First Presidential Debate
After watching the first of three presidential debates, I felt that, despite the unconventional campaigns of 2016, the debate proved informative and revealing of both candidates. Moderated by NBC News anchor Lester Holt, the debate took place at Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY between candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The primary topics of the debate were released one week before the debate (“CPD”). While the questions were not released prior to the debate, Lester Holt provided fair and satisfactory questions for each candidate. Assisted by the format which ensured equal opportunities to respond to both candidates, the questions did not seem to play to either candidates’ advantage. They covered relevant …show more content…
Clinton’s use of a private email server or Mr. Trump’s federal income tax payments. The mentioning of these events, in combination with other common hallmarks of the 2016 presidential bid, led to the debate running slightly later than scheduled and often became diverted from the question at hand. Additionally, during the debate, it was not at all uncommon for the candidates to interrupt each other during allocated segments. By doing so, not only did they delay future topics, but they also catalyzed incomplete thoughts. As for the nonverbal implications, I particularly noticed Mrs. Clinton smiling amid Mr. Trump’s segments. Personally, I interpreted this facial expression to be telling of Mrs. Clinton’s perception of most of Mr. Trump’s statements. By smiling, intentionally or not, she sought to discredit him. In this way, she skewered Donald Trump’s statements as incredulous and, perhaps, ignorant. When considering Mr. Trump, he carried himself as a speaker rather than a listener. In other words, I thought of him as itching to speak rather than considering what his opponent had to say. I observed this phenomenon in his breathing and facial expressions. Consistently, Mr. Trump took in a short breath after tensing slightly each time a contradiction was made during one of Mrs. Clinton’s segments. I thought of these occurrences to be further telling of Mr. Trump’s reaction to each of Mrs. Clinton’s …show more content…
Without the interruptions or diversions from the topic, the presidential debates have to potential to enable us, American citizens, to make a rational decision based on the facts of the running parties’ platforms such as proposed healthcare plans or ideals of national security. Both candidates had shining moments in the debate, though I do not suspect the debate to sway Trump supporters to Clinton or vice versa. The outcome was essentially not adequate for such a decisive victory. With this said, I look forward to seeing how each contender prepares for the next
After watching the first of three presidential debates, I felt that, despite the unconventional campaigns of 2016, the debate proved informative and revealing of both candidates. Moderated by NBC News anchor Lester Holt, the debate took place at Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY between candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The primary topics of the debate were released one week before the debate (“CPD”). While the questions were not released prior to the debate, Lester Holt provided fair and satisfactory questions for each candidate. Assisted by the format which ensured equal opportunities to respond to both candidates, the questions did not seem to play to either candidates’ advantage. They covered relevant …show more content…
Clinton’s use of a private email server or Mr. Trump’s federal income tax payments. The mentioning of these events, in combination with other common hallmarks of the 2016 presidential bid, led to the debate running slightly later than scheduled and often became diverted from the question at hand. Additionally, during the debate, it was not at all uncommon for the candidates to interrupt each other during allocated segments. By doing so, not only did they delay future topics, but they also catalyzed incomplete thoughts. As for the nonverbal implications, I particularly noticed Mrs. Clinton smiling amid Mr. Trump’s segments. Personally, I interpreted this facial expression to be telling of Mrs. Clinton’s perception of most of Mr. Trump’s statements. By smiling, intentionally or not, she sought to discredit him. In this way, she skewered Donald Trump’s statements as incredulous and, perhaps, ignorant. When considering Mr. Trump, he carried himself as a speaker rather than a listener. In other words, I thought of him as itching to speak rather than considering what his opponent had to say. I observed this phenomenon in his breathing and facial expressions. Consistently, Mr. Trump took in a short breath after tensing slightly each time a contradiction was made during one of Mrs. Clinton’s segments. I thought of these occurrences to be further telling of Mr. Trump’s reaction to each of Mrs. Clinton’s …show more content…
Without the interruptions or diversions from the topic, the presidential debates have to potential to enable us, American citizens, to make a rational decision based on the facts of the running parties’ platforms such as proposed healthcare plans or ideals of national security. Both candidates had shining moments in the debate, though I do not suspect the debate to sway Trump supporters to Clinton or vice versa. The outcome was essentially not adequate for such a decisive victory. With this said, I look forward to seeing how each contender prepares for the next