Donald Trump clearly wasn't even trying to win a debate
 

He was doing the only thing that matters. And that, my friends, is to win the hearts and minds of the american people. 100 million americans just watched him do what they have dreamed of having the opportunity to do.... TO CALL BULLSHIT RIGHT IN THE FACE OF THE ESTABLISHMENT.

He may not have won the debate. But he has most definitely won the presidency. No doubt about it.

Trump... is the establishment. He's the billionaire who pulls the strings of the politicians.

Yes. He has established himself as a billionaire and will soon establish himself as the President of the United States of America. Pulled them strings all the way to the top.

I wondered how you would spin this loss - Good try...

Pretty weak though - The sort of BS Trump would say.....

Millions just saw Trump speak a truth to power that has never before been witnessed. He just became a hero to working class Americans all across this country.

Donald Trump 79.68% (30,443 votes)


Hillary Clinton 20.32% (7,762 votes)



Total Votes: 38,205

Poll: Who Won the First Presidential Debate? - Breitbart


Businessman Donald Trump 53.59% (14,011 votes)


Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton 40.45% (10,577 votes)


Neither. 3.84% (1,003 votes)


I don't know. 2.12% (556 votes)



Total Votes: 26,147

Poll: Who won the presidential debate (9/26/16)? How did Clinton, Trump do in the first debate? | NJ.com


Who won the debate?

Hillary Clinton
44 %
Donald Trump
51 %
Draw
5 %

7,410 Votes

Poll: Who won the debate? | TheHill

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump faced off at their first presidential debate Monday. Who do you think won?

Hillary Clinton
43 %
Donald Trump
57 %

302,754 Votes
Presidential Debate: Did Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton Win


22%Hillary Clinton
71%Donald Trump
07%Neither candidate
https://twitter.com/WCTV/status/780589000646070272

36%Hillary Clinton
64%Donald Trump


3,535 votes•22 hours left
https://twitter.com/SteveRudinABC7/s...78868155523072

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

What a load of shit - You are not that stupid...

Sorry but Trump stepped in it tonight with 100 million watching. He showed the world that he is an empty suit. There's nothing upstairs, know what I mean. He's a rich billionaire's son, about as establishment as you could possibly get. He is a oligarch and a fascist, you simply have to google those two terms so you know whose cock you're sucking. Nice try though. Joshua does the sycophant thing a little better but that's just because he's fucking dumber than you are. Sweet dreams.

It's just a sign of whats to come. Donald will be the poll leader.

You only attack because you know I'm right. However frightened you may be about that prospect.. you know.

Breitbart. :1orglaugh

That basically shows 1 in 5 Trump supporters thought he lost.


CNN Poll: Hillary won debate 62-27

https://twitter.com/search?q=cnn/orc...Ctwgr%5Esearch








https://scontent.fsnc1-1.fna.fbcdn.n...36&oe=58822D12

It's like Republicans complaining about Hollywood elite and their favorite president was Ronald Regan.. They have a hard time connecting the dots it seems.. :1orglaugh

Trump held his own, but this debate will quickly become about Lester Holt's extreme bias. He was auditioning for Clinton's press secretary.

As long as there is not a Jew in the white house then I think we have ALL WON! :thumbsup

You talk shit about breitbart and then follow up with Clinton News Network?

Breitbart :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Clearly Breitbart is a proper non biased source.... lol.

Time?
thehill?

Why just pick one?


Who won the debate overall?

Hillary Clinton
49 %
Donald Trump
51 %

405,403 Votes

Presidential Debate: Who Won, Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton?


Clinton or Trump: Who do you think won the first presidential debate?

Getty Images
Donald Trump
58 %
Hillary Clinton
42 %
136468
Votes

Vote: Who won the first presidential debate?

Checked it out, they both made some good points. All I cared about was the talk about cleaning up the neighbourhoods.... Oh wait, I'm Canadian.

I agree. I think the questions Holt asked made Trump look bad.

At the same time, I think this is over due. Trump and his entire campaign has been complaining about how the press has been treating him. It seems to me this entire election has been dominated by Clinton's email and Benghazi, both of which seem silly to me. Benghazi was a terrorist attack no one saw coming, no one could have prevented, and no one could have done anything any different to change the outcome - it was over before we could react. The email crap was pure bullshit; There just any law that says it is illegal for someone to send classified information via email. This was common practice at the State Department, and others in Congress have done this (oddly enough there has been no investigations into anyone else).

Meanwhile, we have a presidential candidate who refuses to release his taxes. Why isn't he being called out on this issue every day by every news org in the country? Why are we taking so much about the Hillary Foundation which seems to have never broken a law, while the Trump Foundation is using charity money to pay off legal fines in the amounts of hundreds of thousands of dollars?

About time he got called out on some of these issues.

ANYONE who uses Breitbart as a source for political news shouldn't be allowed to debate politics online. Or at all.

You are talking about a news org that is running Trump's campaign. That is completely and utterly biased.

I'm linking to every poll I can find.. You're welcome to post some of your own. Good luck finding even a handful showing Hillary the winner. And I can guarantee those sources are completely bias.


Hillary Clinton 11.7%
Donald Trump 87.7%
Other 0.6%

Clinton vs. Trump: Who won the presidential debate? - Roanoke Times: Quizzes & Polls




Current results after 42,418 votes:

Hillary Clinton, 45.70% and Donald Trump, 54.30%.
First presidential debate of 2016: Who won? Vote in our poll.


Donald Trump 63.92%


Hillary Clinton 36.08%
Poll: Who won Monday’s presidential debate? | KSN-TV

After the debate, Megyn Kelly said, "Donald Trump had snot dripping out of his... whatever."

Every poll you're listing is posted at freeperville and stormfront telling Trumpers to go hit. Nice try.

None of the polls linked matter unless we know the criteria by which they were conducted. I switched over and was watching CNN for a little bit after the football game ended and the poll they showed consisted of people they spoke with that had actually watched the debate in its entirety and they admitted it skewed about 4-5% in the favor of democrats.

That is a fair and reasonable poll. Putting a generic poll up on a website where anyone can vote is meaningless.

Every poll I'm posting is of my own google and twitter search results. I've never been on stormfront and have no idea what the other site is but clearly you do :)

Freerepublic.com, i'm sure you know about it.

No it's reflective of what people will do at the actual polls (behind the curtain) rather than being a hand selected group with as you pointed out a democratic leaning bias.

nope, first I've heard of it but I'll give it a gander :thumbsup


That took about a minute. I don't like the site layout.. So I won't be back no matter what they like to do there..

Vigorously defending or attacking any open online poll is a waste of time, really. We will have to wait a day or two until the results of properly conducted polls come out to get a clearer picture of Trump's lead.

Sorry, but you are just wrong here.

Having a generic poll that anyone can vote on posted on a website is worthless. Here is why. I didn't watch the debate, but I am free to go to one of these sites and vote on who won the debate. Everyone knows Trump's diehard fanbase have a strong presence online so they can flood one of these polls and vote it up even if they didn't actually watch the debate.

With the poll I mentioned, they admitted the bias so when they showed it was 67% Hillary won an 33% say Trump won you can read that is actually more like 63% say Hillary won after you remove the democratic skew. That is a hell of a lot more scientific than just putting a generic poll on a website anyone can vote on.

True. All of these, no matter how they are conducted, are snap polls where people are still in the moment. Over the next few days as people calm down and think about it, we should get more clear numbers.

"They say" Clinton News Network says.. Sorry I don't believe anything CNN says when it comes to Clinton and bias.

You don't think that online presence is reflective of offline? What makes the two different? I have yet to see a Hillary sign anywhere offline. Grant it I'm not on the hunt for them either. I've seen two videos in the past two days where in each 1 Trump supporter shows up to volunteer for campaigning for Hillary in battleground states. Meaning 0 Hillary supporters showed to campaign for her. If she doesn't have an online and no offline then what does she have?

http://i.imgur.com/b5ZGysV.png

http://i.imgur.com/2SHoSi6.jpg

Even Michael Moore is nervous about what is plainly obvious. The Trump train is absolutely thundering towards the White House.

I think it is very reflective of his offline energy. He could have gone up on that stage, reached down his pants and flung shit at the audience tonight and 35% of the people would still vote for him. His diehard supports are more excited about him than Hillary's, but you have to assume both will have their die hard's turn out on election day. What matters is what the independents think.

Allowing his diehard supporters to rush to a website and vote that he won while Hillary's may not do the same does not reflect accurately who really won the debate. The only way to know that is to ask people from all over the political spectrum that actually watched the debate who won.

I hear what you're saying but even those polls can't be trusted. I use to run a telemarketing room for a mortgage company. I personally created the very targeted call lists and script. I knew before going in what the results would be if my marketers were as good as I trained them to be. There's so many factors that can skew those polls starting with the call list itself. Or how about the pollster having bias and not correctly tallying?

So do you think that a random poll anyone can vote on that is on a website is more accurate than something where specific people were called and asked specific questions?

More accurate? No. Good insight? Yes.

I will give my verdict after I've seen it. Can't wait.

It's pretty hard to gauge this since the bias on both sides is staggering. Plus there are practically no even slightly unbiased mass media left.

That leads to an absurd situation having one candidate that, in a sensible world, would never even be considered given her track record in public office and outside of it.

Proven track record of disastrous foreign policy, in bed with big business, high probability of selling classified information and an overall history of shady backroom deals. Nixon and Watergate looks like a boy scout operation compared to her.

Then there is the other one who may be even too much of an alternative and whose style inevitavly causes that plenty of people simply won't ever like him.

But again the massive bias and die hard team mentality is what makes it very hard for most to even slightly accept anything even remotely objective about the candidate they don't cheer for.

You can see that on this board everyday.

Trump is 100% right on bringing jobs back to the West. Taxing imports is the way to level the field for companies who make goods in the Third Wolrd and sell in the First.

Relying on small businesses to replace the jobs big businesses exports is a failure and will only get worse.

He's right on stop and frisk. If the people in the lawless areas happen to be Black or Hispanic. Of course. the figures are going to show that more Black or Hispanic are being frisked. The anal retentive PC agenda needs to shut the fuck up on that. What those areas need are jobs that pay a decent wage, jobs that are currently leaving the US.

Trump is right on the US paying to protect other countries. Countries like Japan, S. Korea, Europe have to pay towards the costs.

To me, Hillary was promising to change what she's been a part of creating.

While there is a legit debate to be had about trade tariffs (there are a lot of people smarter than me who say Trump doing this would be terrible for the country as a whole and not really save jobs), stop and frisk is a horrible idea. Not only is is likely unconstitutional, it has yet to be shown to really work (there are plenty of stats that showed crime was going down in NY before they even started stop and frisk). I don't want to live in a country where a cop can just stop me and frisk me simply because he feels like it or thinks I look a certain way. Fuck that!. Helping to bring jobs into those neighborhoods and improving education so the kids can see that there is a future out there for them is how to fix many of the problems in these high crime communities. If you thought there was tension between the police and some black communities now, just wait until they start randomly stopping and frisking people. It will cause chaos.

"Hey, I'm pacing myself. No point bashing in Hillary in the first debate. America always loves the guy who comes up from behind against the establishment."

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/m...jpg?1463509000

I'm sorry to burst your bubble. But true oligarch and one of worlds biggest threats is George Soros, top sponsor of the Clintons. He is their puppetmaster.
The man is so extremely dirty, if you start digging you will be schocked how comprehensive this mans plans to destroy countries are. He comes closest to a real life 'world domination' supervillain we only know from comics. I didn't expect calculating world influencing criminals like this actually existed.

He buys governments all over the world for his own gain.
Few days ago it came to light that Soros wanted to buy the Dutch prime minister. Officially the deal didn't come to fruition, but our prime minister being a true slave to the establishment (like Clinton and Merkel) i would not be surprised if he is bought off the record. We as Dutch citizens tend to go against the establishment a bit more than our fellow European countries. He tried to disrupt democracy here by funding an aggressive and sickening (I have read the leaked docs - you thought "wag the dog" was bad) pro EU/Ukraine brainwash campaign. Luckily the citizens didn't fell for it.

"Divide and conquer" is his credo. Aside from paying his slave Clinton he also funds racist group BLM to create division in the US, which is getting more and more successful. He funds pro immigrant groups and ad campaigns in the EU, which has since grown to an invasion which is destroying our societies. I could go on and on.

Dig and you shall find. The things Clinton, along with handler Soros, is connected to is truly evil and makes Trumps negative things pale in comparison. A few bankruptcies, insults and not showing your tax returns are childs play and become completely irrelevant once you discover the Clinton cesspool.

You have to take your time and effort for the truth, which means investigate, read leaked documents, connect all the dots... and you have your real, objective news. Not a lot of people do this, they just repeat the propaganda headline at their favourite so called "news" channel.

So I suppose all that shit about landing on the moon in the sixties, the aliens and spacecraft at Area 51, and the Kennedy assassination never happened? Almost forgot 9/11 too. And now this Soros is on the brink of taking over the entire planet? I did not know this.

When you say "He established himself" you mean "he got over ten million dollars in loans from his daddy" then sure.

We have this concept of "the establishment" but Trump is all about the establishment. This is a man who dominates Wall Street. He pulls the strings. Trump has already told us he buys and sells politicians.

i have no idea how you come up with all those topics that have nothing to do with what i said. Are you saying that when I try to educate myself with various sources and come to a conclusion based on facts, you push me in the conspiracy theorist corner?

Because I am not judging things on simplistic propaganda headlines like primates like you, but am interested in the underlying facts before i form my view, you somehow see that as a bad thing... You're insane.

I didn't think he did too bad at the beginning. Then he started to unravel. When she started talking about him not paying taxes and replied over her saying "That makes me smart".

Dumbass thing to say.