***Join the SDMB panel of experts for live debate coverage - 9/26/2016***

[Revenant_Threshold]

@Flyer

Because Clinton has a 23-year unbroken record of dishonesty, bad ideas, growing government, and untrustworthiness.

But you consider her to have done well in the debate - that both candidates did well and that neither was the winner. Like you say, you had not entirely complimentary feelings about Trump prior to the debate, too, but his performance during it turned you from a “Well, he’s the one running against her, so I guess I’ll have to vote for him” to a “Hey, I’d quite like to vote for him” guy, to paraphrase you. His good display in your eyes improved your negative reaction to Trump. Why didn’t Clinton’s good display in your eyes improve your negative reaction to her, too?

[Flyer]

By the way, Trump is absolutely right about NATO. Out of 28 countries, only 5–the US, Greece, Britain, Estonia, and Poland–currently meet or exceed the target of 2% of GDP. And Greece and Estonia are too small to make any real difference.

These NATO countries are not spending their fair share on defense

By NATO’s own standards, the alliance’s European member states should be spending substantially more on defense. If they reached the target of spending 2 percent of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense, total spending would rise by $100 billion per year — a 40 percent increase.

NATO’s European Members Should Increase Defense Spending | National Review

[AnalogSignal]

Here’s a sniffing video: A supercut of Donald Trump sniffling like he just don't care | Mashable

[Richard_Parker]

@Flyer

By the way, Trump is absolutely right about NATO.

So you think he’s right that we shouldn’t defend the countries who aren’t paying the right amount?

[Kolak_of_Twilo]

@ThelmaLou

Not so fast! You have to shoot me first.

HOLD ON! If I take a bullet for you can I get some of that cashew fudge you were teasing us with?

[raventhief]

@Flyer

You liberals are so far inside your bubble of anti-reality, that you can’t even fathom the idea of somebody sincerely disagreeing with you. The only thing you can come up with is “satire.”

Because Clinton has a 23-year unbroken record of dishonesty, bad ideas, growing government, and untrustworthiness.

Because she has been fighting ISIS her entire adult life, right?

[asahi]

@Sam_Stone

Trump said stupid things, and he got caught in the weeds trying to defend himself, whch was a bad idea.

But he won the debate. He won because the main thing he had to accomplish was to plant the idea in the minds of the public that he could be President. The bar for him was incredibly low, and he managed to drag himself over it.

If the public starts thinking of him as a real Presidential contender and not as a reality show host on a lark, he comes out ahead. In a way, it was hard for him to lose once he was on that stage unkess he said something so ludicrous that even the average non-political viewer would have said, 'Holy shit, that guy can never be President!" He avoided doing that - somehow.

I just don’t buy that at all. Think about the people who were tuning in to watch him say some outrageous shit like “Crooked Hillary” or whatever – did they get that? No, they didn’t. Hillary elbowed him early on. He tried to sit quietly. Then he started trying to interrupt her as she sat and smirked. Then he started fighting with Lester Holt. Trump’s performance wasn’t off the charts bad – he could recover if Hillary stumbles.

But here’s the thing: What was the narrative coming into the debate?

1. Hillary was weak and sick.

2. Donald was going to tear into her and entertain.

Neither was true. Hillary actually looked fit, alert, and competent. And she got under Donald’s think skin. Moreover, Donald tried to throw some punches but didn’t land. As I said at the outset: If Donald throws, he had better connect. I don’t think he did. Hillary fought back but didn’t even need to do it aggressively.

Of course the debate isn’t over. The spin jobbing is just beginning and it will be interesting to see what happens, but I don’t think Hillary gave her opposition a lot of ammo.

[elucidator]

…So you think he’s right that we shouldn’t defend the countries who aren’t paying the right amount?

Nice little country you got there. Be a shame if something were to happen to it…

[Leaper]

I think a strong performance by Clinton may have been just as important as Trump going off the rails, in order to rouse enthusiasm from her core, and those who are more anti Trump than pro Clinton. Drawing that contrast while also showing good qualities of her own is probably her most important goal from here on in.

[raventhief]

@JohnGalt

Trevor Noah on The Daily Show showed a quick five-second run-on with the sniffles; pretty funny.

Im pretty sure he has a crystal chandelier shoved up there at this point.

[asahi]

I’m trying to see this from Joe Schmoe’s angle:

Anyone notice how many times Donald drank water? Like a shit load, right? How many times did Hillary hydrate on camera? None. Confident. Smiling. Humored. With it. I think Hill won.

[MacTech]

Personally, I LOATHE clinton, hate and despise her. (I also hate trump too, but I loathe clinton)

…but

Even I have to grudgingly admit that she did far better in this debate tonight, trump came off as his bumbling blowhard egocentric self, but clinton was a little less condescending and smarmy than usual

[Inner_Stickler]

I’m an unabashed Clinton supporter and this debate has done nothing but frustrate and confuse me as to why on earth anyone with the sense god gave little green apples would think Trump should come within spitting distance of the presidency.

[tenacious_j]

@AnalogSignal

Here’s a sniffing video: A supercut of Donald Trump sniffling like he just don't care | Mashable

@asahi

I’m trying to see this from Joe Schmoe’s angle:

Anyone notice how many times Donald drank water? Like a shit load, right? How many times did Hillary hydrate on camera? None. Confident. Smiling. Humored. With it. I think Hill won.

Somebody mash that shit up with this for me!

Trump mocks Rubio's SOTU water incident

[BlackKnight]

It really is amazing to see people defending Trump’s performance in the debate. It’s one thing to point out some negatives about Hillary - lord knows they exist - but I just cannot comprehend anyone sincerely thinking that Trump won this debate, or even tied. Yeah, he got in a couple of good lines, but he was largely incoherent, made several blatant bald-faced pants-on-fire lies, and transparently evaded questions.

He had a far lower bar to meet than Clinton. I’m not sure if she met hers, but he definitely didn’t meet his.

I guess cognitive dissonance is a hell of a drug.

[AnalogSignal]

@asahi

Anyone notice how many times Donald drank water? Like a shit load, right? How many times did Hillary hydrate on camera? None.

I noticed him drinking a lot too. But #sniffgate, not #watergate :), is a big Twitter hashtag right now. Everyone is speculating about Donald doing coke.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@raventhief

Because she has been fighting ISIS her entire adult life, right?

Hillary Clinton: **Time Warrior! **

[ThelmaLou]

@Kolak_of_Twilo

HOLD ON! If I take a bullet for you can I get some of that cashew fudge you were teasing us with?

I guess there’s no easy way out for me.

[elucidator]

@BlackKnight

…I guess cognitive dissonance is a hell of a drug.

An excellent point!

[DrDeth]

@Bricker

I don’t think this was a slam-dunk, unambiguous victory for Secretary Clinton, but that’s only because of the weird standards that existed with this matchup.

If this were a first viewing of a debate between Candidate C and Candidate T, in my view Candidate C won on the merits.

But somehow the rule is that Trump merely had to avoid soiling his trousers, and Clinton had to evolve into a being of pure energy. Under those rules, I suppose it was a draw.

Trump did do Ok in the first half. That was a draw, and to be fair, Trump gets the draw. But he fell apart in the 2nd half. He was on the ropes.

Clinton on points, no KO.