Rubbish. It is supported here in this conservative forum. It is supported by CNN's poll, it is even supported by conservatives on Fox and in print.
People want an outsider not another polished lawyer politician. Hillary cannot win legitimately, she does not have the support of the people.
All this might be perfectly true, and I hope it is, but it does not have much to do with who actually advanced their cause in the electoral college.
Fact is Hillary went into the debate with high expectations and behind in the polls. She needed to take Trump out decisively. She failed.
I did not say she succeeded, I said she was more likely of the two to have succeeded. The polls will tell us who succeeded and who failed.
As such no matter your opinion of Trump’s boorishness, he did what he needed to do, scored many long term take-away points and did not harm himself.
I contend that precisely the opposite was the case. I think he harms himself considerably and we will know when real polls, besides CNN, tell us whether his momentum continues or has been blunted. By the way, I did not use the word, "boorishness."
The points that Hillary is all talk no action will stick; the point Democrats ignore blacks for the 4 years between elections to suffer will stick; the point Americans are in danger because Hillary with Obama created ISIS will stick, the point she lies so easy will stick; etc.
Again, we all hope these assertions of yours are true but don't have much to do with the discussion about the debate.
The points you make have been hammered in hundreds of millions of dollars worth of attack ads- obviously they are not harming him.
When a candidate commits a gaffe or otherwise validates a narrative about himself, the damage is always much, much worse. In this case, the narrative has been put out there to the tune, as you say, of hundreds of millions of dollars. The question is, did Trump validate that narrative?
We shall see, soon the polls will tell us.
