Thoughts on last night’s national embarrassment

It was not enjoyable viewing. It was painful to watch. It did not enlighten the mind or uplift the spirit; quite the opposite. It was certainly not a game-changer.

If you want evidence that Hillary Clinton is a historically poor presidential candidate, you saw it last night. That she was unable to completely and utterly destroy her opponent last night is proof just how terrible she really is.

Trump, a candidate from a major political party who seems unable to construct a grammatically correct sentence, held his own against Clinton. While it was difficult to follow him through the word thickets and tanglefoot syntax he led us, it is clear that he was not badly hurt last night.

Early in the debate both candidates dived deeply into the sewer of pander and argued over which is more determined to use the power of the administrative state to restrict trade, block commerce and self-impose trade sanctions against the people of the United States.

In stating their opposition to NAFTA, Clinton was obviously lying that she now opposes it while Trump seems to believe NAFTA is a net-negative for America. It is difficult to decide which of these contemptible positions is more vile.

They both promised to use the heavy hand of state regulation to restrict trade but Trump promised these new regulations while simultaneously argue he would deregulate business in America. Again, Clinton promises no such thing, rather promising volumes of new regulations, making her policy an economic disaster. Trump’s is merely a dog’s breakfast of contradictions.

From there it went downhill. By the end we were witness to Clinton promising a foreign policy that is more of the same failed policies of the Obama years and Trump spewing forth endless, confused, run-on sentences of broken syntax that were virtually indecipherable but for the occasional “defeat ISIS” and “take the oil”.

There were no knockout blows. Judged by the rules of a high school debate team, Clinton soundly defeated Trump. While her policies were disasterous, she was calm, prepared and focused. Trump was angry, juvenile, often baited and generally incoherent.

For example, Trump seemed to admit he pays no taxes. He lied when he claimed he never supported the Iraq invasion. He called for nationwide stop-and-frisk. He defended his birtherism. He even mentioned Rosie O’Donnell!

The audience laughed at him when he said he has a “winning temperament”. Clinton should have crushed him but she didn’t.

The thing is, this debate will not be judged by the Marquess of Queensberry rules rules of a high school debate. It will be judged on a curve. Zingers count for more than policy coherence. Humor counts more than focus.

And so it will continue. Two grotesques will continue to wrestle in the mud of American politics. I don’t know who won last night by the rules of reality television idiocracy in which we live but I know what was lost: Decorum, dignity and discernment.