It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was Lester Holt Unfair To Donald Trump During Debate?

page: 5
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Grambler

Holt asked Trump at least a half dozen follow-up questions...He asked zero follow ups for Clinton.


And grateful for that, too.




posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk
Explain to me how Trump's alleged stance on the Iraq war was a bigger issue than Hillary's actual vote to authorize force in Iraq?


Back when Hillary was running against The Chosen One, that vote came up, over and over.

And Hillary said that she sat down and talked with GWB, looked him in the eye, and felt satisfied he was being honest. *scoff* And, "No," she would not apologize for that vote.

It mattered deeply to Obama supporters. They were totes soooo against the war and dammit, Hillary was a neo-con, warhawk.

i knew back then Obama supporters didn't care about the war. It was just another serious tragedy to exploit for political points.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




Holt then asked Trump 4 different attack questions, constantly following up to get more out of Trump on these. He asked Hillary one difficult question that was "Trump mentioned your emails, care to respond?" She responded for 15 seconds, he had no follow ups like he did with Trump.

Oh boo freaking hoo

Hillary was investigated by the FBI - and cleared. Now - until she's actually on trial - 15 seconds pretty much sums it up. I made a mistake - wouldn't do it again...

Live by the sword - die by the sword. Donny does nothing but put things out there - and never resolves them

When are you Trump supporters going to man up and realize that Trump has made himself a big question mark. Those aren't attack questions - they are simply questions. Things we have every right to hear an answer to

Honestly - what a bunch of wusses

If Trump had anything of substance to add to the debates - there would have been questions on those very things

You want a crucifixion? OK - that's not what a debate is for. This is supposed to be a display of thinking - and a chance to give the public something to actually consider

Instead we got the freaking Jerry Springer show - 100 plus million viewers - for this?

Who do you think showed best? You yourself have admitted who won

We deserve better than this - as a country of people who won't always agree - we still deserve better than this

Last night made a mockery of the whole process. I have always had a favorite going into a debate - but I never once came away from a debate feeling that I just watched a joke

I wish Hillary could have debated somebody worthy. Like her or not - she was cheated last night

Bias...Trump got exactly what he wanted - a focus on his own predilections and lack of substance



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: IAMTAT

Maybe because she qualified her answers professionally and articulately, on the other hand he absolutely NEEDED to qualify Trumps rantings.


Maybe...maybe not.
But you're right about one thing...she IS a 'professional' politician...it's how she made her $120 Million.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
We have seen the leaked DNC emails.

Why shouldn't we believe that the questions were submitted to Holt by Hillary or her accomplices at the DNC?


In my opinion, the media owners cared who won the Dem primaries... they did NOT want Bernie in. I don't think they care who wins between Hillary and Trump.
edit on 9/27/2016 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: IAMTAT

Maybe because she qualified her answers professionally and articulately, on the other hand he absolutely NEEDED to qualify Trumps rantings.


Maybe...maybe not.
But you're right about one thing...she IS a 'professional' politician...it's how she made her $120 Million.

Well..... 120 million bucks that we know about.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk
Explain to me how Trump's alleged stance on the Iraq war was a bigger issue than Hillary's actual vote to authorize force in Iraq?


It's not alleged. It's on camera.

Secondly he has made it a campaign issue that he was against Iraq.
He lied.


When has Hillary denied voting for the Iraq War?



Like I said, disjointed and unhinged.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   
For the sake of argument, let's assume that the entire debate was rigged and Holt was unfairly biased.

We still got an excellent look at how Trump conducts himself, his on-the-fly decision making skills and his temperament. Needless to say, Trump blew it on many different levels. He has a hard time thinking on his feet and addressing issues without pointing a finger at others.

He seems to take things very personally and that is not a good trait for someone that is potentially going to be highly scrutinized for the next 4-8 years.

That being said, the Trump apologists need to get a grip. You can whine and cry about the debate being rigged or biased all you like. That's just a distraction and excuse for you not coming to grips with the reality that Trump got his ass handed to him.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
We have seen the leaked DNC emails.

Why shouldn't we believe that the questions were submitted to Holt by Hillary or her accomplices at the DNC?


Because we have no reason to believe it. No evidence, no paper trail, no logical or rational case for it.

Nothing.




posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: butcherguy
We have seen the leaked DNC emails.

Why shouldn't we believe that the questions were submitted to Holt by Hillary or her accomplices at the DNC?


In my opinion, the media owners cared who won the Dem debate... they did NOT want Bernie in. I don't think they care who wins between Hillary and Trump.

I can't argue with that, as it is a believable possibility.
It is just as believable that Trump is there as the R candidate to ensure a Hillary win.

One thing for sure... Bernie was most definitely NOT allowed to win.

Little is left up to chance.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
Trump was not treated unfairly in the debate in my opinion, but of course he would have had issues with a moderator who actually moderated.

It's a little late to whine about the debate subject matter after agreeing on it.

The moderator was beyond patient with Trump's out of turn babbling.

As far as I could tell, there was nothing wrong with the microphone...

Trump got his ass handed to him fair and square like expected and it had nothing to do with anyone treating him fairly or no.

Trump was the one who wanted no moderator at all, and who knows how unhinged he would have become without anyone to reign him in?.

Trumplestiltskin, Trumplestiltskin, Trumplestiltskin....

....Still there....


Nobody teetering on the fence thought that, they all think Trump did the better job. Only hard core Hillary supporters and hard core Trump haters think he got his ass handed to him.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

I think Lester was neutral.

Hillary's experience as a politician definately outshined Donald's every attempt at composure.

Donald isn't a politician.

Hillary took this debate because Donald handed it to her.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: MongolianPaellaFish

originally posted by: butcherguy
We have seen the leaked DNC emails.

Why shouldn't we believe that the questions were submitted to Holt by Hillary or her accomplices at the DNC?


Because we have no reason to believe it. No evidence, no paper trail, no logical or rational case for it.

Nothing.


But we do have proof in the leaked DNC emails that the MSM are Hillary's lap dogs.
Deny that.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk
Explain to me how Trump's alleged stance on the Iraq war was a bigger issue than Hillary's actual vote to authorize force in Iraq?

Because Hillary isn't lying about her support. Trump is.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: MongolianPaellaFish

originally posted by: butcherguy
We have seen the leaked DNC emails.

Why shouldn't we believe that the questions were submitted to Holt by Hillary or her accomplices at the DNC?


Because we have no reason to believe it. No evidence, no paper trail, no logical or rational case for it.

Nothing.


But we do have proof in the leaked DNC emails that the MSM are Hillary's lap dogs.
Deny that.

False equivalences don't prove conspiracy theories.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Holt was unfair to the American people by being really bad moderator, didn't control the debate in the least, and asked some really irrelevant questions in an obvious attempt to start on-stage drama.

Hell, this election is unfair to the American people, though, so why should the debate moderator be any different?

They both shot themselves in the foot. If you're really trying to say that Hillary was great, I must deduce that we watched different debates.


edit on 27-9-2016 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408


Only hard core Hillary supporters and hard core Trump haters think he got his ass handed to him.



Typically disjointed and unhinged response.

Only Trumpers think he won.


Name one person on the fence who believes Trump won.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   
The points people are making about Holt asking more difficult questions (and more challenging follow-ups) to Trump than Hillary is legitimate.

But what I'm unsure of is whether this was done because Trump seemed so incredibly disjointed, or if it was part of some MSM strategy to favor Hillary.

On the one hand, it's hard to blame the moderator when Trump was so awful. On the other, it's not the moderator's job to fact-check the candidates.

On the fact-check grounds alone, I'm inclined to say yes, Holt was biased.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: MotherMayEye

The birther question was NEVER relevant. NEVER. But Trump made an issue of it for years and why? The why makes it valid for the portion of the debate it was brought up in last night.


BS, how is that going to make this country better? Who cares about the damn birth certificate. Trump said he let it go so the country could move on, and that's the best answer that could have been given. Obama's damage is done and even if he was born in Kenya, it's too late to do anything about it now. TIME TO MOVE ON.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Maybe Trump is just trying to catch up with America's view of Hillary's trustworthiness. It's like a race to the bottom between the two...



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join