Review of Debate #3

[PaulSacramento]

Read this review and, quite honestly, I feel he pretty much hit the nail on the head:

So there you have it people. Your choice has never been clearer…

If you feel that America is doing just fine, both domestically and internationally and all that is needed is more of the same; vote for her.

But if you think the previous eight years have accelerated America’s decline, both at home and abroad and that a new direction is needed; vote for him.

–

If you feel that the biggest national dept in history is nothing much to worry about and that America can continue to borrow it’s way into further debt indefinitely; vote for her.

But if you think that America needs to tackle its unprecedented debt by insisting its economic rivals cease protecting their own markets by cynically manipulating the value of their own currencies and start playing on a level playing field; vote for him.

–

If you feel that entering into endless proxy conflicts abroad is a great use of your most cherished national asset – the brave Men and Women who serve in your military; vote for her.

But if you think that American service Men and Women should only ever be used to protect America’s direct interests and that other nations who rely on America’s protection should contribute to the cost of that protection; vote for him.

–

If you feel that mass illegal immigration from the third world and all the adverse social deprivations associated with it, is good for America; vote for her.

But if you think that America should cease its policy of mass immigration from the third world until it can provide sufficiently for the people who are already in the country. And that America should finally start enforcing its existing laws on illegal immigration; vote for him.

–

If you feel that vilifying your law enforcement officers and whipping up racial tensions, in already gang infested and drug riddled inner cities, has made them better places to live; vote for her.

But if you think the people who live in America’s cities deserve to be protected by strong and respected law enforcement agencies. And that the gang-crime that blights many of those cities needs to be tackled and tackled hard; vote for him.

–

If you feel that allowing your industries to sack their American workers and move to third world countries to take advantage of slave labour and then sell their goods back to you, without penalty, is an acceptable economic policy; vote for her.

But if you think that encouraging industries to remain within America and penalising those that try the slave foreign labour route will be good for America and American workers; vote for him.

–

If you feel that it is wise to ignore the fact that America’s core values are under violent attack from people who obtained their vicious hatred of those values from the teachings of Islam. And that it is some how morally wrong to even mention the phrase “Islamic Terrorism” for fear of offending somebody’s misplaced sensibilities; vote for her.

But if you think that America should acknowledge that many of the teachings of Islam are incompatible with the freedoms it holds dear, including equal rights for gays and women, and that people suspected of favouring such teachings should not be allowed into the country unchecked; vote for him.

[Philip]

So, Trump suspects that election fraud may well be a deciding factor in the election, and so what he did was not too PC, not in winning votes from people who so easily dismiss such a concern. But in a way he was also forewarning that he would put seething fire under any sources of discovered fraud, IF that turns out to be the case. And I think there is sufficient reason to be concerned.

But, as usual, liberal media will focus on the ABOVE and not the substance of what the debate differences showed. Just look at the headline links on today's Drudgereport.com:

FLASHBACK: Gore explains why he won't concede election... https://news.grabien.com/story-flashbac ... count-ensu

'Last week Hillary agreed he 'won' 2000...' https://news.grabien.com/story-flashbac ... count-ensu

'8 Times Liberals Claimed An Election Was Stolen...' http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/19/8-t ... en-rigged/

'Kerry Thinks Bush Rigged 2004! http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/15/john- ... -election/

So this is not just a Trump concern, as many prominent liberals have previously had the very same fears! And IF some significant and impactful fraud is discovered, the results SHOULD be thrown out - I would hope everyone would concede that to be a reasonable thing to do.

[B. W.]

So, Trump suspects that election fraud may well be a deciding factor in the election, and so what he did was not too PC, not in winning votes from people who so easily dismiss such a concern. But in a way he was also forewarning that he would put seething fire under any sources of discovered fraud, IF that turns out to be the case. And I think there is sufficient reason to be concerned.

But, as usual, liberal media will focus on the ABOVE and not the substance of what the debate differences showed. Just look at the headline links on today's Drudgereport.com:

FLASHBACK: Gore explains why he won't concede election... https://news.grabien.com/story-flashbac ... count-ensu

'Last week Hillary agreed he 'won' 2000...' https://news.grabien.com/story-flashbac ... count-ensu

'8 Times Liberals Claimed An Election Was Stolen...' http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/19/8-t ... en-rigged/

'Kerry Thinks Bush Rigged 2004! http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/15/john- ... -election/

So this is not just a Trump concern, as many prominent liberals have previously had the very same fears! And IF some significant and impactful fraud is discovered, the results SHOULD be thrown out - I would hope everyone would concede that to be a reasonable thing to do.

Thanks for the Links! Spares me the time to post them

My wife said it best after watching the debate:

"Hillary sound canned, a rehash of what politicians been saying for years and years - just old - just words..."

When you have empirical evidence starring you in the face: videos of DNC inciting the violence at Trump campaigns, 80 to 85 percent of the News media pro Democrat hiding news away from the USA Public. The volumes of Wiki Leaks testimonials. The Justice department and FBI directors covering up for Hilary. The utter contempt against people of faith Hilary and her staff have toward Christians. The calling part of the American People deplorable and irredeemable then saying she is for all Americans is revealing to say the least.

I was not a Trump supporter but understand that I will vote for him more than ever now as I understand what HRC means by those deplorable and irredeemable people out there: Hitler held that same view about certain elements of the German people in his day as well as demanded Christians acquiesce to the standards of his progressive ideas or else...

Choice is clear...
-
-
-

[Philip]

I was very surprised at one thing about the debate. Chris Wallace asked about the accusations about women. Trump denied it all. But then Hillary made a few snide comments about that issue. I was so sure Trump would immediately respond by going after Bill C and his chief enabler, but was shocked that he didn't do it.

[abelcainsbrother]

I liked it in the debate when Hillary was talking about abortion and a woman's right to choose and Hillary was explaining how she is for partial birth abortion and he told her that is wrong.Hillary is for killing innocent babies right before they are born.Liberals will jump up and down and make a fuss if people abuse animals or even cut down trees,yet are all for the murder of innocent life.I really believe it will hurt Hillary with voters over her wide-open stance on abortion.

[RickD]

I liked it in the debate when Hillary was talking about abortion and a woman's right to choose and Hillary was explaining how she is for partial birth abortion and he told her that is wrong.Hillary is for killing innocent babies right before they are born.Liberals will jump up and down and make a fuss if people abuse animals or even cut down trees,yet are all for the murder of innocent life.

That's not true ACB. Hillary is a woman's health advocate. It's not about abortion, nor killing other humans. It's a woman's health issue.

[RickD]

ACB,

I'm glad you understood my sarcasm.

What a truly warped mind would think that murdering unborn humans, is actually about woman's health.

[abelcainsbrother]

ACB,

I'm glad you understood my sarcasm.

What a truly warped mind would think that murdering unborn humans, is actually about woman's health.

I knew you were being sarcastic.I know you're not for murdering babies.

[Philip]

What a truly warped mind would think that murdering unborn humans, is actually about woman's health.

Hillary and a whole lot of other people.

What I wish had transpired is that Trump had called abortion how a whole heck of lot of people think of it: Birth control after the fact. That vast millions of women and their partners mostly see as a way to avoid dealing with a child - so they'd rather kill it! The whole "to protect the mother's health or life thing" - how rare a situation that is. So, abortion on demand has created a silent holocaust of untold millions. Out of those vast millions, just how many do you think were performed because the mother's life was in jeopardy? A VERY tiny percent of those, that's what! As a matter of fact, the legality COULD be changed to abortion only allowed in such dire situations, in which a doctor or doctors had to stipulate whether and when such a case arises.

And so many liberals who think of themselves being racially progressive, think to themselves mostly about the societal/financial costs if those millions of children that would otherwise be born to poor minorities, were not taken care of by terminating children in the womb. I bet if abortion weren't so easy to obtain that a large percentage of women and men would be a lot more careful as to the circumstances and with whom they have casual sex. Especially if the fathers were truly held financially and otherwise accountable.

[PaulSacramento]

Abortion CAN be about a women's health of course BUT if that was the case then the law would be that abortion would only be permissible of the life of the mother was in danger and that would be the ONLY view being pushed by pro-abortion groups.
That is not the case.
They say it is 100% about a woman being able to choose what she can do with her body.
Neglecting the simple fact that when pregnant, it is no longer JUST HER BODY.

[Kurieuo]

ACB,

I'm glad you understood my sarcasm.

What a truly warped mind would think that murdering unborn humans, is actually about woman's health.

What Hillary supports isn't really about the unborn being killed.

Liberal ethicists want to call killing a baby after delivery "post-birth abortion". Partial birth abortion is no different. The baby is being birthed and killed in one and the same event. They're just trying to use more palatable terms, since "abortion" is more acceptable in Western society.

What such ethicists and Hillary supports is actually infanticide, so long as it's between the woman and her "doctor".

[Kurieuo]

Check out this 4D scan/video captured footage of an unborn fetus in the womb. Pretty neat. I've been so wrong and misled by rhetoric, you can see how it really is the woman's body and clump of cells.

PS. Hillary doesn't recognise this as having any rights. The D&E procedure performed in the second term or Induction Abortion performed at a stage the baby could survive on the outside should be every woman's right. (links are education videos)