You know, he could have gone down in history as the angry meme man who told people they were fired on TV; and his crimes and shitty personality would have likely gone overlooked until after his death. Instead, he ran for president and this is how everyone is going to remember him. Incoherent, rambling, unstable, stupid, out of control, and demented; all while being regularly trotted out in front of the media by his own party like he's some kind of show animal.

I don't feel pity for him, but I can't help but be amused at how he didn't just shoot his legacy in the foot, he blew it up with a grenade.

• She definitely needled him. I knew when she talked about all of the inane nonsense he talks about at his rallies and how he exhausts his own supporters so much they leave early during his 90 minute long ramblings that that would piss him off to no end, and sure enough all he could do after that was brag about his rallies and claim no one goes to her rallies. That being said, why in God's name did ABC let him get the last word on. Every. Single. Talking point? No matter who was talking first, no matter the subject, no matter how off course he was taking the topic, he'd start whining after she finished talking and they'd turn his mic back on and give him more time. If I'm not mistaken they gave him an extra rebuttal one time then tried to restrict Kamala from responding back until she insisted so much that they relented and then they STILL gave Trump another minute to give the last word again! What the hell was that? Tell the fat orange fuck "no", follow the rules and move on! If he wants to whine about her words, he can eat up time from the next question doing that. Don't give him more of platform to spout lies unchallenged. He has plenty of that already.

He knew her strategy going in, because every media outlet talked about it and everyone in Darneld's circle would have prepped him on it, but it still worked.

This dude has been a layup this whole time, but everyone has fucked it up, until Kamala & Walz came along. I think everyone else expected too much of him and his base, and assumed that simply enumerating his flaws was enough.

Kamala took a much more "show, don't tell" approach, plucking his strings like a harpist in a mediaeval softcore porno, then standing back and letting the man embody and demonstrate his flaws unabated, laughing at him as he plays out the 3 lines of uncommented JavaScript that govern his emotional life. She could have late-term abortioned a Haitian cat right there on stage and it wouldn't have made Dundald seem any saner by comparison.

Of course, a debate doesn't mean all that much at the end of the day. The Dendald Tramp contingent of voters probably don't have a lot of fence-sitter types who might be moved by it. You're either all in with that "first image of a black hole" lookin' motherfucker, or you're mentally well. But still, history will keep this debate fat and watered for the rest of recorded history. It will be shown to up-and-coming politicians being trained for the stage. It will be a permanent thorn in Drumald's side and he will ruminate on it for the rest whatever remains of his pointless life. And it will hopefully be listed in the textbooks as one of the key turning points in the electoral win of the first female United States president.

Omg did you know they are eating dogs? Honey look they are eating dogs! They are ruining this country! /s

He was spitting mad within like 10 minutes lol

She didnt need to plan it. He is just that unstable

I didn't watch it.

But my close personal friend who did watch it said she needled him but he largely didn't pull a trump.

We've seen this a few times in trump's . . . whatever we call the time period in which all things are awful because of him - anyway, once at his first SotU speech and another for some big important reason or other - he makes a concerted effort not to be himself and just read the teleprompter. Like he intentionally skipped his adderall and shotgunning a diet coke.

Apparently that was the case last night.

So now I'm wondering - does the article say that because my friend missed the signs that trump was ranting incomprehensibly as usual? Or is it MSNBC's tack that they're out front with a liberal take in order to drive the narrative that way?

I don't know. I leave it as an exercise to the reader to question whether or not they watched it in real time versus saw clips and articles - and whether or not that difference has any weight with whatever voters are either undecided or are contemplating not voting trump.