Poor example: transcripts cannot capture tone of voice, facial expression, nor all of the timing. Video can and does.
Secondly -- it is indisputable that Trump's ratings and favorables unexpectedly (that word is usually reserved for economic failings under Obama, but it works here too) jumped after his dust-up with Megyn. To find out why, one must look at more than the transcripts, and talk to some of the observers.
Hillary Clinton is certain to do so in the general. To ignore it now is to venture out onto the minefield hoping that nothing blows until after the election.
Aye, 'tis true, 'tis true.
But from my (admittedly limited) trolling of the internet, it looks like those who will vote for Hillary are going to be (to quote Susan Sarandon) "voting with their vaginas" anyway: and as such will listen to the hysterics of their fellow Harpies, *regardless* of what Trump actually says or does.
Far better that we look out for those things which are likely to have traction with the "mushy middle": which in this election, I deem, is far more likely to revolve around immigration, the wall, jobs, and terrorism, than "binders full of women".
Hillary apparently has the Dem nomination locked up, barring indictment, due to SuperDelegates: and the Bernie Jugend may take their tweets and go home and sulk...but the internals, say of South Carolina, show that 5% of whites hold her trustworthy: and was it 95% or 100% of blacks.
Of such is not a winning nationwide coalition made.
Think you an "October surprise" will even work against Trump? Or will it look like desperation from a shrill, feeble, washed-up Harridan?
But my interlocutors on this thread do not go to the video, they dismiss the transcript out of hand and stand resolutely on their impressions.
I suspect that Donald Trump's numbers improved markedly after the debate for the same reason that Newt Gingrich's numbers improved markedly after he attacked the press. That does not have much to do with the substance of the charges and almost nothing to do with whether or not Megan Kelly behaved properly which, after all, is the subject of this debate.
It is clear that Hillary will attempt to exploit feminism and attack Trump as a misogynist, in fact it was already attempted and effectively beaten back by Donald. Therefore, Kelly's questioning in this area was perfectly proper. It is not to be likened to the questioning a cycle ago of Santorum about birth control which was a planted question designed to create an issue, Kelly's question was designed to explore a known issue.
As to an October surprise, I don't think the votes which will be cast by the Democrat base have anything to do with the issues but are cast on race, ethnicity, self-interest, and prejudice (including allegations of misogynism). There are however some independents and some lunchpail Democrats who might be swayed by an October surprise one way or the other. If they are on the fence about Hillary Clinton, whom we all agree is a wretched harridan, there might be some impact.
But I think you are right, I think this will be a wave election and whoever has the momentum will prevail. That should be a Republican although Donald Trump is probably the most vulnerable choice as among the three leaders and not for his alleged misogyny alone but for his really unattractive character and career.
This is probably the last election in which Republicans have a chance if they do not shut down immigration which is why I said that I will support Trump in the general election. I put it this way:
I will pull the lever for Trump with one hand while holding my nose with the other hand and falling on both knees in supplication and repentance to God Almighty begging forgiveness and mercy for the Republic for generating this Hobbesian choice.