PDA

View Full Version : As debates near, forum shows potential Trump advantage



jimnyc
09-08-2016, 01:15 PM
NBC's "Commander in Chief Forum," held Wednesday night aboard the USS Intrepid in New York, was the closest thing to a debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton until the real thing on Sept. 26. And it showed an advantage Trump might have when the two meet face-to-face: she has a record in government to defend, while he doesn't. On that score, Trump, at 70 a newcomer to politics, seems new, while Clinton, at 68 a veteran of decades in public life, seems, well, not new.

The format of the NBC forum, in which the two candidates were separated by only a commercial break, put that contrast into higher relief than ever before.

Clinton cited her experience right out of the blocks, when moderator Matt Lauer asked her, "What is the most important characteristic that a commander in chief can possess?"

"Steadiness," Clinton answered instantly. "An absolute rock steadiness, and mixed with strength to be able to make the hard decisions. Because I've had the unique experience of watching and working with several presidents …"

The problem for Clinton was that talk of her experience leads naturally to talk of what she has done — and that, in today's campaign environment, means talk of her mishandling of classified information as secretary of state. "Why wasn't it disqualifying?" was Lauer's second question of the evening.

Then, when it came time for the military audience to ask questions of their own, the first for Clinton, from a retired naval officer, was brutal. "Secretary Clinton, how can you expect those such as myself who were and are entrusted with America's most sensitive information to have any confidence in your leadership as president when you clearly corrupted our national security?"

Ouch. Clinton argued that she did not send or receive emails with a header marked "TOP SECRET" or the like. Maybe voters will find that convincing, and maybe they won't. But it was a rocky start.

The next question, from Lauer, was about Clinton's vote in 2002 to authorize the Iraq War.

Another audience member stood to ask: "You have had an extensive record with military intervention. How do you respond to progressives like myself who worry and have concerns that your hawkish foreign policy will continue?"

Rest here - http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2601242

fj1200
09-09-2016, 10:07 AM
From what I heard nobody did particularly well especially Lauer. Johnson's Aleppo thing, hrc sucking as per usual, trump didn't get called on his being for the Iraq War before he was against it and the CIA body language thing.

Kathianne
09-09-2016, 10:19 AM
From what I heard nobody did particularly well especially Lauer. Johnson's Aleppo thing, hrc sucking as per usual, trump didn't get called on his being for the Iraq War before he was against it and the CIA body language thing.

I thought Lauer did a good job, though needed more time. He got Hillary tangled up in email stuff. He got Trump on Russia. I think both the candidates looked like they are.