ORC polls.

Check out our survey of more than 30 sites below:

Continue . . . http://www.infowars.com/poll-who-won-the-first-presidential-debate/

Wow. Infowars found polls that support an obvious loss as a win. Imagine that sort of conspiracy coming from them.

 

[poncho]

Wow. Infowars found polls that support an obvious loss as a win. Imagine that sort of conspiracy coming from them.

Wow, imagine you trying to dismiss reality with magic words.

 

[Zaac]

Wow, imagine you trying to dismiss reality with magic words.

Imagine you thinking that InfoWars deals in reality.

 

[poncho]

Imagine you thinking that InfoWars deals in reality.
View attachment 915

I'm starting to wonder who all these folks are who are saying Trump "won"? Must just be the "conservative" outlets.

It's the thousands and thousands of folks who voted in the thirty or so online polls you're desperately trying to ignore and dismiss Zaac. It's not because of any imaginary "vast right wing conspiracy" so put your tin foil hat away.

 

[InTheLight]

Lots of people are talking about Russian hackers breaking into these websites and planting poll results that show Trump won the debate. Lots of people. Good people. [emoji3]

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo

 

[Don]

Seriously? Did you just wake up this morning with a penchant to argue because that's just dumb. To save you the trouble of continuing to make such statements, I'll explain something again for you. If I want to say it, I can say it. I don't need your help.

Sure you do; because the rest of your post (below, as well as prior posts) validates what I wrote: you agree with CTB, and therefore support his comments in this thread. Feel free to deny it.

Oh gosh. She's definitely the better candidate. I'm not afraid to admit that. I think some of you are and will continue to be disingenuous to that fact because she's a Democrat. But of the two candidates and their ability and readiness to be President, his resume shouldn't even get a half of a second glance in comparison to hers.

In terms of who he is as a person, he presents himself as a person who doesn't care about other people. He's crass and condescending and thinks he's smarter than he actually is. He's misogynistic. He's bigoted and narcissistic.

In all her shortcomings and flaws, she still comes across as sane. He doesn't.

But I'm not voting for her either.
To say that she isn't the better candidate is based in nothing but partisanship.

Let me say it again if it let's your mind feel at ease. I'm not voting for her either.

Umm, I don't think she is as bad a choice as Trump. He's the worst candidate for President in so many ways that I've seen in my lifetime. She could be caught in a lurid affair the day before the election and it still wouldn't come anywhere close to what this man has said and done.

So that sums it up: of the two, you'd prefer Hillary. Doesn't mean you'll vote for her; but since you're basically letting the majority of Americans choose for you, you'd prefer Hillary.

So I don't have to give her equal time. The rest of you have got that covered.

Don't include me in that "you." I'm not a republican, nor have I supported or spoken favorably of Trump.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Online polls are notoriously inaccurate. Anyone going to the website can vote whether they are a citizen or not, regardless of their age. And they can vote numerous times in the same poll. I'd not put much stock in an online poll.

 

[poncho]

Lots of people are talking about Russian hackers breaking into these websites and planting poll results that show Trump won the debate. Lots of people. Good people. [emoji3]

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo

Yeah and I hear all those thousands of people who keep showing up at every Trump rally are really Russians that have infiltrated the US to make Hillary look bad.

Don't believe it?

WoW! Look at all them Russians!!!

 

[InTheLight]

Yeah and I hear all those thousands of people who keep showing up at every Trump rally are really Russians that have infiltrated the US to make Hillary look bad.

Don't believe it?

WoW! Look at all them Russians!!!

Wow! Look at Poncho conflating two things!