![\"https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File%3ADonald_Trump_and_Hillary_Clinton_during_United_States_presidential_election_2016.jpg;](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/533\/2016\/09\/Donald_Trump_and_Hillary_Clinton_during_United_States_presidential_election_2016.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
So I watched the debate. \u00a0I even took copious notes. \u00a0But it was painful and unpleasant to watch it \u2014 and the reality is that, when it comes down to it: \u00a0fundamentally, I support neither Trump nor Clinton, and I feel a certain amount of ironic relief that my vote, in Illinois, simply doesn\u2019t matter; yet, at the same time, I still harbored a certain amount of hope that Trump would surprise us all with a stellar performance that would leave us rethinking our opinions of him.<\/p>\n
Yes, that hope was irrational. \u00a0And, yes, that hope was dashed.<\/p>\n
The 90 minutes were full of missed opportunities \u2014 how could he have failed to dig into Clinton\u2019s e-mails when Holt raised the question of cyberwarfare, for instance? \u00a0(Especially given the recent news that Obama himself e-mailed her on that server.) \u00a0And he had plenty of time to recognize that he\u2019d be asked about the \u201cbirther\u201d issue, and concoct an explanation or a timeline on the question, and come up with rehearsed answers to the other questions that were highly likely, if not nearly certain, to be raised.<\/p>\n
But he didn\u2019t. \u00a0His answer on the \u201cBirther\u201d question was disjointed, trying to bring in Blumenthal but in a way that no one really had a chance of understanding. \u00a0His attempt to clarify that he really did oppose the war in Iraq was similarly confused: \u00a0he seemed to be claiming that the Howard Stern interview that suggests the contrary \u201cdoesn\u2019t count\u201d because it was a throwaway line before he or anyone else was giving it serious thought, but then he seemingly got stuck and, for all I could tell, just repeated \u201cSean Hannity! Sean Hannity!\u201d which likely meant nothing to most viewers.<\/p>\n
He tried to defend himself against the accusations of racism by citing his nondiscriminatory Palm Beach club, which I imagine was meant to be placed in a historical context of \u201cwe did this at a time when other clubs were still discriminating,\u201d but he didn\u2019t say that, so he ended up sounding foolish.<\/p>\n
And the tax return issue? \u00a0He would have been better off having released his returns a long time ago so that it\u2019d be old news; if there\u2019s some way in which releasing the exact details is a problem due to the ongoing audit (I\u2019ve read statements that it\u2019s a bad thing because then millions of Americans will start \u201ccrowdsourcing\u201d ways for the IRS to \u201ccatch\u201d him) he could release an abbreviated version, say, the 1040 without the schedules. \u00a0And maybe people don\u2019t care, but why not eliminate this as an issue.<\/p>\n
He had a few good digs at Clinton, hammering her on supporting the TPP and then changing her tune when it became clear it was a losing position, for instance, and he did have, well, at least some substance: \u00a0for instance, stating that he wouldn\u2019t keep jobs in the U.S. by means of a magic wand but by means of taxes\/tariffs. \u00a0He countered the (unstated) assertion that the economy is doing great with the statement that the stock market is in a bubble and as soon as interest rates rise we\u2019ll see a crash.<\/p>\n
His response on the question of \u201crace relations\u201d was very weak, turning it into a question of crime, and, thus, \u201claw and order\u201d \u2014 and, I\u2019m sorry, but the same-named TV show makes that phrase seem very cliche. \u00a0Granted, he had a more-or-less reasonable response to Lester Holt\u2019s attempt to fact-check him (\u201cStop-and-frisk is unconstitutional.\u201d \u00a0\u201cNo, a discredited judge made that ruling and the new mayor of New York declined to appeal.\u201d), but he then flailed around for what should have been a compelling statistic, 3,000 shot in Chicago so far in 2016.<\/p>\n
But\u00a0at the same time \u2014 well, with respect to Clinton: \u00a0remember when I was initially quite impressed with Carly Fiorina, and the detailed, thought-out answers she had to questions, until I realized that it\u2019s always the same answers, because that\u2019s what she had memorized, and her debate strategy was to wait for the right opportunity, and then jump in with those memorized bits?<\/p>\n
Well, it was pretty much the same thing here. \u00a0Her memorized bits included:<\/p>\n
Now, I understand that memorized bits is a part of how these debates work. \u00a0And Trump would be better off with some memorized bits himself, but either rejects the concept or is unwilling to spend his time on it. \u00a0But it became increasingly jarring to hear these memorized bits. \u00a0(That\u2019s one thing about Cruz \u2014 if it were him against Hillary, at least when he\u2019d be reeling off these facts, you\u2019d know that it wasn\u2019t because he memorized these bits with the plan to throw them in whenever they fit, but because of his superior memory.)<\/p>\n
In the end, I doubt any Trump supporter will reconsider and switch to Clinton, nor vice-versa. \u00a0But to be honest, I can\u2019t even see any undecided voter making a decision in favor of one or the other of these two based on what they saw tonight.<\/p>\n
And one last thing \u2014 more of a question, actually: \u00a0when did people start pronouncing individuals who believe in Islam, \u201cMOOOs-lims\u201d instead of \u201cMUHs-lims\u201d?<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Image: \u00a0https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File%3ADonald_Trump_and_Hillary_Clinton_during_United_States_presidential_election_2016.jpg; By Krassotkin (derivative), Gage Skidmore (Donald Trump), Gage Skidmore (Hillary Clinton) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-sa\/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
So I watched the debate. \u00a0I even took copious notes. \u00a0But it was painful and unpleasant to watch it \u2014 and the reality is that, when it comes down to it: \u00a0fundamentally, I support neither Trump nor Clinton, and I feel a certain amount of ironic relief that my vote, in Illinois, simply doesn\u2019t matter; […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2209,"featured_media":5383,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[374],"tags":[442,229,325],"class_list":["post-5381","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-politics","tag-election-2016","tag-hillary-clinton","tag-trump"],"yoast_head":"\n