Truthy. Of course, much of the debate, if you can call it that, was Trump warding off the attacks of both Clinton and the moderator. The latter saw what happened when Matt Lauer asked a tough question of the Hildebitch, and must have decided he would prefer to continue going to upscale liberal parties than treat the candidates fairly.

So...are you inferring that the debates could be used as a laxative?
Neither candidate is a Ted Cruz, so expecting references to the Constitution is probably asking too much. At least half the debate was about inconsequentialities.
In 1945 the world series had most of the best players in the military, prompting a sportscaster to say, "I don't think either side can win."

Hello AJAshinoff,
The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.” (Benjamin Franklin)

As goes the Constitution so goes the Republic...
Regards,
O.A.

Actually Trump did mention the second amendment a few times. But he fell headlong onto the trap of the watch list.

There was also a distinct lack of morality based positions. There was some good. Ack and forth zingers toward the end though. I think her comeback on stamina was solid, as was his on experience.

It was a pitiful, smarmy affair, that further soiled the reputation of our political discourse and the character of those that would seek to govern.

I would say Holt lost the debate as the horrible moderator who actually got the Constitution issue wrong on law enforcement.He also got it wrong on the stupid birther issue that will not die. We all know that is fake, but let historians take it one now. Trump proved he could stay in control, and Hillary was medicated enough to not scream, where's her 50%, or do facial gyrations. So, it was pretty boring, but Trump needed to proved he could not be prodded into hysteria. Now, he needs to learn how not to let her set the discussion, just end hers as not of issue. His tax return is not her business, she has too many unanswered questions of her owm - like why was she went to Iran secretly to crash and get brain damage, and then lied about it?.Why did Trump appoint Kerry thinking she was going to die? Oh, she has so much to answer. Like why did she approve selling 50% of the uranium in 4 western US states to Russia, via a deal Bill brokered through a Canadian company? He once again ended up sevearl hundred million richer. Is that not conflict of interest? If she is saying nuclear war is the top issue, why did she allow uranium sales to an enemy? It is pretty clear Hillary sees the Constitution as something to go around, like on guns, property rights (Agenda 21), free speech (climate discussion). I am not sure most of those came up, as good points about the Constitution. I think Trump is more for the Constitution, but more as a layman, like us, than like our self proclaimed "Constitutional scholar" Obama, who makes a practice of shredding it.

We are now calling a food fight with 30 second snippets a "debate."

You won't see much mention of the Constitution unless Gary Johnson is allowed into the debates.

My opinion is simple:
Donald Trump is about personality.
Hillary Clinton is about policy.
Neither of them can keep a promise.
Neither of them has a purpose with which I can identify.

In comparing the two, I would have to conclude that one favors policy and one favors personality. The one favoring policy favors it so she can avoid personal attacks. The one favoring personality favors that so he can avoid detailed critical thinking. Neither of the candidates cares much for promises, particularly the one regarding protecting the constitution.

http://patriotupdate.com/holt-lary-tr...

My wife and I watched the debate for about 30 min.. My wife who has been a RN for thirty years made a diagnosis that Hillary was smiling way to much than a normal person. Then her run on talk ignoring Trump or the moderator showed that she could be on some mood elevating medication or a product that has a similar effect.
Today, I had an appt. with my Doctor that got me off a psychotropic medication that I was taking for years that damaged my health; we discussed the debate and she considered that it was possible that Hillary was medicated.
So, there you have it two diagnosis of Hillary by medical professionals.

I could only handle about 45 minutes of sound bytes then I had to change the channel. Hillary was well coached in presenting unrelated concepts that sounded great but had no merit - ie "trickle down economics" caused the last recession. It was the collapse of the housing market created by the federal governments "affordable housing act" in my view that resulted in the collapse. Trump missed an excellent opportunity to respond "John F. Kennedy lowered taxes to help the economy" after he was elected - and was a Democrat. Maybe her concussion wiped out that part of her memory.
I too voted for Perot. I thought he made sense with his grafts and explanations. His VP candidate looked like a deer in headlights I suspect that cost him the election.
I didn't hear either of them discuss the 19 trillion spent on the "War on Poverty" and the resulting brake up of the family unit - unless that was after I tuned out. Ronald Reagan said it best: "The government is the problem, not the solution."
Still looking for a real life Gault's Gulch.

It does scare the crap out of me, and as bad as I think that DT is I find HC INFINETLY WORSE!

Didn't watch. Can't stand HC. You make a real good point and it should scare us. Your 2 bits is worth more than a buck.

we're in a post-constitutional era....... -- j
.

I thought Trump bombed. I waited and waited for him to really go for the jugular and he just kind of flailed away. He got baited into talking about his taxes for too long. Didn't go after the Foundation. When she mentioned integrity he had a great soundbite opportunity served up on a platter, tee'd up with driver in hand - and nothing... She seemed well prepared.

I could only stomach the first half, though.

That becomes a little problematic for those of us who (to varying degrees) have thrown our support to the one candidate (Trump) who has spoken out championing the Constitution (Ex: 2nd amendment) and the protection of it by the appointment of Constitutional Justices to the Supreme Court. Many of us are very concerned about this relentless assault on our Constitutional protections. Especially by the progressive hoards on the left. If this critical plank slips off the radar, the issues surrounding its defense becomes magnified.

We have degenerated into a mob rule government to be used by the "IN" people against the ones who are not "IN". Hildebeast is the poster child for this, and is the basis for her support. She says "stand with me" so she can get to run the country. The stupid people who vote for her are led to think that Hillary will "stand with them" if they give her votes. In reality, Hillary stands with Hillary and the people who give her $$ through contributions to her "charity" and her campaigns. She enjoys a good life for herself only for 4 years, and then asks for votes from the people who she has deceived.

Constitutionality only impedes this process, which is why its pretty much dead today.

Like bsmith51, we watched for awhile, then decided on something else. Ended up watching "Designated Survivor" online as we missed the initial showing last Wednesday. It was quite interesting and a definite departure from the debate.

Five minutes in, we decided watching the debate would be like Ipecac to an alcoholic. So we moved on to more productive endeavors, like beating Freecell on the computer.

Trump would have one excuse: his marketing advisers would suggest not enough voters care. That's the really scary part.

I was an avid watcher as I was hoping some clue regarding Hillary's real health issues would show itself again. Except for a small prolonged shimmy, I was disappointed. I find that aspect of this presidential season fascinating. The lengths she is willing to go to to hide her problems! It's like a slow-moving political mystery movie playing out before our eyes! LOL

Yes, not one of them appreciate nor know, our constitution and That Is indeed, scary.

Trumpet should have pointed out what "Progressivism" has done to Free Market capitalism.

One has the ability to articulate bull crap and the other can't articulate much at all...

Also, trumpet should have relied upon his tax cuts to keep businesses here in the states instead of relying on strong man tactics...That in my view is his biggest failure.

Hillary revealed one thing about Donald that is quite telling. Donald received 14 million dollars from his father and built it into a multibillion dollar enterprise. Donald's businesses have employed thousands of workers. Did Hillary think he built those building by him self? This shows how stupid she is. Yes he had some failures, but did he invest millions knowing he would fail, of course not. what has this dunce named Hillary ever done that has been productive for the country in her 30/40 years as a supposed civil servant, gotten people killed as far as I know. The elites dislike Donald because he has accomplished more in his life than all of them in their combined lives. Having had some interaction with politicians I find it very difficult to understand how he will engage with them once elected president which I am sure is going to happen. He simply does not speak their language. Will he be a good president; given the choice it does not matter to me; if not him I'd vote for mickey mouse. With Donald as president the constitution will not be changed, not to worry.