Now that you've watched and talked about the Commander in Chief forum, read this article from Politifact. Comment below with who you think won and why.
People think it is funny to laugh when Donald Trump says take the oil from ISIS but in reality it's makes perfect sense. ISIS could not fund themselves or fuel their vehicles without the abundant oil in their region. If the U.S. had taken the oil before they left Iraq in shambles ISIS wouldn't have been able to grow. Also Hillary clintons "experience" is the worst trait she has because she has overseen the Middle East grow into disarray during her time as a senator and Secretary of State. Also she had accepted numerous "donations" from foreign entities which resulted in favorable action from the state department towards that person/country.
I don't know if one side "won" the debate. As I was watching it it seemed to me that both candidates were asked questions which made them look bad. For example, Hillary was asked about her emails and Trump was asked about some of his more controversial statements. Honestly I would be much more interested to see how the two candidates act and answer questions during the debates. Tyler Kachadorian
A forum is meant to get questions answered, and is not a competition necessarily, so no one won. Both candidates were questioned about different topics. Neither candidate is trustworthy, but no politician is at this point. Donald Trump is highly incompetent and inconsistent. He has no plan of action, no experience, and no common sense whatsoever. I can't seem to understand how anyone can take him seriously. Most of his responses involved pointing out the "faults" of Obama and his administration as well as Hilary, rather than detailing his own agenda for if he were to be elected. Hillary has the experience, but in that experience comes a history of lies and secrets. She is just as untrustworthy, but at least she won't be viewed as a joke by foreign countries. Those that support and defend Trump have a myopic view of his lack of everything it takes to be a president. As everyone has pointed out, this election is a decision between the lesser of two evils.
I do not think anyone really won the debate, but I think Clinton did pretty well considering she was getting criticized about her obvious mistakes for the majority of the forum. I think that Trump on the other hand did not really make too much sense with his responses. I do not understand how the United States can invade a country take all of their natural resources and call it a counter terrorist operation instead of conquest. I do think that the Obama administration could have better managed US involvement in Afganistan and Iraq, but I think that it is ridiculous to say that Clinton and Obama are directly responsible for the instability of the middle east and the formation of ISIS. The area has historically been unstable due to the effects of colonization, varying religions, ethnicities, and nationalities of the middle east.
Matt Lauer won. Hilary Clinton used the just like my opponent card a ton. She seemingly did a better job and yes she needs to continuously be asked the topics that many find her unfavourable in.
Trump also was treated the same way yet Lauer chose to ignore his initial response about supporting the war cause its a waste of time and hes not the decision maker. Trump never got close to ever answering a question so theres nit much to say except that be lies. And he walked the line of releasing classified information just like many assume Clinton has.
Either way I don't support either. The best player was Clinton in this but she definitely did not win.
They both were treated the same and generally acted in negative light and I feel neither understood the point of the forum and the time constraints. David E. 5th Block
I don't think either of them won, they were both asked questions to which neither of them really had a clear answer to give the audience. Sure they both had some good points but honestly it just seemed like a joke; both candidates have lied and switched up their opinions and honestly you really can't tell what's true. Hillary has experience but she also has made a lot of "mistakes that she would never do again" which isn't a good quality to have in a presidential candidate. Also, Trump evidently does not have a clear plan on what he wants to do and having his be the president could most definitely create tension with other countries- which is something the US really doesn't need.
I dislike both of the candidates equally, but I have to give the edge to Hillary. Unsurprisingly, Trump played the blame game quite a bit, pointing fingers towards the current administration instead of directly answering the question. Hillary is also guilty of this as well, completely deflecting Lauer's questions or only giving half-answers on more than one occasion. The only reason Hillary "won," in my opinion, was due to the fact that she gave intelligent responses, i.e she sounded much more professional and well-prepared.
I will admit that, though I didn't see the entire segment on Hillary, there was clearly a bias against Trump; the man was absolutely railed by Matt Lauer when it came to VA affairs and ISIS. Granted, Hillary gave pretty vague responses regarding these questions as well, but at least she attempted to answer them.
If anything, the only thing the forum solidified is that Hillary is untrustworthy but politically experienced, Trump is incompetent and ambiguous. We already knew this.
Nobody really won the forum, and I don't see any significant changes coming from the responses the candidates had. The forum was very short and I don't think either of them had time to get down to specifics on policy. I think Trump was smart to avoid some of the questions that were thrown at him because the debates coming up are what really matter, and it wouldn't help him to say something extremely controversial that would give Hilary more ammunition. I think the debates are going to decide this race and there's going to be plenty to debate over. Matthew Kim
Both candidates were equally terrible and, in my opinion, neither won the forum. What really surprised me was how aggressive Hillary was being when Matt Lauer tried to cut her off politely. On the other hand, Trump was quite self-contradictory saying that he knew more than the generals did, but yet his plan to deal with terrorism was to convene a panel of generals to come up with ideas. While Hillary did bash Trump some, Trump bashed nearly everyone that came to his mind, except Putin of course. I think that this is one of the worst qualities in a leader, especially on of the free world. As for Trump's position and response on sexual assault in the military, it was ignorant. When it comes down to the election, I'm not sure anyone knows 'the right thing' to do.
I don't think anyone won. And honestly I don't believe that was the point of this forum. I personally think that it played out exactly they way I thought, Hilary sounded more experienced but personally seemed to defensive. I think she lost people in the beginning because she was asked again about her emails, which seemed unessecary to the forum. Trump once again talked about Obama and what he didn't do, and mentioned Hilary and things that she's said. Instead of him doing that he should try actually answering the questions.
Both candidates had trouble in this forum, and having Matt Lauer as the moderator didn't help things. Trump and Clinton both played the blame game, and although the questions were similar and tended to be good ones, it ended up neither benefiting nor helping either-and in my opinion, it really wasn't clear who came off better. Clinton had a better time fielding tougher questions, but she tends to be more polished being a politician. Trump had an alright time, sometimes deflecting, but it wasn't too big of an issue. We'll really see how the candidates handle the issues when the debates start.
I think Matt Laur really pushed both candidates into their weaknesses that have repeatedly shown up in both their campaigns so far. Hilary spent most of her time on the defensive trying to justify her carelessness in handling her emails during her tenure as Secretary of State, and Donald Trump spent his whole time spewing his vague rhetoric. However, if a were to say who "won" the forum, I would have to give a very small edge to Clinton. Although she spent the whole time trying to defend her mistakes, she was at least coherent and composed throughout the forum. Trump on the other hand was off on one of his infamous tangents about how he knows more than everyone else, how Putin is such a great leader, and how he could defeat Isis without an actual formed plan of attack.
In my opinion, no one won. However, Clinton did seem more experienced and professional--as to be expected of the former Secretary of State. She seemed to handle the backlash of her email scandal well despite the fact that was not the focus of this debate at all. Trump seemed to leave out a lot of details when answering questions, and even avoided answering some altogether.
Trump's plan about how to keep stability in Iraq after defeating Isis seems a bit outlandish. The oil does help Isis fund themselves, just like it made Saddam Hussein rich before them, but U.S. can't leave soldiers behind to defend oil reserves that aren't theirs to begin with. The better solution would be to establish a strong democratic government with a trustworthy armed forces behind it to enforce law and order. Besides that however I though Trump gave good answers and acted presidential. Hillary Clinton opened by preaching about judgement when she herself has several examples of very poor judgement.
No clear winner can be determined even after watching the forum, and analyzing the fact checking article. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton both presented themselves, for the most part, as they have presented themselves for the past few months. Donald Trump managed to make it through the forum without saying anything completely ridiculous, while Hillary Clinton presented herself as a seasoned candidate ready to assume the position of Commander-in-Chief.
Both candidates seemed to have trouble explaining their plans and enjoy blaming eachother to boost their validity. However, Hillary Clinton presented herself in an intellectual way due to experience, and Donald Trump appeared to dance around the question. I do agree with Trump on how there should be effective managment stationed in the Middle East to oversee the government until they are able to function. Angela Lin
Honestly there are so many things that happened in this forum that was not good. I feel like Matt only asked questions about things that have to do about the campaign, rather than questions relative to veterens and military actions. The answers didnt seem honest either,just preplaned "this is what they want to hear" basic cookie cutter sentences. The highlights of this forum were Trump sourcing Esquire magazine, insulting the generals intelligence, and then Hillary constantly standing and sitting when Matt asked a question. It was an interesting forum.
It was difficult to determine a winner in this forum. Both candidates avoided giving in depth answers to the questions given. Trump has shown that he is inexperienced, inconsistent, and insensitive. Clinton proved that while she is experienced, she is untrustworthy. The only thing that is certain is that the voters are the losers.
Honestly, both candidates are equally in wrong and I don't think either side won. Hilary has made mistakes with her email scandal, which she had addressed in the forum, and Trump just contradicts everything he says. Trump's highlight was when he hurt the generals intelligence. The majority of Hilary's forum was on her explaining her scandal with the confidential emails. They did not give enough time or good questions to actually have a clear "winner". No one could understand what their policy was, Hilary was just getting flamed over for the email scandal and honestly Trump was just being vague throughout the entire forum. In my opinon, this forum was just a waste of time because nothing actually happened because Hilary was just being defensive while Trump was just being Trump.
I do not support either candidate. I believe when electing a leader who is to represent our entire nation, duty, honor and servitude are the most important/fundamental values that one MUST have. This upcoming election has become a problem of character where neither candidate displays the fundamental values of representing our nation, than a choice based on one's political platform. However, if I had to choose a leader I would say that Hillary won this forum. First of all, Trump stated that due to the Obama administration the generals of this country have been reduced to rubble. However, when asked to reveal his plans for the military and the war against ISIS Trump refused to reveal his "plan" and contradicted himself by stating that he would convene with the "generals" whom he had claimed were "reduced to rubble". At least Hilary knows where she stands with her initiative to aide prevention of sexual assualt and addiction in military,gun control and viewing war campaigns as wasteful.(not that she has a solid plan) Trump said he has a "secret" plan and pointed fingers at Hilary and Obama for being solely reaponsible for the issues raised. Hilary is experiences politically despite her untrustworthiness whereas Trump has just demonstrated he is improvising and truly has no definite plan for the war against ISIS. Trump's commendation of Putin was also very questionable...
I don't think either one of them won but I think it hurt Clinton when she said that she has dealed with classified information sense she entered government but in the email FBI report she said she didn't know what C standed for.
There wasn't anything accomplished. The length of the forum was too short to learn anything knew. The questions for Hillary were bad. She only got questions about her emails. The emails are only a part of her campaign. Trump was lieing constantly. Nothing was accomplished in this forum. Hillary is still defensive and untrustworthy. Trump is still crazy and unpredictable. This was a waist of time.
Because it was an open forum, in my opinion there can't be a winner. Both candidates were asked completely different questions so it can't be compared. Both candidates have their flaws: Trump's being his temperament and Clinton's being her untrustworthiness. I look forward to the debate because there will be a "winner" in that.
I think the forum was depressing for the vetrens because they've been pushing for this for a long time and a lot of the questions that were asked didn't truly pertain to commander-in-chief duties. I wish Matt Lauer had focused more and pushed back on certain things such as Trump's lies and not focusing so much on Hilary's emails. Yes that is a topic but shouldn't have been the focus of the hour long forum. I think going forward it needs to be long and for there to be a different, more experienced moderator.
Hiliary and Donald both had their different viewpoints and even though they agreed not to attack each other, they did. Donald Trump constantly avoided the questions that were asked to him and Hilary Clinton couldn't be asked as many questions because she wouldn't stop talking. I think that both candidates are untrustworthy so it's up to us to decided who we trust more as a future president. Which is a very concerning future for the country. I don't think either of them won because neither of them were convincing with the topics asked to them. -Kaitlyn Cole
The whole forum wasn't set up in the way it should have. It seemed more like an attempt for Matt Lauer personal FBI investigation on Hilary's emails instead of the topic of National Security. Trump just did what you would expect him to do. The forum was not productive.
I think that Hillary won because she sounded like she knew what she was talking about and didn't get off topic. Unlike Hillary, Trump kept getting way off topic and avoiding the questions. He may know things about wars and the military but if he really wants to win then he needs to answer more straightforward. -Brianna Dittmer
I believe Hilliary Clinton won. She took responsibility for her mistakes, and extensively explained why and how she made them. When asked questions she was adamant about answering fully, getting out everything she needed to, even if she ran over time. Donald trump in comparison did not answer his questions straightforwardly, he often resorted to insulting others to justify himself. He attacked generals, the agents who briefed him and Clinton in a classified meeting, and many others. He suggested we take the oil from the Middle East, insulting the USA in the process by suggesting we would impose his old fashioned, imperialistic views on them.
I honestly hate both candidates. Nothing unexpected came out of this forum. Once again, Hillary was questioned about her emails (which she deserves to be in prison for), and Trump made ignorant offensive comments, this time about the military. The fact that he blames the military's policy on gender equality for the sexual assaults is absolutely disgusting.
I don't really think either of them won because they both didn't follow a rule which I was not to attack their opponent. Hillary Clinton came in with a strategy and she used her experience. I think that she only told the good things she was a part of not the bad ones. She tried to justify the bad things she did when they came up. I just laughed at Trump because he said that we should've taken the oil from ISIS.--Hamza Tahir
I have to give Matt Laur credit for attempting to keep the candidates on track about what needed to be discussed and for pushing the controversial topics regarding each candidate. I think the forum was pointless, it was too short for anythint to get done and the candidates still avoided what was asked. In terms of who won, I have to give a slight edge to Clinton even though both candidates did not do well in the forum. Clinton was the only one of the two who stayed mostly on topic during the forum, Trump rambled on about his "successes", most of which didn't have a relevancy to the question asked and I believe that hurt him. -Libby Forcade
A veteran told hillary that if he had done what Hillary did in regard to handling classified information he wouldve been imprisoned, which is true. People say that Matt Lauer was too hard on Hillary over her emails but many military and DOD personell have been arrested and jailed for doing a fraction of what she did.
The whole forum was for nothing. Hillary was talking about her "fantastic" achievements and Trump was dodging all the questions. Trump always claims he knows everything, but this further shows he doesn't know anything about leading this country. Hillary also claimed that no ground troops will be sent, but that could definitely turn out a lie.
Nothing was accomplished from the forum. The candidates are as terrible as ever. Clinton rambled on and on about topics and limited her own time. Trump made horrible comments about the sexual assaults in the military. Lauer was poor in how he handled the candidates and had a poor choice of questions.
During the forum, Hillary was mainly defending her position on her emails while Trump was saying absurd statements.Trump's comments, such as how he praised Putin, was completely out of line. He admired Putin for leading for a long time, but that doesn't make any sense, because he's a dictator! If you think Putin is so great, you should praise the other infamous dictators throughout history, such as Hitler and Mussolini. In total, Trump and Hillary were both asked about their controversies and neither of them won.
Both candidates appeared to be at a stalemate. Neither were able to address the questions. Trump presented vague answers that were too broad to derive concrete information. Hillary swiftly ran out of time as the majority of the interview was comprised of questions that targeted the Internet scandal. However, Hillary was able to remind the public of her previous experience that strengthened her position. ~Ingrid Vanderzon
I don't think anyone really won, but I think Hillary had more appeal compared to Trump. A lot of trump's responses to the questions was backed by bashing Obama and he didn't really give clear answers. Hillary also didn't really elaborate her answers. It felt like she was pleading for understanding and exclaiming how she is better than trump due to her experience. I'd say the only reason Hillary might have had more appeal was because of her emphasis that she put on learning from mistakes. Overall I dislike both
I wouldn't say either side won this forum. Hilary seemed like she was on the verge of some good idea but really wasn't given enough time to explain. The emails thing is starting to become over played at this point. Now during Trump turn the thing he said about the oil wasn't totally far off. Taking their oil would cut off Isis income source which would be a major aid in stopping them, but other than that it was just typical convilute trump talk.
As much as I was hoping it would, this forum didn't really get anything done. Both candidates did what was expected: Hillary deflected questions and defended herself against the email scandal, and Trump did what he does when anyone asks him anything. I feel if Hillary didn't have so much of her time taken up by Matt Lauer asking about her emails, she would more than likely be the "winner" of the debate, especially with Trump talking about his "secret plan" to deal with Isis and increasing the concern over his attitude towards Putin. Hopefully something will happen closer towards the election to cause some of sort of distinction between the candidates, but as of right now there doesn't seem to be much that would cause me to favor one much more over than the other.
The forum overall was not productive. Since they were both questioned different individual questions, it was hard to compare the two candidates and say either was better. Yet it was clear that they were both struggling. They both dodged from answering the questions in depth which made no positive influence. Hilary ended up being defensive the entire time while Trump continued his absurd talking. The fact of Hilary's email scandal and Donald Trump's contradiction of his previous statements does not change. And the forum did not greatly influence the opinions on the two candidates. -Hannah Ahn
I don't think any opinions have changed after the debate. Most of the time it felt like a personality contest instead of facing real issues. Matt Lauer could have done a little better job facilitating the topics. They could have picked a stronger mediator. However, it was fairly unbiased. -Autumn Vaught
I do not think that the point of the forum was achieved. Questions dwelled on past topics that were not directly pertinent to the military for both candidates and I found responses a bit dodgey. Trump continued to lie and flip flop and Hillary was on the defense. No ones views changed after the forum and I wish they had really spoken more about their intentions with being the commander-in-chief. - Madison Parse
America is the biggest loser in all of this, and it's shame that I hear everybody saying they are gonna vote JUST to keep a candidate out of office, not because they want that candidate. Both we're playing the blame game, both were avoiding questions, and Matt Lauer didn't seem like the best choice to do this because he was both wishy washy and didn't focus on the whole commander and chief aspect of this forum. Americans watching this didn't learn anything knew about Hillary or Trump, they are still both universally disliked by most. Per usual trump had some comments that were pretty stupid, like his tweet regarding women and men in the military and the taking of oil from the Middle East after we win a war or go to war (?) and Hillary was composed but seemed secretly psycho underneath her cool exterior. Nobody wins.
There was nothing said that we have not already heard. The Donald is still a vague idiot,and Hillary is still a reckless snake. The middle East is a quagmire that the US shouldn't have gotten involved in. And boots on the ground won't change anything. To change a nation you must change its character. Nothing is more powerful than this, especially not even the wholly fledged force of the US military.
(((Kyle Christensen))) The forum was not constructive at all. Questions and answers found their way to the dirt and speculation that has surrounded each candidate in the lest couple of weeks. Clinton was questioned about emails and her ability to keep information confidential, while Trump was repeatedly caught lying and circumventing any questions that attempted to evoke solid, concrete answers regarding our continued involvement in Syria and Iraq. Both responded with predictable answers that remain consistent with their characters. They lie, and continue to uphold their reputations as untrustworthy and shallow.
Most of what I saw was exactly what I had expected to see. However as it is the first time the two candidates have been together in the same venue I think it was safe to say people expected more. i wish the questions and entire forum has been more based off of what there intentions as commander in chief would be instead of their previous actions. Hopefully the debates will be different -Eric Ceschin
In my opinion neither candidate really won. Controversial questions took up a large portion of Hillary's time which led to Matt Lauer rushing her through the questions that really mattered. This must have been why she did not answer the questions fully and even avoided answering some. In addition to that, during Trump's turn to talk, he was very vague with his answers and kept trying to refute Hillary's statement about himself. All in all, neither of them stayed on track with the topic of the forum, and having Matt Lauer as a moderator did not help.
I think this was pretty unsuccessful, as per usual Hillary was on the defensive, and Trump pointed fingers at other people instead of elaborating on his policies. Although I think it is important to address the emails, spending 1/3 of the time talking about the emails drew the focus away from what the Commander-in-chief forum is supposed to be about. -Laila Sharif
In terms of gaining votes, I felt that neither party made much headway. When Matt Lauer pressed each candidate on their weak points-Trump with his lack of detailed policy and Hillary with her emails & approval from the military- each danced around the issue. I don't feel like either gained any votes from the Forum. To me, Trump's inexperience was painfully obvious, but Clinton wasn't able to clearly differentiate herself as the more experienced option when Lauer pointed out her decision to go into Iraq, in addition to her low military approval rate.
I believe the whole event was unsuccessful due to the fact that nobody got any real answers. Hillary's time was mostly spent talking about her email controversy instead of the questions that really mattered, and Trump made no sense for the most part (like usual). The forum was supposed to help sway some voters, but nothing's changed. Trump was lying & flip flopping, Hillary was on the defensive, & both candidates are still deemed untrustworthy by many Americans. I don't think anybody "won". -Jasmine Abuziad
I don't think either side won. During Clinton's turn to answer questions, Lauer had used most of that time to ask questions about her email scandal, instead of asking questions that had to do with the Comander-in-Chief Forum, so when she was asked questions about what mattered her answers seemed quite vague. When it was Trump's turn to answer questions I felt that he spent more time complaining about what was wrong with Democratic policies, and lying about how he never support the war and Iraq instead of actually spending time talking about his policies.
I don't think either side won. During Clinton's turn to answer questions, Lauer had used most of that time to ask questions about her email scandal, instead of asking questions that had to do with the Comander-in-Chief Forum, so when she was asked questions about what mattered her answers seemed quite vague. When it was Trump's turn to answer questions I felt that he spent more time complaining about what was wrong with Democratic policies, and lying about how he never support the war and Iraq instead of actually spending time talking about his policies.
Secretary Clinton and Trump took very different approaches to this forum. Plus, they both broke the rules of the forum by mentioning each other in regards to issues such as whether or not the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq. Clinton constantly referenced her past and built upon her contributions, and her experience was clear in regards to international terrorist threats, such as 9/11. Trump, on the other hand, spoke in very general/broad terms because he doesn't have that experience. He hasn't met with the US generals or the Secretary of War. Furthermore, Trump says that he has a "plan" when it comes to how to take down ISIS and he won't reveal it ever because then they'll know about it. But, I don't really think that he has any sort of plan whatsoever. Plus, his lie in Esquire magazine about not supporting troops going into Iraq was a huge mistake since he did support the troops going in there. Clinton knew this, and Lauer should have known this. This forum is called the "Commander in Chief Forum" and I think that Trump is unfit to be in charge of the most powerful military force in the world. So, to me, Clinton won this forum because she gave examples and has a clear plan that assures the American people that she is looking to the future. While I don't like how much time was spent on the confidential email scandal since this forum was meant to target war plans as well as troop and veteran safety, I still think that her experience outshined Trump's general remarks. -Lea Paragas
In my opinion one candidate did not win over the other. Both of them avoided directly answering the questions that were prompted and instead ranted about something else. As usual, Clinton rambled on defensively about the emails and Trump was not making sense with anything he said. To add to the mess, Matt Lauer had no idea what questions to ask the candidates which ultimately lead this forum to have no major significance whatsoever. I think the debate in September will be far more beneficial for the candidates.
Overall it was poorly executed with neither candidates coming out on top. The questions didn't address the main reasons the candidates were there; national security and global issues. Matt spent the majority of the time addressing Hilary's email scandal and asking Trump easily avoided questions.The candidates responses were vague or defensive and once again didn't focus on the point of the forum. When they did give details they were irrelevant to the questions and sidetracked the dysfunctional interview. Watching the interview I had no idea where either of the candidates stood in the matter of national security. In my opinion no one won, well maybe Matt Lauer due to the fact that no one will have him run a forum again. I'm excited to see the debates where real questions will be asked and the candidates won't be able to be vague and unresponsive.
I think that this forum got both candidates nowhere. Hillary Clinton spent 90% of her twenty five minutes dodging questions about the email scandal, which did nothing to help her. Although she was very composed, her answers could have been more dynamic. Trump, on the other hand, commented on everything. As usual, he kept making "factual" statements that are simply not true. Politically, this forum did not have as big of an impact as many thought it would.
I was personally very upset by Donald Trump's comments on sexual assault in the military. This summer, Trump claimed that women being sexually harassed at work should find a new job. Just a few weeks ago, Trump's campaign manager Kellyanne Conway stated that if women were stronger, rape would not exist. Because of these previously expressed negative views on women by Trump and his campaign, it was alarming to hear that he has no real plan to address sexual assault within our armed forces. I worry that under a Trump presidency, the brave women of our military would be told to "find a new job" if harassed or that they're "not strong enough" if they become the victim of sexual violence.
I thought that the forum was going to be really cool and that it would be a good time to see how each candidate would reply to the same questions without interruptions from other candidates. After watching it, I realized that I'd much rather see the two candidates debate. Both candidates didn't really give definitive answers the entire time, and they mostly just pointed fingers. It wasn't very interesting to watch mostly because none of the questions were being answered fully. I don't think either candidate did better than the other. However, I think Trump might have gained a better image in the public eye by keeping his cool the entire time.
In my opinion, there was no winner or loser in this forum. Both the answers from the candidates and questions from Matt Lauer were poor. The candidates were not equipped to answer the questions that Lauer presented and Lauer's questions rarely had follow ups to them to gain more information. The presenters of the forum should have chosen someone other than Lauer because of his poor interviewing skills with politicians. Meanwhile, the candidates should have stayed on topic and presented their opinions in a solid manner.
I tthought overall this was a useless interview on both candidates and nothing overall was accomplished trump still proved to be incompetent and indecisive and Hillary proved to be evasive and secretive
The forum was boring, and no one really "won it" because they both made a lot of mistakes. One thing I was upset about during the forum is when Hillary said "We did not lose a single American in the Libyan action." I mean this friggin pisses me off....4 AMERICANS DIED. And the irony of her Hillary saying that is she was responsible for her deaths because there numerous requests to have addition security in Ben Ghazi but of course she ignored it. The next big chance Trump has to gain more voters is the presidential candidate debate later this month. I'm really looking forward to this debate because I want to see Trump Hillary for everything she has done wrong. Last think I continue to stress, I get that both candidates are not good, but Trump is a better choice because Hillary is corrupt, an idiot, and is gonna ultimately danger the American people.
The forum was really boring to watch. No one really "won" because both made mistakes, and didn't answers questions too well. One thing that pissed me off during the forum is when Hillary said "We did not lose a single American in the Libyan action." This frigging pisses me off because FOUR AMERICAN DIED in Ben Ghazi. And the ironic part of her saying that statement is she is part of the reason they got killed. She got numerous requests for more security, but you know she ignored it. I'm very excited for the presidential candidate debate later this month because I want to see Trump attack Hillary on everything he possibly can. And I feel if he does this, a lot of undecided voters are going to sway to the Trump side
Overall l think that both Hilary and Trump did a poor job. Hilary overall just tried to defend her emails and Trump would say contradicting or childish remarks. The mediator also did a poor job at really asking them good questions on what was really the main focus, which was military. All in all there really was no clear winner in this debate which would calculate to there not being any major changes in the polls.
Neither candidate campaigned well, but if I had to pick one over the other, I would say that Clinton did a better job than Trump did in terms of ability to act on a crisis. She constantly referred to her previous experience in the White House; experience that Trump does not have. However, neither truly confronted the question head on and stated any definitive strategies for dealing with ISIS and other national/international threats. Both candidates got sucked into a debate about their support for the war in Iraq, a related but still separate issue.
I found it interesting how Matt Lauer wasn't pushing both candidates as hard as other moderators. Although he was a good moderator, I think he should've focused less on Clinton's email scandal and let the military attendees ask more questions to clarify both candidates' stance on the issues. That being said, I think it's hard to say who won because both took jabs at each other and both tried to say why they were better than each other instead of focusing on the issues at hand.
There was no clear cut winner in this debate. Lauer targeted the most pressing issues of each candidate, but neither seemed to be able to put together coherent answers that pleased the americans citizens more than a couple times. Hillary is still battling the Republican campiagn's claims on her realiability and ability to handle classified information. I'm not sure whether Americans are willing to value Hillary's experience over her mistakes in this election. Not surprisingly, Trump would say something that almost made sense, and then combine it with an insulting comment, managing to offend at least one minority every time he spoke. His postitions on sensitive topics, such as immigration and military abuse, continue to keep many voters from wanting to elect him. This election is turning out to be a choice between the lesser of two evils.
I think the forum was very unsuccessful and pretty useless for either candidate to gain some ground on votes. I felt that Matt Lauer did a poor job at mediating and didn't ask the right questions. He let alot of wrong facts slide and really did get us much information that we didnt know before. I also think that Hilary did a bad job at really attracting voters with her speaking and Trump said a lot of false statements.
Neither Hilary of Trump won in this event. Hilary's turn was mostly focused on her email scandal. Trump was very weak in his arguments and continued to display his lack of knowledge and maturity. Matt Lauer also didn't help both candidates because of the unrelated questions he would ask them. Over all this event didn't help either candidate. -Zach Price
Neither side won the debate, even though Hilary had more direct and thorough answers, I don't think she said enough to sway some people to vote Democrat. Trump's answers were just not sufficient, sometimes he didn't answer the question or he gave a very vague answer. Matt Lauer was also a factor in the lack of good answers. Asking Hilary multiple times about emails in a short time span, and then trying to cut her off while she tries to answer. Neither candidate got a big bump from this event.
It doesn't seem to me that either candidate had a definitive win over one another. I felt that there wasn't enough time for the candidates to talk in detail about their policies. Also, Matt Lauer repeatedly interrupted the candidates, shortening the time even more. Hilary was addressed about her emails once again and the conversation did not highlight anything new with her policies. When Trump was asked about his policies, he seemed unprepared and kept going off into tangents. They both were vague and unclear about addressing the questions presented, which frustrates voters who need clear answers about important issues.
I feel as though both Trump and Hilary's points where weak and that neither of them won. Hilary only talked about her email scandal and Trump didn't provide any useful information. However it also didn't help that Matt Lauer was asking the questions because he seemed rush the answers for every question
I feel like neither of the candidates won. If anything, Hillary had better answers considering her statement about the emails were partially true and she claimed her vote about going to war in iraq was her mistake. A lot of the things said from both parties have been said before and i feel like this didn't make much of a difference as far as how the votes are going to go and how people feel about both candidates. This was very unsuccessful.
Uhh well, the moderator for the debate kept trying to debate Trump rather than letting Hilary debate Trump herself. He seemed very biased. No one ever called out Hilary on her false information yet they asked Trump about the birther movement and Hilary called him racist for that even though Hilary Clinton's campaign was the one who originally started the birther movement. Also nothing really got done, there wasn't much new to say. Hilary was a very strong debater ; however, all she did was deflect questions and then say how bad Trump is. So in the end nothing got done and all of this was a complete waste of time. David E
Trump and his family were raised in a bubble of narcissism and hyper-aggressive competitiveness. He has not grown past the mentality he had as a child/during his formative years. He is and always will be a cutthroat. He is a man that will never settle, and who also strives to be the "biggest man" in the room.
Hillary Clinton changed her appearance to appeal to voters following her husband's loss in a bid for reelection. As she grew up, she becomes a social activist and becomes heavily involved in progressive moments of the day. As a young adult she becomes heavily invested in the politics.
Both people come from stark family backgrounds. Trump has been raised to be incredibly aggressive, and prided itself on being overly masculine. Love was only given to the victors, the losers should want for nothing. Hillary was raised in an oppressive environment in which she was demeaned day in and out.
For those who trust the overly aggressive and feel that the "politically correct" culture of the day has neutered American superiority, Trump is their man. He is seen as a no-nonsense, all-action sort of candidate, a rejection of the slow, methodical dimplomacy of yesteryear. He is the embodiment of unthinking American might and power, at least in this election.
Hillary Clinton is the old-school politician, a power broker and a diplomat. Her experience appeals to those that realize force cannot be used in every situation. Her target audience are the people that like to think about something carefully before acting.
Whether or not you "like" these candidates is irrelevant; you will pick whichever person you feel will do the best job. Trump appeals to the hotheads that think that nuking ISIS will solve the issue once and for all, and Hillary appeals to the people that love to wheel and deal.
-Trump would constantly talk about how he does not think that obama was not born in the us & then obama humiliated him (some might be embarassed by him)
He came up from a rough childhood (some may be inspired by his story)
Trump shocked the construction world by putting a woman in charge(might appeal to women voters)
Clinton broke the tradition of "not being an accessory to her husband"/ breaking tradition of southern govereners wife (might not be admired by southern voters)
She came from a conservative family/area (some democrats might not think she's a pure/true liberal)
Always was good at keeping secrets(can be good for presidency, some may find it scandalous, for example, her email scandal)
I really think this forum really didn't change anybodys mind at all, we already knew all of this. I think the forum was too short for anything to get done and the candidates still avoided the questions. Trump was lying constantly and hillary was defensive and untrustworthy.
People think it is funny to laugh when Donald Trump says take the oil from ISIS but in reality it's makes perfect sense. ISIS could not fund themselves or fuel their vehicles without the abundant oil in their region. If the U.S. had taken the oil before they left Iraq in shambles ISIS wouldn't have been able to grow. Also Hillary clintons "experience" is the worst trait she has because she has overseen the Middle East grow into disarray during her time as a senator and Secretary of State. Also she had accepted numerous "donations" from foreign entities which resulted in favorable action from the state department towards that person/country.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if one side "won" the debate. As I was watching it it seemed to me that both candidates were asked questions which made them look bad. For example, Hillary was asked about her emails and Trump was asked about some of his more controversial statements. Honestly I would be much more interested to see how the two candidates act and answer questions during the debates.
ReplyDeleteTyler Kachadorian
A forum is meant to get questions answered, and is not a competition necessarily, so no one won. Both candidates were questioned about different topics. Neither candidate is trustworthy, but no politician is at this point. Donald Trump is highly incompetent and inconsistent. He has no plan of action, no experience, and no common sense whatsoever. I can't seem to understand how anyone can take him seriously. Most of his responses involved pointing out the "faults" of Obama and his administration as well as Hilary, rather than detailing his own agenda for if he were to be elected. Hillary has the experience, but in that experience comes a history of lies and secrets. She is just as untrustworthy, but at least she won't be viewed as a joke by foreign countries. Those that support and defend Trump have a myopic view of his lack of everything it takes to be a president. As everyone has pointed out, this election is a decision between the lesser of two evils.
ReplyDeleteI do not think anyone really won the debate, but I think Clinton did pretty well considering she was getting criticized about her obvious mistakes for the majority of the forum. I think that Trump on the other hand did not really make too much sense with his responses. I do not understand how the United States can invade a country take all of their natural resources and call it a counter terrorist operation instead of conquest. I do think that the Obama administration could have better managed US involvement in Afganistan and Iraq, but I think that it is ridiculous to say that Clinton and Obama are directly responsible for the instability of the middle east and the formation of ISIS. The area has historically been unstable due to the effects of colonization, varying religions, ethnicities, and nationalities of the middle east.
ReplyDeleteMatt Lauer won.
ReplyDeleteHilary Clinton used the just like my opponent card a ton. She seemingly did a better job and yes she needs to continuously be asked the topics that many find her unfavourable in.
Trump also was treated the same way yet Lauer chose to ignore his initial response about supporting the war cause its a waste of time and hes not the decision maker. Trump never got close to ever answering a question so theres nit much to say except that be lies. And he walked the line of releasing classified information just like many assume Clinton has.
Either way I don't support either. The best player was Clinton in this but she definitely did not win.
They both were treated the same and generally acted in negative light and I feel neither understood the point of the forum and the time constraints.
David E. 5th Block
I don't think either of them won, they were both asked questions to which neither of them really had a clear answer to give the audience. Sure they both had some good points but honestly it just seemed like a joke; both candidates have lied and switched up their opinions and honestly you really can't tell what's true. Hillary has experience but she also has made a lot of "mistakes that she would never do again" which isn't a good quality to have in a presidential candidate. Also, Trump evidently does not have a clear plan on what he wants to do and having his be the president could most definitely create tension with other countries- which is something the US really doesn't need.
ReplyDeleteI dislike both of the candidates equally, but I have to give the edge to Hillary. Unsurprisingly, Trump played the blame game quite a bit, pointing fingers towards the current administration instead of directly answering the question. Hillary is also guilty of this as well, completely deflecting Lauer's questions or only giving half-answers on more than one occasion. The only reason Hillary "won," in my opinion, was due to the fact that she gave intelligent responses, i.e she sounded much more professional and well-prepared.
ReplyDeleteI will admit that, though I didn't see the entire segment on Hillary, there was clearly a bias against Trump; the man was absolutely railed by Matt Lauer when it came to VA affairs and ISIS. Granted, Hillary gave pretty vague responses regarding these questions as well, but at least she attempted to answer them.
If anything, the only thing the forum solidified is that Hillary is untrustworthy but politically experienced, Trump is incompetent and ambiguous. We already knew this.
Nobody really won the forum, and I don't see any significant changes coming from the responses the candidates had. The forum was very short and I don't think either of them had time to get down to specifics on policy.
ReplyDeleteI think Trump was smart to avoid some of the questions that were thrown at him because the debates coming up are what really matter, and it wouldn't help him to say something extremely controversial that would give Hilary more ammunition.
I think the debates are going to decide this race and there's going to be plenty to debate over.
Matthew Kim
Both candidates were equally terrible and, in my opinion, neither won the forum. What really surprised me was how aggressive Hillary was being when Matt Lauer tried to cut her off politely. On the other hand, Trump was quite self-contradictory saying that he knew more than the generals did, but yet his plan to deal with terrorism was to convene a panel of generals to come up with ideas. While Hillary did bash Trump some, Trump bashed nearly everyone that came to his mind, except Putin of course. I think that this is one of the worst qualities in a leader, especially on of the free world. As for Trump's position and response on sexual assault in the military, it was ignorant. When it comes down to the election, I'm not sure anyone knows 'the right thing' to do.
ReplyDeleteI don't think anyone won. And honestly I don't believe that was the point of this forum. I personally think that it played out exactly they way I thought, Hilary sounded more experienced but personally seemed to defensive. I think she lost people in the beginning because she was asked again about her emails, which seemed unessecary to the forum. Trump once again talked about Obama and what he didn't do, and mentioned Hilary and things that she's said. Instead of him doing that he should try actually answering the questions.
ReplyDeleteBoth candidates had trouble in this forum, and having Matt Lauer as the moderator didn't help things. Trump and Clinton both played the blame game, and although the questions were similar and tended to be good ones, it ended up neither benefiting nor helping either-and in my opinion, it really wasn't clear who came off better. Clinton had a better time fielding tougher questions, but she tends to be more polished being a politician. Trump had an alright time, sometimes deflecting, but it wasn't too big of an issue. We'll really see how the candidates handle the issues when the debates start.
ReplyDeleteI think Matt Laur really pushed both candidates into their weaknesses that have repeatedly shown up in both their campaigns so far. Hilary spent most of her time on the defensive trying to justify her carelessness in handling her emails during her tenure as Secretary of State, and Donald Trump spent his whole time spewing his vague rhetoric. However, if a were to say who "won" the forum, I would have to give a very small edge to Clinton. Although she spent the whole time trying to defend her mistakes, she was at least coherent and composed throughout the forum. Trump on the other hand was off on one of his infamous tangents about how he knows more than everyone else, how Putin is such a great leader, and how he could defeat Isis without an actual formed plan of attack.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, no one won. However, Clinton did seem more experienced and professional--as to be expected of the former Secretary of State. She seemed to handle the backlash of her email scandal well despite the fact that was not the focus of this debate at all. Trump seemed to leave out a lot of details when answering questions, and even avoided answering some altogether.
ReplyDeleteTrump's plan about how to keep stability in Iraq after defeating Isis seems a bit outlandish. The oil does help Isis fund themselves, just like it made Saddam Hussein rich before them, but U.S. can't leave soldiers behind to defend oil reserves that aren't theirs to begin with. The better solution would be to establish a strong democratic government with a trustworthy armed forces behind it to enforce law and order. Besides that however I though Trump gave good answers and acted presidential. Hillary Clinton opened by preaching about judgement when she herself has several examples of very poor judgement.
ReplyDeleteNo clear winner can be determined even after watching the forum, and analyzing the fact checking article. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton both presented themselves, for the most part, as they have presented themselves for the past few months. Donald Trump managed to make it through the forum without saying anything completely ridiculous, while Hillary Clinton presented herself as a seasoned candidate ready to assume the position of Commander-in-Chief.
ReplyDeleteBoth candidates seemed to have trouble explaining their plans and enjoy blaming eachother to boost their validity. However, Hillary Clinton presented herself in an intellectual way due to experience, and Donald Trump appeared to dance around the question. I do agree with Trump on how there should be effective managment stationed in the Middle East to oversee the government until they are able to function.
ReplyDeleteAngela Lin
Honestly there are so many things that happened in this forum that was not good. I feel like Matt only asked questions about things that have to do about the campaign, rather than questions relative to veterens and military actions. The answers didnt seem honest either,just preplaned "this is what they want to hear" basic cookie cutter sentences. The highlights of this forum were Trump sourcing Esquire magazine, insulting the generals intelligence, and then Hillary constantly standing and sitting when Matt asked a question. It was an interesting forum.
ReplyDeleteIt was difficult to determine a winner in this forum. Both candidates avoided giving in depth answers to the questions given. Trump has shown that he is inexperienced, inconsistent, and insensitive. Clinton proved that while she is experienced, she is untrustworthy. The only thing that is certain is that the voters are the losers.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, both candidates are equally in wrong and I don't think either side won. Hilary has made mistakes with her email scandal, which she had addressed in the forum, and Trump just contradicts everything he says. Trump's highlight was when he hurt the generals intelligence. The majority of Hilary's forum was on her explaining her scandal with the confidential emails. They did not give enough time or good questions to actually have a clear "winner". No one could understand what their policy was, Hilary was just getting flamed over for the email scandal and honestly Trump was just being vague throughout the entire forum. In my opinon, this forum was just a waste of time because nothing actually happened because Hilary was just being defensive while Trump was just being Trump.
ReplyDeleteI do not support either candidate. I believe when electing a leader who is to represent our entire nation, duty, honor and servitude are the most important/fundamental values that one MUST have. This upcoming election has become a problem of character where neither candidate displays the fundamental values of representing our nation, than a choice based on one's political platform. However, if I had to choose a leader I would say that Hillary won this forum. First of all, Trump stated that due to the Obama administration the generals of this country have been reduced to rubble. However, when asked to reveal his plans for the military and the war against ISIS Trump refused to reveal his "plan" and contradicted himself by stating that he would convene with the "generals" whom he had claimed were "reduced to rubble". At least Hilary knows where she stands with her initiative to aide prevention of sexual assualt and addiction in military,gun control and viewing war campaigns as wasteful.(not that she has a solid plan) Trump said he has a "secret" plan and pointed fingers at Hilary and Obama for being solely reaponsible for the issues raised. Hilary is experiences politically despite her untrustworthiness whereas Trump has just demonstrated he is improvising and truly has no definite plan for the war against ISIS. Trump's commendation of Putin was also very questionable...
ReplyDeleteI don't think either one of them won but I think it hurt Clinton when she said that she has dealed with classified information sense she entered government but in the email FBI report she said she didn't know what C standed for.
ReplyDeleteThere wasn't anything accomplished. The length of the forum was too short to learn anything knew. The questions for Hillary were bad. She only got questions about her emails. The emails are only a part of her campaign. Trump was lieing constantly. Nothing was accomplished in this forum. Hillary is still defensive and untrustworthy. Trump is still crazy and unpredictable. This was a waist of time.
ReplyDeleteNo one won this debate
DeleteBecause it was an open forum, in my opinion there can't be a winner. Both candidates were asked completely different questions so it can't be compared. Both candidates have their flaws: Trump's being his temperament and Clinton's being her untrustworthiness. I look forward to the debate because there will be a "winner" in that.
ReplyDeleteI think the forum was depressing for the vetrens because they've been pushing for this for a long time and a lot of the questions that were asked didn't truly pertain to commander-in-chief duties. I wish Matt Lauer had focused more and pushed back on certain things such as Trump's lies and not focusing so much on Hilary's emails. Yes that is a topic but shouldn't have been the focus of the hour long forum. I think going forward it needs to be long and for there to be a different, more experienced moderator.
ReplyDeleteHiliary and Donald both had their different viewpoints and even though they agreed not to attack each other, they did. Donald Trump constantly avoided the questions that were asked to him and Hilary Clinton couldn't be asked as many questions because she wouldn't stop talking. I think that both candidates are untrustworthy so it's up to us to decided who we trust more as a future president. Which is a very concerning future for the country. I don't think either of them won because neither of them were convincing with the topics asked to them. -Kaitlyn Cole
ReplyDeleteThe whole forum wasn't set up in the way it should have. It seemed more like an attempt for Matt Lauer personal FBI investigation on Hilary's emails instead of the topic of National Security. Trump just did what you would expect him to do. The forum was not productive.
ReplyDeleteI think that Hillary won because she sounded like she knew what she was talking about and didn't get off topic. Unlike Hillary, Trump kept getting way off topic and avoiding the questions. He may know things about wars and the military but if he really wants to win then he needs to answer more straightforward. -Brianna Dittmer
ReplyDeleteI believe Hilliary Clinton won. She took responsibility for her mistakes, and extensively explained why and how she made them. When asked questions she was adamant about answering fully, getting out everything she needed to, even if she ran over time. Donald trump in comparison did not answer his questions straightforwardly, he often resorted to insulting others to justify himself. He attacked generals, the agents who briefed him and Clinton in a classified meeting, and many others. He suggested we take the oil from the Middle East, insulting the USA in the process by suggesting we would impose his old fashioned, imperialistic views on them.
ReplyDeleteMeghan Muldoon
I honestly hate both candidates. Nothing unexpected came out of this forum. Once again, Hillary was questioned about her emails (which she deserves to be in prison for), and Trump made ignorant offensive comments, this time about the military. The fact that he blames the military's policy on gender equality for the sexual assaults is absolutely disgusting.
ReplyDeleteI don't really think either of them won because they both didn't follow a rule which I was not to attack their opponent. Hillary Clinton came in with a strategy and she used her experience. I think that she only told the good things she was a part of not the bad ones. She tried to justify the bad things she did when they came up. I just laughed at Trump because he said that we should've taken the oil from ISIS.--Hamza Tahir
ReplyDeleteI have to give Matt Laur credit for attempting to keep the candidates on track about what needed to be discussed and for pushing the controversial topics regarding each candidate. I think the forum was pointless, it was too short for anythint to get done and the candidates still avoided what was asked. In terms of who won, I have to give a slight edge to Clinton even though both candidates did not do well in the forum. Clinton was the only one of the two who stayed mostly on topic during the forum, Trump rambled on about his "successes", most of which didn't have a relevancy to the question asked and I believe that hurt him. -Libby Forcade
ReplyDeleteA veteran told hillary that if he had done what Hillary did in regard to handling classified information he wouldve been imprisoned, which is true. People say that Matt Lauer was too
ReplyDeletehard on Hillary over her emails but many military and DOD personell have been arrested and jailed for doing a fraction of what she did.
The whole forum was for nothing. Hillary was talking about her "fantastic" achievements and Trump was dodging all the questions. Trump always claims he knows everything, but this further shows he doesn't know anything about leading this country. Hillary also claimed that no ground troops will be sent, but that could definitely turn out a lie.
ReplyDeleteNothing was accomplished from the forum. The candidates are as terrible as ever. Clinton rambled on and on about topics and limited her own time. Trump made horrible comments about the sexual assaults in the military. Lauer was poor in how he handled the candidates and had a poor choice of questions.
ReplyDeleteMichael Zhang
During the forum, Hillary was mainly defending her position on her emails while Trump was saying absurd statements.Trump's comments, such as how he praised Putin, was completely out of line. He admired Putin for leading for a long time, but that doesn't make any sense, because he's a dictator! If you think Putin is so great, you should praise the other infamous dictators throughout history, such as Hitler and Mussolini. In total, Trump and Hillary were both asked about their controversies and neither of them won.
ReplyDeleteBoth candidates appeared to be at a stalemate. Neither were able to address the questions. Trump presented vague answers that were too broad to derive concrete information. Hillary swiftly ran out of time as the majority of the interview was comprised of questions that targeted the Internet scandal. However, Hillary was able to remind the public of her previous experience that strengthened her position.
ReplyDelete~Ingrid Vanderzon
I don't think anyone really won, but I think Hillary had more appeal compared to Trump. A lot of trump's responses to the questions was backed by bashing Obama and he didn't really give clear answers. Hillary also didn't really elaborate her answers. It felt like she was pleading for understanding and exclaiming how she is better than trump due to her experience. I'd say the only reason Hillary might have had more appeal was because of her emphasis that she put on learning from mistakes. Overall I dislike both
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't say either side won this forum. Hilary seemed like she was on the verge of some good idea but really wasn't given enough time to explain. The emails thing is starting to become over played at this point. Now during Trump turn the thing he said about the oil wasn't totally far off. Taking their oil would cut off Isis income source which would be a major aid in stopping them, but other than that it was just typical convilute trump talk.
ReplyDeleteAs much as I was hoping it would, this forum didn't really get anything done. Both candidates did what was expected: Hillary deflected questions and defended herself against the email scandal, and Trump did what he does when anyone asks him anything. I feel if Hillary didn't have so much of her time taken up by Matt Lauer asking about her emails, she would more than likely be the "winner" of the debate, especially with Trump talking about his "secret plan" to deal with Isis and increasing the concern over his attitude towards Putin. Hopefully something will happen closer towards the election to cause some of sort of distinction between the candidates, but as of right now there doesn't seem to be much that would cause me to favor one much more over than the other.
ReplyDeleteThe forum overall was not productive. Since they were both questioned different individual questions, it was hard to compare the two candidates and say either was better. Yet it was clear that they were both struggling. They both dodged from answering the questions in depth which made no positive influence. Hilary ended up being defensive the entire time while Trump continued his absurd talking. The fact of Hilary's email scandal and Donald Trump's contradiction of his previous statements does not change. And the forum did not greatly influence the opinions on the two candidates.
ReplyDelete-Hannah Ahn
I don't think any opinions have changed after the debate. Most of the time it felt like a personality contest instead of facing real issues. Matt Lauer could have done a little better job facilitating the topics. They could have picked a stronger mediator. However, it was fairly unbiased.
ReplyDelete-Autumn Vaught
I do not think that the point of the forum was achieved. Questions dwelled on past topics that were not directly pertinent to the military for both candidates and I found responses a bit dodgey. Trump continued to lie and flip flop and Hillary was on the defense. No ones views changed after the forum and I wish they had really spoken more about their intentions with being the commander-in-chief.
ReplyDelete- Madison Parse
America is the biggest loser in all of this, and it's shame that I hear everybody saying they are gonna vote JUST to keep a candidate out of office, not because they want that candidate. Both we're playing the blame game, both were avoiding questions, and Matt Lauer didn't seem like the best choice to do this because he was both wishy washy and didn't focus on the whole commander and chief aspect of this forum. Americans watching this didn't learn anything knew about Hillary or Trump, they are still both universally disliked by most. Per usual trump had some comments that were pretty stupid, like his tweet regarding women and men in the military and the taking of oil from the Middle East after we win a war or go to war (?) and Hillary was composed but seemed secretly psycho underneath her cool exterior. Nobody wins.
ReplyDeleteThere was nothing said that we have not already heard. The Donald is still a vague idiot,and Hillary is still a reckless snake. The middle East is a quagmire that the US shouldn't have gotten involved in. And boots on the ground won't change anything. To change a nation you must change its character. Nothing is more powerful than this, especially not even the wholly fledged force of the US military.
ReplyDelete-Nathan A Monk
(((Kyle Christensen))) The forum was not constructive at all. Questions and answers found their way to the dirt and speculation that has surrounded each candidate in the lest couple of weeks. Clinton was questioned about emails and her ability to keep information confidential, while Trump was repeatedly caught lying and circumventing any questions that attempted to evoke solid, concrete answers regarding our continued involvement in Syria and Iraq. Both responded with predictable answers that remain consistent with their characters. They lie, and continue to uphold their reputations as untrustworthy and shallow.
ReplyDeleteMost of what I saw was exactly what I had expected to see. However as it is the first time the two candidates have been together in the same venue I think it was safe to say people expected more. i wish the questions and entire forum has been more based off of what there intentions as commander in chief would be instead of their previous actions. Hopefully the debates will be different
ReplyDelete-Eric Ceschin
In my opinion neither candidate really won. Controversial questions took up a large portion of Hillary's time which led to Matt Lauer rushing her through the questions that really mattered. This must have been why she did not answer the questions fully and even avoided answering some. In addition to that, during Trump's turn to talk, he was very vague with his answers and kept trying to refute Hillary's statement about himself. All in all, neither of them stayed on track with the topic of the forum, and having Matt Lauer as a moderator did not help.
ReplyDeleteI think this was pretty unsuccessful, as per usual Hillary was on the defensive, and Trump pointed fingers at other people instead of elaborating on his policies. Although I think it is important to address the emails, spending 1/3 of the time talking about the emails drew the focus away from what the Commander-in-chief forum is supposed to be about.
ReplyDelete-Laila Sharif
In terms of gaining votes, I felt that neither party made much headway. When Matt Lauer pressed each candidate on their weak points-Trump with his lack of detailed policy and Hillary with her emails & approval from the military- each danced around the issue. I don't feel like either gained any votes from the Forum. To me, Trump's inexperience was painfully obvious, but Clinton wasn't able to clearly differentiate herself as the more experienced option when Lauer pointed out her decision to go into Iraq, in addition to her low military approval rate.
ReplyDeleteI believe the whole event was unsuccessful due to the fact that nobody got any real answers. Hillary's time was mostly spent talking about her email controversy instead of the questions that really mattered, and Trump made no sense for the most part (like usual). The forum was supposed to help sway some voters, but nothing's changed. Trump was lying & flip flopping, Hillary was on the defensive, & both candidates are still deemed untrustworthy by many Americans. I don't think anybody "won". -Jasmine Abuziad
ReplyDeleteI don't think either side won. During Clinton's turn to answer questions, Lauer had used most of that time to ask questions about her email scandal, instead of asking questions that had to do with the Comander-in-Chief Forum, so when she was asked questions about what mattered her answers seemed quite vague. When it was Trump's turn to answer questions I felt that he spent more time complaining about what was wrong with Democratic policies, and lying about how he never support the war and Iraq instead of actually spending time talking about his policies.
ReplyDeleteI don't think either side won. During Clinton's turn to answer questions, Lauer had used most of that time to ask questions about her email scandal, instead of asking questions that had to do with the Comander-in-Chief Forum, so when she was asked questions about what mattered her answers seemed quite vague. When it was Trump's turn to answer questions I felt that he spent more time complaining about what was wrong with Democratic policies, and lying about how he never support the war and Iraq instead of actually spending time talking about his policies.
ReplyDeleteSecretary Clinton and Trump took very different approaches to this forum. Plus, they both broke the rules of the forum by mentioning each other in regards to issues such as whether or not the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq. Clinton constantly referenced her past and built upon her contributions, and her experience was clear in regards to international terrorist threats, such as 9/11. Trump, on the other hand, spoke in very general/broad terms because he doesn't have that experience. He hasn't met with the US generals or the Secretary of War. Furthermore, Trump says that he has a "plan" when it comes to how to take down ISIS and he won't reveal it ever because then they'll know about it. But, I don't really think that he has any sort of plan whatsoever. Plus, his lie in Esquire magazine about not supporting troops going into Iraq was a huge mistake since he did support the troops going in there. Clinton knew this, and Lauer should have known this. This forum is called the "Commander in Chief Forum" and I think that Trump is unfit to be in charge of the most powerful military force in the world. So, to me, Clinton won this forum because she gave examples and has a clear plan that assures the American people that she is looking to the future. While I don't like how much time was spent on the confidential email scandal since this forum was meant to target war plans as well as troop and veteran safety, I still think that her experience outshined Trump's general remarks.
ReplyDelete-Lea Paragas
In my opinion one candidate did not win over the other. Both of them avoided directly answering the questions that were prompted and instead ranted about something else. As usual, Clinton rambled on defensively about the emails and Trump was not making sense with anything he said. To add to the mess, Matt Lauer had no idea what questions to ask the candidates which ultimately lead this forum to have no major significance whatsoever. I think the debate in September will be far more beneficial for the candidates.
ReplyDeleteOverall it was poorly executed with neither candidates coming out on top. The questions didn't address the main reasons the candidates were there; national security and global issues. Matt spent the majority of the time addressing Hilary's email scandal and asking Trump easily avoided questions.The candidates responses were vague or defensive and once again didn't focus on the point of the forum. When they did give details they were irrelevant to the questions and sidetracked the dysfunctional interview. Watching the interview I had no idea where either of the candidates stood in the matter of national security. In my opinion no one won, well maybe Matt Lauer due to the fact that no one will have him run a forum again. I'm excited to see the debates where real questions will be asked and the candidates won't be able to be vague and unresponsive.
ReplyDeleteI think that this forum got both candidates nowhere. Hillary Clinton spent 90% of her twenty five minutes dodging questions about the email scandal, which did nothing to help her. Although she was very composed, her answers could have been more dynamic. Trump, on the other hand, commented on everything. As usual, he kept making "factual" statements that are simply not true. Politically, this forum did not have as big of an impact as many thought it would.
ReplyDeleteI was personally very upset by Donald Trump's comments on sexual assault in the military. This summer, Trump claimed that women being sexually harassed at work should find a new job. Just a few weeks ago, Trump's campaign manager Kellyanne Conway stated that if women were stronger, rape would not exist. Because of these previously expressed negative views on women by Trump and his campaign, it was alarming to hear that he has no real plan to address sexual assault within our armed forces. I worry that under a Trump presidency, the brave women of our military would be told to "find a new job" if harassed or that they're "not strong enough" if they become the victim of sexual violence.
I thought that the forum was going to be really cool and that it would be a good time to see how each candidate would reply to the same questions without interruptions from other candidates. After watching it, I realized that I'd much rather see the two candidates debate. Both candidates didn't really give definitive answers the entire time, and they mostly just pointed fingers. It wasn't very interesting to watch mostly because none of the questions were being answered fully. I don't think either candidate did better than the other. However, I think Trump might have gained a better image in the public eye by keeping his cool the entire time.
ReplyDeleteLuke Thomas
In my opinion, there was no winner or loser in this forum. Both the answers from the candidates and questions from Matt Lauer were poor. The candidates were not equipped to answer the questions that Lauer presented and Lauer's questions rarely had follow ups to them to gain more information. The presenters of the forum should have chosen someone other than Lauer because of his poor interviewing skills with politicians. Meanwhile, the candidates should have stayed on topic and presented their opinions in a solid manner.
ReplyDeleteI tthought overall this was a useless interview on both candidates and nothing overall was accomplished trump still proved to be incompetent and indecisive and Hillary proved to be evasive and secretive
ReplyDeleteThe forum was boring, and no one really "won it" because they both made a lot of mistakes. One thing I was upset about during the forum is when Hillary said "We did not lose a single American in the Libyan action." I mean this friggin pisses me off....4 AMERICANS DIED. And the irony of her Hillary saying that is she was responsible for her deaths because there numerous requests to have addition security in Ben Ghazi but of course she ignored it. The next big chance Trump has to gain more voters is the presidential candidate debate later this month. I'm really looking forward to this debate because I want to see Trump Hillary for everything she has done wrong. Last think I continue to stress, I get that both candidates are not good, but Trump is a better choice because Hillary is corrupt, an idiot, and is gonna ultimately danger the American people.
ReplyDeleteThe forum was really boring to watch. No one really "won" because both made mistakes, and didn't answers questions too well. One thing that pissed me off during the forum is when Hillary said "We did not lose a single American in the Libyan action." This frigging pisses me off because FOUR AMERICAN DIED in Ben Ghazi. And the ironic part of her saying that statement is she is part of the reason they got killed. She got numerous requests for more security, but you know she ignored it. I'm very excited for the presidential candidate debate later this month because I want to see Trump attack Hillary on everything he possibly can. And I feel if he does this, a lot of undecided voters are going to sway to the Trump side
ReplyDeleteOverall l think that both Hilary and Trump did a poor job. Hilary overall just tried to defend her emails and Trump would say contradicting or childish remarks. The mediator also did a poor job at really asking them good questions on what was really the main focus, which was military. All in all there really was no clear winner in this debate which would calculate to there not being any major changes in the polls.
ReplyDeleteNeither candidate campaigned well, but if I had to pick one over the other, I would say that Clinton did a better job than Trump did in terms of ability to act on a crisis. She constantly referred to her previous experience in the White House; experience that Trump does not have. However, neither truly confronted the question head on and stated any definitive strategies for dealing with ISIS and other national/international threats. Both candidates got sucked into a debate about their support for the war in Iraq, a related but still separate issue.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting how Matt Lauer wasn't pushing both candidates as hard as other moderators. Although he was a good moderator, I think he should've focused less on Clinton's email scandal and let the military attendees ask more questions to clarify both candidates' stance on the issues. That being said, I think it's hard to say who won because both took jabs at each other and both tried to say why they were better than each other instead of focusing on the issues at hand.
ReplyDeleteThere was no clear cut winner in this debate. Lauer targeted the most pressing issues of each candidate, but neither seemed to be able to put together coherent answers that pleased the americans citizens more than a couple times. Hillary is still battling the Republican campiagn's claims on her realiability and ability to handle classified information. I'm not sure whether Americans are willing to value Hillary's experience over her mistakes in this election. Not surprisingly, Trump would say something that almost made sense, and then combine it with an insulting comment, managing to offend at least one minority every time he spoke. His postitions on sensitive topics, such as immigration and military abuse, continue to keep many voters from wanting to elect him. This election is turning out to be a choice between the lesser of two evils.
ReplyDeleteI think the forum was very unsuccessful and pretty useless for either candidate to gain some ground on votes. I felt that Matt Lauer did a poor job at mediating and didn't ask the right questions. He let alot of wrong facts slide and really did get us much information that we didnt know before. I also think that Hilary did a bad job at really attracting voters with her speaking and Trump said a lot of false statements.
ReplyDeleteNeither Hilary of Trump won in this event. Hilary's turn was mostly focused on her email scandal. Trump was very weak in his arguments and continued to display his lack of knowledge and maturity. Matt Lauer also didn't help both candidates because of the unrelated questions he would ask them. Over all this event didn't help either candidate. -Zach Price
ReplyDeleteNeither side won the debate, even though Hilary had more direct and thorough answers, I don't think she said enough to sway some people to vote Democrat. Trump's answers were just not sufficient, sometimes he didn't answer the question or he gave a very vague answer. Matt Lauer was also a factor in the lack of good answers. Asking Hilary multiple times about emails in a short time span, and then trying to cut her off while she tries to answer. Neither candidate got a big bump from this event.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't seem to me that either candidate had a definitive win over one another. I felt that there wasn't enough time for the candidates to talk in detail about their policies. Also, Matt Lauer repeatedly interrupted the candidates, shortening the time even more. Hilary was addressed about her emails once again and the conversation did not highlight anything new with her policies. When Trump was asked about his policies, he seemed unprepared and kept going off into tangents. They both were vague and unclear about addressing the questions presented, which frustrates voters who need clear answers about important issues.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though both Trump and Hilary's points where weak and that neither of them won. Hilary only talked about her email scandal and Trump didn't provide any useful information. However it also didn't help that Matt Lauer was asking the questions because he seemed rush the answers for every question
ReplyDeleteI feel like neither of the candidates won. If anything, Hillary had better answers considering her statement about the emails were partially true and she claimed her vote about going to war in iraq was her mistake. A lot of the things said from both parties have been said before and i feel like this didn't make much of a difference as far as how the votes are going to go and how people feel about both candidates. This was very unsuccessful.
ReplyDeleteUhh well, the moderator for the debate kept trying to debate Trump rather than letting Hilary debate Trump herself. He seemed very biased. No one ever called out Hilary on her false information yet they asked Trump about the birther movement and Hilary called him racist for that even though Hilary Clinton's campaign was the one who originally started the birther movement. Also nothing really got done, there wasn't much new to say. Hilary was a very strong debater ; however, all she did was deflect questions and then say how bad Trump is. So in the end nothing got done and all of this was a complete waste of time.
ReplyDeleteDavid E
Brandon Nguyen
ReplyDeleteTrump and his family were raised in a bubble of narcissism and hyper-aggressive competitiveness. He has not grown past the mentality he had as a child/during his formative years. He is and always will be a cutthroat. He is a man that will never settle, and who also strives to be the "biggest man" in the room.
Hillary Clinton changed her appearance to appeal to voters following her husband's loss in a bid for reelection. As she grew up, she becomes a social activist and becomes heavily involved in progressive moments of the day. As a young adult she becomes heavily invested in the politics.
Both people come from stark family backgrounds. Trump has been raised to be incredibly aggressive, and prided itself on being overly masculine. Love was only given to the victors, the losers should want for nothing. Hillary was raised in an oppressive environment in which she was demeaned day in and out.
For those who trust the overly aggressive and feel that the "politically correct" culture of the day has neutered American superiority, Trump is their man. He is seen as a no-nonsense, all-action sort of candidate, a rejection of the slow, methodical dimplomacy of yesteryear. He is the embodiment of unthinking American might and power, at least in this election.
Hillary Clinton is the old-school politician, a power broker and a diplomat. Her experience appeals to those that realize force cannot be used in every situation. Her target audience are the people that like to think about something carefully before acting.
Whether or not you "like" these candidates is irrelevant; you will pick whichever person you feel will do the best job. Trump appeals to the hotheads that think that nuking ISIS will solve the issue once and for all, and Hillary appeals to the people that love to wheel and deal.
-Trump would constantly talk about how he does not think that obama was not born in the us & then obama humiliated him (some might be embarassed by him)
ReplyDeleteHe came up from a rough childhood (some may be inspired by his story)
Trump shocked the construction world by putting a woman in charge(might appeal to women voters)
Clinton broke the tradition of "not being an accessory to her husband"/ breaking tradition of southern govereners wife (might not be admired by southern voters)
She came from a conservative family/area (some democrats might not think she's a pure/true liberal)
Always was good at keeping secrets(can be good for presidency, some may find it scandalous, for example, her email scandal)
I really think this forum really didn't change anybodys mind at all, we already knew all of this. I think the forum was too short for anything to get done and the candidates still avoided the questions. Trump was lying constantly and hillary was defensive and untrustworthy.
ReplyDeleteJordon Greene