THE DEBATE THAT WAS REALLY…SOMETHING ELSE ALTOGETHER!!!

No, I didn’t watch the debate last night between President Trump and Cumala for the very simple reason that, with it being on ABC, I was certain that it would be nothing more than the joke which, by most accounts, it appears to have been. Personally, I made up my mind some time ago regarding who I would be voting for, which was another reason I saw no value to be gained from watching. To be honest, there is absolutely nothing that Cumala could say that would make me choose to vote for her. And frankly I just don’t understand why any reasonably intelligent individual could ever convince themselves that Cumala is sufficiently qualified to be president.

But apparently there are those who seem to have gotten something out of it, so much so that they just couldn’t stop talking about it. And one such character is none other than Chris Wallace. Ok, I know, Chris who? Not that it’s likely to matter all that much, but it was Wallace who appeared to have been nearly orgasmic over Cumala’s performance in the debate last night. And being a Trump hater from way back I don’t suppose we should be surprised. And it was during his network’s coverage of Tuesday’s presidential debate that Wallace said President Trump’s performance was “just as devastating” as the June debate was for Joey, which was clearly an exaggeration.

And it was in addressing his co-host Jake ‘The Joke’ Tapper, that Wallace said, “Jake, I didn’t think I was ever going to witness a debate as devastating as the one that you and Dana moderated back in June, where Joe Biden basically tanked his reelection campaign. I think tonight was just as devastating. I think that Kamala Harris pitched a shutout on almost every subject I can think of.” It comes as no surprise that Wallace was nearly beside himself when providing his description of the evening’s events. But then I think it fair to say that when one is an employee of CNN and doesn’t say that Cumala had a blowout win, you could find yourself unemployed in the morning.

Wallace went on to say, “She shut Trump down on abortion, she shut Trump down on January 6th and democracy, she shut him down on national security and turned to the former president and said, ‘The military leaders who served with you think that you’re a disgrace,’ and then, as Dana mentioned, very powerfully at the end made the point that she is the candidate of change and we need to turn the page from a decade of division and polarization. On substance, I think she pitched a shutout, and I think she did on style as well.” He added, “Donald Trump looked old tonight. And you know somebody said on my show on Saturday, she wins just by showing up."

Wallace wrapped up his idiotic commentary by saying, “I didn’t know that was going to be true. I think it was she was the candidate of change from the moment the two of them were on the stage.” Wallace clearly overstates the bad night for our guy. Joey’s performance was so bad, his donor dollars dried up overnight and he resigned. No chance of President Trump resigning after this debate performance. And I don’t necessarily agree with those who seem in such a hurry to say that President Trump didn’t perform up to expectations. Because while most of the talking heads were quick to say that he lost, a great many ‘regular’ folks seemed to disagree.

Most, if not all, of the surveys taken after seem to indicate that this debate really had little, or now, effect in terms of who anyone is going to be voting for. That means President Trump won because his poll numbers are slowly improving, while Cumala’s are either flat, or slowly decreasing. That means the gap will only widen over the next two months going into the election. This debate was supposed to reverse all that and send Cumala’s numbers skyrocketing and that just didn’t happen. This was an orchestrated media attempt to pump up Cumala. There was NO debate, clearly Cumala had all of the questions in advance and her answers were all scripted.

Wallace has continually proven that he is neither fair nor objective when it comes to all things related to President Trump, so he should simply be ignored. Not a single comment was heard from Wallace about the very obvious partisanship and deceit on the part of ABC’s “moderators” which tells you all you need to know about Wallace’s obvious partisanship as well. Wallace is a ‘dead man walking’ as a journalist of any credibility. ABC too threw it all away last night. Anyone who watched the debate saw three people ganging up on one, yet President Trump still managed to land a few good punches. It was also painfully obvious she knew the questions before they were asked.

Her answers came across as being memorized. And from much of what I’ve read President Trump clearly won on substance. She said a lot, but none of it meant anything. The American people still have no idea what her positions are. And the moderators never pressed her on that. That said, the problem is that people seem more than willing to gamble on this vacuous radical empty suit. She only presented vague platitudes void of substance or any real plan or position. She is what she’s always been, a horrible politician and an even worse leader. Just look at today’s stock market as an indicator of what the market thinks of Cumala presidency.

Wallace is a joke. He heralds Cumala as a “change” candidate? Seriously? She is essentially the incumbent, as much as those in the ‘fake news’ media try to distract from that fact. Now President Trump may not have had his best night, and I’m not saying he had a bad night, but it’s pretty hard to stay calm when you aren’t on a level playing field. Our country is going to hell in handbasket faster than the ‘fake news’ media will tell you and we are going to elect the person who’s caused the damage based on a debate? Please pull your head out of your butt. Just when you think Wallace couldn’t get any dumber, he goes and beclowns himself yet again.

And “change” from what, exactly? The policies that have been put into place by the administration that she’s been part of for the last four years? She can’t say things have been great, and then turn around and say I’m going to change things for the better all in the same sentence. I mean, why would she want to be the candidate of change if things are going so well? And if things aren’t going well, how could she be the candidate of change? I just makes no sense. Anyone who believes Cumala will do anything other than stay the disastrous course that Democrats have subjected the nation to, are either willfully ignorant or irreparably stupid, perhaps both.

Hey Chris, once again your analysis is the epitome of stupidity. The leftist ‘moderators’ went well out of their way to put President Trump on the defensive all night for the express purpose of making it so Cumala wouldn’t have to actually answer anything. She never answered the first question about are we better off now than we were four years ago. And of course, she was not pressed for an answer. We all saw the biased ambush that was coming, and President Trump still discussed actual policies that most Americans are concerned about. A clear majority of the questions were focused on what was important to democrats and steered to put Trump on defense.

Finally, in my opinion President Trump couldn’t take this silly woman seriously. If it had been a business meeting, he would have got up and walked out seeing it as a waste of his time. The moderators were terrible, fact checking and/or correcting President Trump at every turn to help the imbecilic Cumala. I don’t think this debate changed anyone’s mind and frankly those few who are still on the fence will just have to toss a coin. All told President Trump stood his ground against all the lies by simply stating his proven beneficial track record. Kamala has had four years to affect her change. She didn’t because she never intends to keep any of her many promises.