The best analysis of the Presidential debate last night was presented as a comment to an American Thinker article. I present it in full, as he says it so perfectly there is virtually nothing for me to add:
"Confession: I did not watch the debate because I knew the outcome and
did not want to see it unfold in real time. Knew Lester would be
Hillary's servant. The white lady on the plantation had him trained
Knew Donald would be "spontaneous" (prepped as if this were
another primary debate and not an animal of an entirely different
stripe), knew she would be coiffed, canned, buffed, stuffed, propped,
programmed, and smug with her superiority. Knew he would be walking on
eggshells, careful to avoid validating the image the left has painted of
Therefore he would be hesitant to "go there" and come across as an
unhinged bomb thrower. The left painted a caricature of him before he
set one foot on the stage and he was crippled because he had that to
One more thing: she, in her debate years ago with Rick Lazio
for the New York Senate seat played the helpless women victim card by
portraying Lazio, a fine gentleman, as a sexist and a threat for daring
to walk over to her podium and ask her to sign a pledge. She stood
there playacting the part of a woman whose safety was momentarily
threatened by a nasty man who was seen overpowering the space of a
Don't for a moment think that tactic wasn't remembered
by Trump who was trying not to give her that result so it could be
trumpeted today all over social media and by the reptiles in the press.
So Trump has had his baptism by fire. He got the lay of the land so to
The dynamics were noted and the rules of the game on display.
If the RNC weren't sharing one brain amongst all of them, they would
insist they have their OWN moderator at the next debate. Or at the very
least, a co-moderator who will balance out the bias and the rank
deceit. No debate takes place until that happens. Prince Reibus should
be put on notice."
What Did You THINK Was Going to Happen?
1 week ago