Have they? I never watch it. Thought it was more of a business type news channel. Just looked it up and from what I'm reading it doesn't sound too liberal to me.....correct me if I'm wrong....don't know much about them.
To me, the whole event was a total bust. Lester Holt and Hillary against Trump should have been on the billboard instead of just Trump and Hillary. Holt asked Trump around 18 questions and Hillary only had to field 2 which kind of shows the bias at the event. I almost refuse to call it a debate because for the most part it was Trump who was continually put into a position of defending himself. There were only 2 occasions when Trump was actually able to get in a couple of valid licks and they were about NAFTA and street crime in Chicago in particular. Everything else was as though everybody had a sword and Trump was only allowed a shield and a very small one at that. Trump did have one bit of wiggle room and that was when Hillary started her rant about Trump's tax return statement and he broke in by saying that he would go against his lawyer's advice and publish them if Hillary would come up with 33K emails. And, oh yeah, he did say that her entire staff has to take the 5th in order to avoid prosecution. Other than that.......and hour and a half plus a few minutes and the next 2 hours of being ticked was a waste of time and aggravation.
I just wish Trump would smile once in a while. He always looks so angry. A great smile will sometimes outweigh any other factors. Case in point, Bill Clinton has a fabulous smile and he has gotten a lot of mileage out of it in his career.
Generally, so far as the politico's are concerned, the far left does a lot of smiling. I believe it has something to do with the idea that one can be happy as long as one has his left hand putting something Into his Own pocket while his right hand is taking something out of someone else's. Or possibly I have them switched with pickpockets but let's face it, they both do it and they both smile a lot. Or, in defence of Trump...........I give you tonight's entertainment.
@Bobby Cole The Dramatics big hit was ":Whatcha See is Whatcha Get", they did not cut "Smiling Faces Sometimes", which was done by "Undisputed Truth", making #3 in 1971. Another similar song which was "catchy" along those lines was "The Back-Stabbers", done by by the "O'jays", making #3 in 1972. Frank
My husband pointed out Trump seemed Nixonlike with regards to his stance, and lack of smile. Whereas, Hillary, while only smiling during certain remarks actually seemed to be authentic in her reaction. Others suggested Trump might have been getting ill due to his constant sniffling, etc. Or, perhaps there were other reasons for the incessant non-smiling approach on his part. As for me, I'm still watching all parties and all candidates. For, I believe it is important that each of us have the ability and freedom to vote our conscience even if others might disagree. Whatever happens, there will be sadness and sorry, joy and happiness, it's just a matter of which side one is on when the final vote is counted. Of course, there is no doubt that some will suggest the overall contest, like Bernie's campaign is rigged. Wait for it....
Well, the election was rigged against Bernie. There is no denying that. If the election was between Bernie, Hillary and Trump, I would vote for Bernie.
Many sources are now saying that the reason that Hillary Clinton was able to spend the week preparing for the debate was because she had all of the topic questions delivered to her by NBC well before the debate; so she knew what would be asked. Very likely, by seeing what Donald Trump has answered on those same questions before, she was able to practice strategic answers for those topics. Apparently, there was also collusion between Hillary and the debate moderator, even more than we suspected. Here is a short video showing Hillary using hand signals to let Lester Holt know that she wanted to send a "zinger" on a particular topic, or that she had something she wanted to add to the topic; so he knows when to change the topic and when not to. This is pretty interesting to watch. Pinochle players, and probably other card players will remember how players would send discreet little signals to their pinochle partners to let them know when they had aces, or wanted a certain card to be trump. This is pretty much the same kind of a setup at the debate.
I don't buy into after the fact videos, they can be manipulated. Did she scratch her nose when nothing happened? I hate all this picking on every little thing instead of just focusing on the issues...with the internet the focus has shifted to looking at every single thing a candidate does. I've read that Trump was sniffling and drinking water like crazy because he did a line of cocaine before the debate. Both sides do this and I really can't stand it. I'm not arguing with you, Yvonne....just these type of videos. Please don't take my reply the wrong way.
You need to move to the west coast....it started at 6:00 p.m. here. You'll be on Rocky Mountain time in Colorado!!
The video might have some merit no matter the believers or otherwise but there is one aspect that I have studied which brings things to a better light. Since the "League of Women Voters" lost control of the presidential debates to the Presidential Debate Commission a few years ago the influence of sponsors, lobbyists, and superpacs has never been more prevalent. While each moderator is indeed chosen by a supposed unbiased group, the moderator in this case not only works for CNBC but CNBC was the host cable company for the debate. Here's the trick: The moderator MUST wear an ear piece which is for hearing producer instructions to the wearer. Normally, the producer gives alerts such as time, breaks, uh oh's such as bad language etc to the news person or moderator in this case. Now, if you are a producer and have a multimillion dollar company, lobbyist or whatever on the hook, would you not follow that sponsors lead especially if the company you are working for is in agreement with that sponsor or worse multi sponsors? Lester Holt makes a ton of money doing what he does for CNBC and chances are, if he said anything other than what the producer told him to say and when to say it he would be in the unemployment line. And THAT is exactly what was going on in the background and it is indeed provable without even a hint of speculation or controversy in the mix. It happened with Obama/Romney and it will happen again after this last debate also. The thing is, both parties know it so it is up to each party to do the homework they need to cut through the red tape. This last debate had an even more ominous piece of garbage which is whether or not Hillary was indeed given the questions before the event. Thus far, there are a couple of witnesses coming forth that say that this is true, which to me is purely believable when I look at Hillary's background of tyranny and falsehoods.