Tuesday, September 27, 2016

First Presidential Debate Reaction

So the first presidential debate is over, here are my thoughts:

1) In short, I don't think this debate really changes the opinions of those who had a preference coming in to the debate.  A Hillary supporter will believe that Hillary showed greater command on the issues, the Donald is shady and prejudiced man and has a better temperament suited for a president.  A Donald support will believe the Donald made the case of change from many years of Hillary's incompetence and the establishment in general and showed the country that he can be seen as plausible president.  In my myopic opinion, I thought that while Hillary made more concise points on policy, she discounted that by her references to fact checkers and personal attacks on the Donald.  The Donald, while staying on message that Hillary has made many bad decisions over many years, discounted that advantage by being overly defensively about charges made at him, especially about the Birther issue and his tax returns (do we really want our time used during the debate to hear the Donald talk about his assets?). So in the end, I don't really thing it'll move the needle too much one way or another.

2) Watching this debate really illuminates the cultural differences between blue collar and white collar life in this country.  When I watching this debate, I was trying to think of watching it in two prisms.  One is how I as a white collar professional would view the debate and the other is how I would as a blue collar worker growing up working in a restaurant (and occasionally still working in one) would view the debate.  I find the contrast quite stark.  

- White Collar - I would find the Donald's language and body language quite sloppy and immature.  Outside of some points on trade and tax policy, there was a glaring lack of sophistication in his policy knowledge.  His temperament when being challenged by the moderator and Hillary shows his lack of meekness and lack of qualification to be president. In contrast, Hillary showed greater command for the policy issues and greater composure.  However, her personal attacks on the Donald were quite off putting, especially when she vituperated against him.  But all in all, Hillary won the debate on points and composure.

- Blue Collar - I would find the Donald's language is simple and blunt in talking about the failure of the elites like Hillary to address the needs of everyday folks that I know.  The Donald is right to talk about how elites like Hillary live by a different set of rules than most American. He's also right to show that Hillary has made many mistakes that have adversely affected America.  How dare Hillary assert that I'm a bigoted person based on her life of living in the upper crusts of society.    Now while the Donald's lack of transparency regarding his tax returns is troubling, I see that he really is talking about the issues important to me.  

3) The moderator, Lester Holt, has become a lighting rod for the Donald's supporters for the way he prodded the Donald on issues such as stop and frisk, his tax returns, the Birther issue and his support on the Iraq war.  Plus, Holt never pressed Hillary on the Clinton Foundation, Benghazi nor her handling of classified information.  I didn't think that Holt did anything I didn't expect would happen and he does have a tough job.  However, Holt's actions is probably a gift to the Donald, who can continue to use the media's treatment of him to gin up the high enthusiasm of his supporters.  Perhaps that's why he was winning so many online post-debate polls.

4)  I have the say that the body language of both candidates left much to be desired.  The Donald's frequent sniffles (he denies he was), eye rolls and just overall looks of disgust of whatever Hillary was saying was noteworthy.  However, Hillary's smiling and smirking, made more obvious by excessive makeup and lipstick, made it appear that she was quite condescending to the debate and whatever the Donald has to say.  In fact, the small "shimmy" reaction to one of the Donald's answers made that attitude even more obvious.  Each side I think lost some points through how they looked when they were not talking.

So there it is, my post-debate reaction.  I don't think this will show a real shift in the trajectory of the race since events happen so quickly and the spin machines are running at full blast right now.  But it makes the next two debates much more intriguing in my mind.

However, I have decided that I will be voting early this year.  I'll let you know how that goes.

2 comments:

  1. I totally agree that whose ever side people were on pre-debate they will remain on that side post-debate. The debate process was more of a reestablishment of what we already know about either candidates, beliefs, policies, plans and otherwise; however both of them seemed to brush off certain questions. Hillary seemed to try to avoid questions by attacking Trump, yes we all needed to talk about dogs, slobs, and Miss Piggy, which just seemed kind of desperate. One such example was what she would actually do against ISIS. It seems her plan is just to talk about potential fields of conflict that we are already aware exists. Yes ISIS is on the internet give the her a prize for that one out. But instead of giving specifics she says "Well look at Trump he has no plan," as if talking about potential threats constitutes a plan. Trump did the same when it came to his tax returns, but he brought up a legit point about Hillary's emails. I am still leaning heavily towards the Donald as Hillary just plain old scares me. Thanks for the informative post once again Eric "Donald" Wong. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oh also certain media outlets saying that "Trump winning online polls was because of trolls from 4Chan," (though absolutely hilarious if true, and I love those people for it) seems a bit petty. I'll have to look into it though but its ridiculous that people throw these accusations around.

    ReplyDelete