Exactly, they should not be allowed in because they cannot be adequately vetted. There is no need to even mention religion.
I would say there was no clear winner. It seems to me that Trump came out ahead, but then I agree more about his ideas for the country than I do Hillary. I didn't hear anything from Hillary that sounded like she had anything to offer other than more of the same. If that resonates with people, then she did well. I don't know.
Thanks for spending the debate night with me. Otherwise, I try to make my points to my cats and they just look at me strangely.
I cannot listen to CBS's after-debate follow up, because it consists of the Hillary campaign trying to tell me that I didn't hear what I did hear. I just watched it. Don't try to tell me that he said things that he didn't say or that she said things that she didn't say. It's just campaign spin and I don't need that. I have shut CBS off.
Well I read through here and the news channels and other forums and the main topic is Trump won't concede if he loses.
I think the voters have made up their minds before now. to me these debates are just a dog and pony show IMO
Okay, what I have learned since the debate is that I was right in that the Heller decision that Hillary said was all about protecting toddlers from the dangers of firearms had nothing whatsoever to do with toddlers. Richard Heller was on the radio this afternoon. He was a police officer who was being told that he couldn't have a firearm while he was off duty. So she lied.
What I think of when I see that this is what they chose as their talking point is that he must have done better than I thought he did if that was all they could come up with. For one thing, the wording of that question was much the same as the pledge that he was asked to take at the start of the Republican primary, yet he was the only one who was expected to live up to it. For another, the whole premise of it was fictitious. Al Gore didn't accept the loss in 2000. He took it to court and, at that, every chance he gets he whines about having been cheated out of the 2000 election. Lastly, why should someone pledge to accept a result that may not turn out to be legitimate? I also think that it might indicate that he takes a pledge seriously, and isn't going to make a pledge without knowing the facts surrounding it.
I've never seen such a fuss over wording...all day long. He did amend it somewhat later..... Of course victim no. 10 spoke to the media...in 1998 Trump touched the inside of her breast....this one was pretty unbelievable in my opinion. He was a womanizer and he was rich. Not the nicest behavior and he should have known better but it's not sexual assault. Sexual assault is a serious thing and these women are doing a disservice to women who are REALLY sexually assaulted.
I'm thinking that the women who are probably being paid to come forward with allegations of sexual assault aren't having the devastating effect they hoped for, probably because they went overboard with it and included several whose stories didn't even come close to being believable, and perhaps because these complaints are being paired with the several (in my mind, more credible) scandals involving Hillary Clinton. Yes, it hurts but I'm thinking those who aren't voting for him on the basis of these reports probably wouldn't be voting for him anyhow. The crowd at the Trump rally that I attended was pretty close to being fifty percent female, by my estimation. I could be wrong, but I don't doubt that Trump is a sexist by most standards. The fact that he owned the Miss Universe pageant suggests that, I think. I also wouldn't be surprised to learn that he may have made unwanted advances to a woman from time to time, but I have trouble believing he raped anyone or attacked anyone sexually. He's rich, he wasn't at all bad looking in his day, and I'm thinking he wouldn't need to attack people who weren't interested.