After the two contestants stepped out of the ring, blood and gore covered the floor. Fire raged from one end of the room to the other. Brimstone rained down from the heavens. And all the while, a man named Lester Holt sat in the middle of the disaster zone, praying for the night to end.
Ok, maybe it wasn't quite that ugly. But there is no doubt that during Monday's 1st Presidential Debate, Lester Holt was in the midst of a war zone. The political version of the Battle of the Bulge played out, with over 80 million pairs of eyes across the nation glued to the action.
However, no WMDs were dropped by either candidate. The most-used weapons on Monday were verbal haymakers, some landing, some not. But the biggest story of the night was the weapon that Donald Trump didn't use very often: the cyber attack.
Trump Turns Down Opportunities For Email Attacks
The mainstream media was flabbergasted when Trump let the ultimate opportunity for an attack on Hillary Clinton go when both candidates were asked about cybersecurity. It is unlike Trump to miss such a chance to go on the offensive against the former Sec. of State and her email problems, but he decided to focus on the question rather than go for blood at that moment. He had talked about Hillary's email scandal earlier in the debate.
One observation: The media has criticized Trump all year for his constant onslaught of attacks on a variety of public figures. Isn't it humorous that the media is now blasting the Trumpster for not going on the offensive and attacking Mrs. Clinton? Whether the American people can see through the media's hypocrisy remains to be seen.
I disagree with the notion that Trump hurt his case by not going after Clinton more often about the email controversy. It was a 90 minute debate. If Trump had constantly went after Clinton's jugular over the issue, he would have been painted as a 'one-issue candidate' trying to kill the debate clock. You see, no matter how he handled his attacks on the email controversy, he was going to be criticized. I contend that Trump would rather have been criticized for not spending enough time on the email saga rather than spending too much time on it.
Also, are we really all going to vote for someone because of how hard the candidate attacks their opponent? I don't think so. I, for one, am going to support the candidate that has policies and values that most align with my thinking. I hope that you do the same.
Trump Puts Himself In A Corner
There is no question that Donald Trump became very defensive during the debate, especially regarding his tax returns, birtherism, and past comments about climate change and the Iraq War. Like her or not, Hillary Clinton came prepared in terms of how to combat Trump on those issues.
For climate change, it is clear that in 2012, he tweeted that he believes that climate change is a myth made pervasive by the Chinese. In 2002, when asked by Howard Stern if he supports the Iraq War, he replied, "I guess so."
When the media started pressing him on these issues as the legitimacy of his campaign rose, Trump should have given himself two options for each: Either say he was wrong when he made the quotes, or stick to his guns and say his opinions haven't changed.
Instead, Donald Trump has tried to deny he ever said such things. Trump has continued to dig himself into a hole, giving Clinton plenty of ammunition. Thinking as a political strategist, I would advise Hillary Clinton to continue pushing the narrative that Trump has been lying about his past positions. This would take the focus off of Hillary's trustworthiness issues and put the spotlight on the fibs Trump has entangled himself in.
Clinton's Smugness Continues To Hurt Her
The definition of smugness is "contentedly confident of one's ability, superiority, or correctness." If that wasn't what Hillary Clinton came off as on Monday night, I don't know what smugness is.
Trump had a brilliant parry that resonated when he said she was trying to act "holier than thou." Clinton already has an image problem, and her condescending tone of voice, constant sarcasm, and arrogant-looking sneers didn't help things.
Although Clinton takes him as a joke, it has been proven o'er and o'er that Donald Trump is leading a movement in the United States of voters that want change in Washington. If she doesn't get that through her head soon, she may just lose this election. She recently said that she doesn't understand why she isn't up 50 percentage points on Trump. Her lack of understanding of why people don't like her may end up crippling her campaign in the end.
Conclusion
I think there were jabs from both sides that landed and quotes that resonated. Trump did well in his attacks on Hillary's flip flops on TPP, his explanation of the benefits of stop-and-frisk, and his opening talking points on job creation. Clinton did well in keeping Trump on the defensive, painting him as unfit to be president, and enunciating her ideas for the future. I thought Trump won the first 45 minutes, while Clinton won the second half.
That also correlates with the fact that Lester Holt let Trump and Clinton debate back and forth in the first 45 minutes, while Holt essentially tried to help Hillary take Trump to trial in the 2nd half. Holt had one question on the email scandal, but he had no interest in asking Hillary tough questions beyond that one question.
I can't predict how this will affect the race long term. I think that many people understand that there were many issues that went untouched. I liked the analogy that Fox News commentator Greg Gutfeld used, saying that Trump treated the first debate like the first day of a three day golf tournament. No holes-in-one, no albatrosses, but several pars, setting himself up for a potentially big showing in the final two debates.
One thing is certain: This race is still tight, and it will be until the end. And it's about to get uglier than ever.
No comments:
Post a Comment