On September 26, the most important night of 2016, Donald J. Trump and Hillary Clinton faced off in the first presidential debate at Hofstra University and swapped their color schemes—Trump wore a blue tie while Clinton put on her red pantsuit; however, the personal styles that defined them remained congruent throughout the debate.
Despite Clinton has built momentum toward the end of the debate, exposing Trump’s lack of preparation, she could have done much better by focusing more on her substantial proposals, and the audience would be able to discern empty words from actionable ones. After all, the goal for Clinton is to convince the undecided voters rather than converting pious Trump supporters to hers, which seems impossible, therefore futile.
Trump did not relinquish his adamant lying and Clinton managed to stay composed and factual; anyone with a fair amount of common sense would have foreseen this a long time ago, especially Clinton. She started off by reminding the audience that on her website there is a fact checker, which would straighten out each piece of misinformation or lie Trump produces. Some of Trump’s statements were so blatantly mendacious that they have made the fact checker redundant, for instance, deflecting the “birther” issue and lying about his support for the war against Iraq. The billionaire grew more incoherent and inconsistent as the debate progressed, showing just how badly he had prepared for the night, while secretary of state remained clear-headed.
For the first debate, the two candidates have lived up to their supporters’ exceptions by delivering great performances; however, whether the same standard applies to both of them is yet to know. Hillary will definitely not lose any of her voters, at the same time, Trump is unlikely to gain new ones. Neither candidate has won the debate by a landslide. It is true Clinton had more facts than Trump did, but facts have never been his campaign strategy from the get-go.
I viscerally root for secretary Clinton and I think she needs to take the lead in the next two debates. Clinton has spent more time than she should have been defending herself and challenging Trump’s wildest assertions—ones that no matter how many times he reiterates, will not stop being false as they are ridiculous. In a way, it seemed like Clinton was a challenger fighting a reigning champion, but Trump definitely is not.
Clinton’s greatest strength is her sound and consistent logic in making decisions and proposing new deals. Instead of challenging Trump’s authority, Clinton should ascertain hers by striking him with the deadly pugilism that is actionable promises. A tie is simply not enough.