A Fall, A Subission or a Knockout-the last debate as I saw it.

This time around I was fortunate enough to have a front row seat where I was able to watch the activity of the Elections. 

Getting what we deserve or need.

As a start and with hindsight it seems as though the Americans have been blessed with the heads of State they have needed for the unique circumstances their country has faced (external influences notwithstanding and assassinations). 

Two Decades of evidence or proof.

Most recently the country needed to community organizer and lawyer to unite the country under the banners of change and maybe they got that in Barack Hussein Obama. Prior that they needed a military face (and I argue that military service ought to be a pre-requisite to the presidency) and that they got in the extension of King George's legacy. Go back a few years and maybe the governor from Arkansas brought in even more knowledge and experience regarding the law. Prior to this confrontations with the Soviet Union and future altercations in the Middle East brought about the need for another military man with a lot war time experience. The announcement  that came soon after naturally related to the New World Order and the call to 'Tear Down This Wall'. 

In the Early and Late seventies there was an exhaustion from the Machinery of War and those who were at the heart of its effects and influence regardless of who was in charge of the Oval Office. 

Monarchs in name with foreign policy influence.

The challenges and troubles and the fall out that resulted in the water gate scandal brought about some changes that were unexpected but that may have also been attributed to the divine hand. Ford can therefore be looked at as an anomaly. But he too calls attention to the value of good Vice Presidents who are able to step in at a time of crisis should they be needed. You could almost argue that Cheney was the power behind the Bush presidency. Having wielded influence for decades before in the corridors of power long before the emergence of the Monarchs. But he too as I have often argued at least by name may have been a ancient reincarnation of one of those Richards of old. As was Henry who retains as much respect as he held back in the day negotiating peace and various types of contracts between the Vietnamese and the Americans and the Chinese. 

Well split and managed.

So one thing was outstanding about this debate. The manner in which everything flowed and the clarity with which the differences between the two candidates was articulated. 

SUPREME COURT

The closeness with which Hillary Rodham Clinton stuck to President Obama's agenda (especially regarding his choice of Supreme court judge). Donald Trump on the other hand insisted on his candidates as presented to the press and the public weeks before. 

Clearly the changes in the highest court in the land would be monumental and useful in determining the fate of the nation. 

ROE Vs. WADE

The select use of language to describe his position regarding the right to life doctrine versus the right to choice was also another outstanding example of the vast differences that exist between the two candidates and possibly a major turning point in the decision making process for many conservatives (traditional Christians will find it hard to ignore this difference). But this is also problematic because the republican crew has had a very rough time accepting the candidate and his abrasive style. 

WALLS AND DEALS 

We also saw quite a split in thinking regarding how to handle the immigrant question with varying opinions on close neighbors (Mexico) and more distant and possibly more desperate (Syria). But this also worked and was used along the economic and trade question which was milked to its core by Donald Trump who enjoys the use of superlatives and hyperbole in describing the 'worst deal in History'. Fortunately he has some clout in defense of his positions and just when you expect him to speak in generalities he manages to slip in a blade to expose the innards of an unsuspecting opponent. 

ENDORSEMENTS AND MAMMOTH CROWDS 

The question of experience was tackled well by Hillary Clinton who chose it differentiate between her busy last thirty years contrasting these years with her adversary in which she narrowed it down to celebrity shows. Donald Trump was keen and in many moments most sincere when he attempted to question her about why these new changes were only just occurring in the mind of the candidate after a whopping three decades in power. 

The biggest challenge in this regard for Donald Trump will be as he already stated accepting the results that will be given at the end of the race. 

This is because he has been present amidst the crowds and these as we have seen in East Africa (both Tanzania and Uganda-with both opposition leaders) can be very deceptive. The biggest issue will be to convert the mammoth crowds and the discontent into votes. 

SYRIA, IRAQ, IRAN, CHINA, EGYPT AND LYBIA. 

It was almost impossible to listen to the foreign policy question without thinking about the middle east and the vast changes that have taken place threatening to alter the map of the middle east as we know it. Donald Trump made full use of his endorsements from men with military experience and others in law enforcement as well as border patrol. He leaned heavily in the past and the idea that he would have never supported the invasion of Iraq. Each successive leader has to deal with the challenge of war and interests that arise. We have seen how the first few years of office are honey moon years and go quickly the grey hairs invade the scalp. We have also noted how quickly time passes forcing the candidate to think about legacy and second terms...and yes delivering on promises made in campaign highs.