metro10:
Post election poll result...

curechris:
I do not want trump to win but he has good plans(arguably) and he did win this debate to me.even now there is still a possibility for trump to spring up an upset against her.
its so sad that the American people have to choose between those two

SirJeffry:
Exactly my position. The two are disaster. Trump surely will give Hillary some surprise at the polls believe me.

konklud22:

in the other room when u lost your sense

dustmalik:

Go and sit down. She was simply telling you to learn to use the right word, which is 'would'.

curechris:

He just stated the obvious...they were outsmarted
(still dont know why CNN is always all negative about trump smh)

metro10:


This is the US, not some "undemocratic" African country that goes against democratic verdicts.

If you loose election, accept the result and not throw tantrums.

Babacele:
Trump v Clinton: Who won the
presidential debate?
Anthony Zurcher
North America reporter,BBC
20 October 2016
From the section US Election
2016

This may have been the debate
Donald Trump wanted, but it
wasn't the one he needed.
Nice one
With one last chance to make a
pitch to the American public that
he should be trusted with the
presidency, the Republican
nominee had to make efforts to
expand his base of support.
He had to find a way to distance
himself from the allegation that he
has a history of sexual
harassment.
He had to position himself as the
change candidate - just days after
a Fox poll showed that Hillary
Clinton, whose party has held the
presidency for eight years, was
beating him on the question of
who would "change the country
for the better".
Instead, after a roughly half an
hour of something resembling an
actual policy debate about the
Supreme Court, gun rights,
abortion and even immigration,
the old Donald Trump - the one
who constantly interrupted his
opponent, sparred with the
moderator and lashed out at
enemies real and perceived -
emerged.
He called Mrs Clinton a liar and a
"nasty woman".
He said the women accusing him
of sexual harassment bordering
on assault were either attention-
seekers or Clinton campaign
stooges.
He said the media were
"poisoning the minds" the public.
And, most notably, he refused to
say whether he would accept the
results of the election if he loses.
Mrs Clinton had her own moments
where she was put in the
defensive - on her emails, on the
Clinton Foundation and on
embarrassing details revealed in
the WikiLeaks hack.
The difference, however, is that
Mrs Clinton largely kept her poise
and successfully changed the
topic back to subjects where she
was more comfortable. It was, in
fact, a master class in parry-and-
strike debate strategy.
The key takeaway from this
debate, however - the headline
that Americans will wake up to
read in the morning - will certainly
be Mr Trump's refusal to back
way from his "rigged" election
claims.
That was what Mr Trump wanted
to say, but it isn't something the
American people - or American
democracy - needed to hear.

The Russian gambit

Mrs Clinton's skill at deflecting
attacks and baiting Mr Trump into
unhelpful answers first was on
display when moderator Chris
Wallace brought up a line from
one of her Wall Street speeches -
revealed in the Wikileaks hack -
that she endorsed a hemispheric
free-trade and open-immigration
zone.
After saying she was only talking
about an open energy market - an
assertion that seems somewhat
questionable - she tried to turn
the question into a discussion of
whether Mr Trump would
renounce the Russian government,
which US officials have said is
behind the cyber-attack.
Mr Trump actually called Mrs
Clinton out on her attempted
"great pivot" - but then he went on
to get bogged down on the
Russian issue.
He said he'd never met Mr Putin
(although he boasted during a
primary debate that he had talked
with him in a television green
room), and said that Mrs Clinton
was a liar and the real Russian
"puppet".
Oh, and this all came up when the
debate topic was supposed to be
immigration.

A bad experience

Mrs Clinton's next chance to pull
a rhetorical switch-a-roo came
during the economic portion of
the debate. After a discussion of
their tax proposals - and a
predictable exchange of
allegations over who's cutting and
who's raising them too much - Mr
Trump went after Mrs Clinton on
her past support of trade deals.
When she waffled a bit, he tried to
tag her with a line he used in an
earlier debate with some success.
Why didn't Mrs Clinton enact her
economic reforms over her 30
years in the public sphere? Mr
Trump asked.
"You were very much involved in
every aspect of this country," he
said. "And you do have
experience. I say the one thing
you have over me is experience,
but it's bad experience, because
what you've done has turned out
badly."
The problem with reusing attack
lines is that sometimes your
opponent prepares a defence -
and Mrs Clinton had a scathing
response ready to fly.
She said that while she was
defending children's rights in the
1970s, Mr Trump was defending
himself against charges he
engaged in housing discrimination
against African-Americans.
When Mrs Clinton was speaking
out for women's rights as first
lady in the 1990s, Mr Trump was
taunting a beauty contest winner
about her weight. And when she
was in the White House situation
room watching the raid on Osama
bin Laden's compound, Mr Trump
was hosting a television reality
show.
"I'm happy to compare my 30
years of experience, what I've
done for this country, trying to
help in every way I could,
especially kids and families get
ahead and stay ahead, with your
30 years," she said.
"I'll let the American people make
that decision."
It was a scripted set-piece, yes,
but it drew blood.


Women trouble

Quick on the heels of the
exchange about experience came
the question Mr Trump had to
expect - but didn't appear ready
for. What did he think of all the
women who had come forward
since the last debate to allege
that, when it came to sexual
harassment, Mr Trump's actions
matched his candid words in that
recently revealed recording?
The Republican nominee's
response was that the women
were either attention-seekers or
Clinton campaign stooges and that
the allegations have been "largely
debunked" - which, when you
think about it, isn't exactly a
blanket denial.
In the last debate, Mrs Clinton
appeared to hold back a bit in her
condemnation of Mr Trump on the
topic.
This time - perhaps inspired by
First Lady Michelle Obama's well-
received speech condemning Mr
Trump last week - was much
sharper.
"Donald thinks belittling women
makes him bigger," she said.
"He goes after their dignity, their
self-worth, and I don't think there
is a woman anywhere who doesn't
know what that feels like. So we
now know what Donald thinks and
what he says and how he acts
toward women. That's who Donald
is."
Mr Trump's response, that no one
respects women more than he
does, was met by laughter in the
debate hall and the nearby media
hall.
Mrs Clinton brushed off his efforts
to turn the topic to her private
email server.
He may have lost this election
even without the live-mic
revelation two weeks ago, but it's
becoming increasingly clear his
campaign has been irreparably
wounded by it.

Cracked foundation

During the presidential "fitness"
portion of the debate, Wallace had
some pointed questions for Mrs
Clinton, as well.
He asked her to defend the
Clinton Foundation against
allegations it was a pay-to-play
organisation that granted insider
access to the state department in
exchange for big-money
donations.
Mrs Clinton responded by
defending the foundation's actions
- noting its high ratings from non-
profit watchdogs and its global
health efforts.
Mr Trump called it a "criminal
enterprise" - but then Mrs Clinton
was able to push the conversation
to Mr Trump's foundation, which
has had its own share of
controversies.
She noted that Mr Trump had used
foundation money to purchase a
six-foot portrait of himself. "Who
does that?" she asked.
Mr Trump tried to defend himself,
but Wallace wouldn't let him off
the hook, asking him why he used
charitable money to settle a fine
levied on his Florida resort.
The Republican's response was
only that the money had gone to
charity.
An exchange on the Clinton
Foundation could have been -
perhaps should have been - a
winning moment for Mr Trump.
Instead, it was another
opportunity for Mrs Clinton to
knock him off his stride.

Cuntslayer:


I thougjt people werent noticing it
When i tuned to other analysis from aljazeera sky etc, they were applauding Trump for a more composed performance and disected all the lies Trump revealed about Hilary.
CNN is so biased.

kinibigdeal:
Trump rout secretary Clinton in that tense debate. And why should Trump accept the outcome of the election that is bound to be rigged by bigot's

SeunWedsLinda:
Buhari and Jonathan should have had a political debate prior to the election. We wouldn't have been in this mess honestly.