For an interesting debate recap video, Click Here.
Donald Trump’s first presidential debate confirmed he has no idea what he’s talking about (Vox)
Try to imagine yourself as a modern-day Rip Van Winkle awakening after a few years of hibernation. You weren’t following the election news, but you knew it was a big story, and so you tuned in to tonight’s first presidential debate to see what the hubbub was all about.
You’d be confused.
You’d quickly see that Hillary Clinton represents a familiar archetype. She’s been in American politics for a long time. She served as the nation’s top diplomat and as a United States senator. She sponsored bills and was part of diplomatic agreements. She spoke fluently about her ideas on a range of issues. She took some jabs at her opponents, and she was sometimes a little boring and in the weeds.
You would see, in other words, that the Democrats had nominated an experienced politician — it’s what you do.
The other party, by contrast, seems to have done something weird. Their nominee, Donald Trump, seems erratic — peevish, visibly annoyed at being referred to by his first name, lashing out at Rosie O’Donnell for some reason — and mired in controversy.
Accused of practicing racial discrimination in his businesses, he says being sued by the federal government is “one of those things” and even though he paid up, there was “no admission of guilt.” Pressed to release his federal income tax returns, he said he can’t because he’s being audited, which really just seems like a confirmation that his returns would be interesting and worth seeing.
But beyond the personal controversies, he rather clearly has no idea what he’s talking about.
Mod: The rest of this article here.
The weekend America's newspapers called Donald Trump a liar (CNN Money)
On the weekend leading up to 2016's first presidential debate, four news organizations came to a similar and sweeping conclusion: Donald Trump lies more often than Hillary Clinton.
In a normal election year this would be extraordinary. On Sunday editors and reporters at the newsrooms used another word: necessary.
The New York Times story — "A Week of Whoppers" — came out first on Saturday. Politico, The Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times all followed within hours.
Several of the editors who were involved said the timing was a coincidence. But there was clearly a desire to publish stories before Monday's debate, when Trump and Clinton's truthfulness will surely be at issue.
"Never in modern presidential politics has a major candidate made false statements as routinely as Trump has," the L.A. Times declared on page one of Sunday's paper.
Politico Magazine's team analyzed every statement made by both Trump and Clinton for five days and said "the conclusion is inescapable: Trump's mishandling of facts and propensity for exaggeration so greatly exceed Clinton's as to make the comparison almost ludicrous."
The words "almost ludicrous" ricocheted around Twitter.
Politico found that Trump averaged "one falsehood every three minutes and 15 seconds over nearly five hours of remarks" while Clinton averaged one falsehood every twelve minutes.
Overall, the news outlet counted 87 "misstatements, exaggerations, falsehoods" from Trump and eight from Clinton.
The Times counted only Trump's "biggest whoppers," 31 of them, while skipping "dozens more."
All four of the newsrooms distinguished between the kind of misstatements Clinton makes and the kind Trump makes.
"Clinton has made her share of questionable claims," the Post said, but Trump "at times seems uniquely undeterred by facts."
The Post said Trump "continues to rely heavily on thinly sourced or entirely unsubstantiated claims."
Mod: More at the link.
Is this a death threat?