Were the voters asking the questions at the last debate truly "Undecided"?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Atlas, and pollsters, tell me that Trump is polling at near zero for black voters.  Yet there were, as I looked over the crowd at the last debate, approximately 1/4 African Americans asking the questions.  Now this is probably representative of metro St. Louis, where the debate was held, but was it likely that all of those black voters in the crowd "undecided"?

The first voter from the crowd to ask a question (tilted somewhat toward Clinton) was an African-American female, and a schoolteacher.  A black, female, unionized teacher who was an undecided voter?  Undecided between who; Clinton and Jill Stein?

Another voter was a Muslim woman.  Muslim support for Trump is, reportedly, at 12% nationally.  Now I realize that lightning strikes, but what was the likelihood that this Muslim woman was, actually "undecided"?

There were other examples during the debate that suggested that these voters were far from "undecided".  Now don't get me wrong; the crowd appeared representative of the area.  But they didn't appear at all to be representative of the folks who are actually undecided.  And while they may be decent enough folks, I believe folks are right in questioning whether or not these folks are truly undecided between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  (An undecided voter between Clinton and Stein or even Clinton and Johnson is a misrepresentation of "undecided" in this context.)

Just another way that the process is in the tank for Hillary Clinton, IMO.  That is the most offensive thing about this entire election; the paving of the way for Hillary, both in the primary and in the general.  Trump's done his share to bury himself, and he is what he is, but the "in the tank" process that sells these debates as something less fixed than WWE has gotten beyond the point of outrageous.

[Wells]

KEN BONE was a true undecided.

[Fuzzy Bear]

KEN BONE was a true undecided.

Yes, he was; one of the few, IMO.

I wonder if the decision to get to him last was strategic, to bring folks to a different impression of the rest of the event.

Ken Bone asked one of the more thoughtful questions on policy.  He was better than the moderators in both debates in that regard.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

How can the CPD know whether anyone is truly an undecided or not? Seems like an intractable problem.

It would be better to have an even number of Dem/Rep/Ind.

[BoAtlantis]

This wouldn't be a problem if we never ask questions about personal-related questions like email or tax return. Just let debates be about the country's issues only. That way, any question thrown is a fair game.

[Alcon]

I think it was pretty obvious that a lot of the audience were leaners who self-identified as undecided.  This is the reality of polling.  Some people refuse to identify their lean because they see their choice as totally binary: either they're decided, or they haven't decided yet.  I see this in polling results fairly often, even for voters we know have pronounced partisan leans.  I think that's what you were seeing there, too...and then they chose the ones with the most interesting questions, I suppose, which probably further skewed toward the ones who were actually decided.

Ken Bone asked one of the more thoughtful questions on policy.  He was better than the moderators in both debates in that regard.

I'm not at all on the Ken Bone hate train, but was his question really thoughtful?  He basically said that fossil fuels aren't good for the environment, but they're important to jobs, and then asked one of those vague "how do we balance things?"-type questions that generates comparably vague answers that basically amount to "by balancing them real good!"  Bone seems like a smart guy, but that's 'thoughtful' by what, middle school standards?

[Panda Express]

Just another way that the process is in the tank for Hillary Clinton, IMO.  That is the most offensive thing about this entire election; the paving of the way for Hillary, both in the primary and in the general.  Trump's done his share to bury himself, and he is what he is, but the "in the tank" process that sells these debates as something less fixed than WWE has gotten beyond the point of outrageous.

Grow up

[Maxwell]

this doesn't sound like a question from someone who thought Donald Trump won.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Just another way that the process is in the tank for Hillary Clinton, IMO.  That is the most offensive thing about this entire election; the paving of the way for Hillary, both in the primary and in the general.  Trump's done his share to bury himself, and he is what he is, but the "in the tank" process that sells these debates as something less fixed than WWE has gotten beyond the point of outrageous.

Grow up

Grown-ups don't provide these kinds of responses to legitimate observations, sonny.

Do you believe that a black unionized schoolteacher from St. Louis, MO is actually undecided?  Or a female Muslim?  Or a black male named James Carter, given that folks here proclaim the percentage of the black vote for Trump at about 1%?  There were others whose "undecided" status I doubted, but those are the most dubious, given poll numbers.

Those folks asked OK questions, some better than others.  It's not that these were the folks asking the questions; they're citizens, and voters, and all that.  I'm not knocking the questioners.  I'm knocking the packaging. 

Even if they were "undecided" voters, what does that mean?  Are they undecided between Clinton and Trump, or are they undecided between Clinton and a 3rd party candidate, but have ruled out voting for Trump.  I think it's fair to suggest that such a voter isn't undecided between the two folks debating, and such voters in a "Town Hall" format skew the questioning.  Significantly.

[Devout Centrist]

Whine some more will you? Please, this is utter bullsh*t and your points are nonsense.

[Speed of Sound]

this doesn't sound like a question from someone who thought Donald Trump won.

Refusal to admit their own failure might be the greatest bond between Trumpists.

[heatcharger]

It's amazing how Fuzzy Bear went from one of the best Republican posters all the way to one of the worst within months.

[Likely Voter]

Don't assume 'undecided' means can't decide between Trump or CLinton. Voters have more choices than that. I suspect that half and possibly more of undecideds are really unsure between voting for the party they usually vote for or for a third party (or possibly not voting at all). I saw an interview with one of the participants who said he was a Bernie supporter who was thinking of voting 3rd party. I suspect there were Kasich or Cruz supporters in the room who aren't sure of Trump.  When polls fluctuate it isn't people going back and forth between the candidates, it is people going back and forth between one of the candidates and 'undecided' or 3rd party. 

[Fuzzy Bear]

Just another way that the process is in the tank for Hillary Clinton, IMO.  That is the most offensive thing about this entire election; the paving of the way for Hillary, both in the primary and in the general.  Trump's done his share to bury himself, and he is what he is, but the "in the tank" process that sells these debates as something less fixed than WWE has gotten beyond the point of outrageous.

Grow up

Grown-ups don't provide these kinds of responses to legitimate observations, sonny.

Do you believe that a black unionized schoolteacher from St. Louis, MO is actually undecided?  Or a female Muslim?  Or a black male named James Carter, given that folks here proclaim the percentage of the black vote for Trump at about 1%?  There were others whose "undecided" status I doubted, but those are the most dubious, given poll numbers.

Fuzzy Bear, we get it. You don't like the fact that moslems and negroes are allowed to vote. Unfortunately for you, in 21st Century America, white Christian men aren't the only ones allowed to engage in the political process.

You have no qualms about lying do you?  At least about me.

If I said I was "undecided", and I was vacillating between Trump and Darrell Castle, would you consider me "undecided" for the purpose of that debate?

I will say it straight up:  While the voters I noted may have been "undecided", I don't believe that many of them were open to voting for Trump. 

If they had called the audience a cross-section of voters of the area, that would have been accurate.

[Figueira]

It could be that they intentionally chose a diverse group from the undecideds.

Also the relevant numbers are not the percentages of those groups who are for Trump, but the percentage who are undecided.

[Gustaf]

Just another way that the process is in the tank for Hillary Clinton, IMO.  That is the most offensive thing about this entire election; the paving of the way for Hillary, both in the primary and in the general.  Trump's done his share to bury himself, and he is what he is, but the "in the tank" process that sells these debates as something less fixed than WWE has gotten beyond the point of outrageous.

Grow up

Grown-ups don't provide these kinds of responses to legitimate observations, sonny.

Do you believe that a black unionized schoolteacher from St. Louis, MO is actually undecided?  Or a female Muslim?  Or a black male named James Carter, given that folks here proclaim the percentage of the black vote for Trump at about 1%?  There were others whose "undecided" status I doubted, but those are the most dubious, given poll numbers.

Fuzzy Bear, we get it. You don't like the fact that moslems and negroes are allowed to vote. Unfortunately for you, in 21st Century America, white Christian men aren't the only ones allowed to engage in the political process.

You have no qualms about lying do you?  At least about me.

If I said I was "undecided", and I was vacillating between Trump and Darrell Castle, would you consider me "undecided" for the purpose of that debate?

I will say it straight up:  While the voters I noted may have been "undecided", I don't believe that many of them were open to voting for Trump. 

If they had called the audience a cross-section of voters of the area, that would have been accurate.

Your candidate can't handle any kind of scrutiny which is why he wants to jail the political opposition, curb freedom of speech and attacks the media.

Your fascist whining is very low-energy.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Conspiracies to the left of him, very little to the right of him- charging in asking and answering his own questions is Fuzzy Bear! The dearly departed sensible conservative who is so riddled with HDS that he cannot see what garbage he's spouting and the reality of what he's advocating.

[voter1993]

I wonder this to when i was watching... the muslim woman was totally for Hillary watching this and so were the African American "undecided" voters. I think they just wanted a mix of different backgrounds and religions so not just one type of person gets their voice heard.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Conspiracies to the left of him, very little to the right of him- charging in asking and answering his own questions is Fuzzy Bear! The dearly departed sensible conservative who is so riddled with HDS that he cannot see what garbage he's spouting and the reality of what he's advocating.

What this election about is anti-Globalism.  It's where Donald Trump differed not just from Democrats, but from his fellow Republicans.

The election is playing out to where there is no discussion of Trade, Immigration/Open vs Closed Borders, Interventionism, or the whole idea of America First, which rocket-fueled Trump to the nomination.  The Democrats want to win, of course, and the GOP wants to protect their pre-Trumpian agenda.  This election isn't a hot topic on Atlas for some of the most powerful folks in America; it's playing for keeps.

This election has the look and feel of what would have happened if one of the candidates J. Edgar Hoover had the goods on gave him the middle finger and suggested what he could do.  Only we're high-tech, instant-information now.  We will be electing a President soon who will be taking specific actions, but the discussion is now totally off policy and on "character" (a euphemism, to put it mildly). 

Trump's agenda has real popular appeal.  The collective noise machine that is the mass media repeats a story over and over that everyone is aware of and can make up their mind on, while the actual policy proposals get no time in discourse now.  That's deliberate.  Perhaps if Trump had lives one of "The Lives of the Saints" we wouldn't be here.  But the dialogue is all about something everyone knows about and can figure out, and none of it is on policy.  The Globalists, working independently and in conjunction, have finally succeeded in totally hijacking the campaign, and the status quo is likely secure.

Trump was, undoubtedly, a flawed candidate, given our information age.  But he was the only one that challenged the Globalist policies that are responsible for the diminishment of the Middle Class.  At this point, I hope a less vulnerable leader will take up the legitimate causes Trump's candidacy has taken up. 

[Gustaf]

Conspiracies to the left of him, very little to the right of him- charging in asking and answering his own questions is Fuzzy Bear! The dearly departed sensible conservative who is so riddled with HDS that he cannot see what garbage he's spouting and the reality of what he's advocating.

What this election about is anti-Globalism.  It's where Donald Trump differed not just from Democrats, but from his fellow Republicans.

The election is playing out to where there is no discussion of Trade, Immigration/Open vs Closed Borders, Interventionism, or the whole idea of America First, which rocket-fueled Trump to the nomination.  The Democrats want to win, of course, and the GOP wants to protect their pre-Trumpian agenda.  This election isn't a hot topic on Atlas for some of the most powerful folks in America; it's playing for keeps.

This election has the look and feel of what would have happened if one of the candidates J. Edgar Hoover had the goods on gave him the middle finger and suggested what he could do.  Only we're high-tech, instant-information now.  We will be electing a President soon who will be taking specific actions, but the discussion is now totally off policy and on "character" (a euphemism, to put it mildly). 

Trump's agenda has real popular appeal.  The collective noise machine that is the mass media repeats a story over and over that everyone is aware of and can make up their mind on, while the actual policy proposals get no time in discourse now.  That's deliberate.  Perhaps if Trump had lives one of "The Lives of the Saints" we wouldn't be here.  But the dialogue is all about something everyone knows about and can figure out, and none of it is on policy.  The Globalists, working independently and in conjunction, have finally succeeded in totally hijacking the campaign, and the status quo is likely secure.

Trump was, undoubtedly, a flawed candidate, given our information age.  But he was the only one that challenged the Globalist policies that are responsible for the diminishment of the Middle Class.  At this point, I hope a less vulnerable leader will take up the legitimate causes Trump's candidacy has taken up. 

Maybe you can elaborate a bit on this "globalist" conspiracy you believe in. Who are these people? Rootless cosmopolitans?

[Panda Express]

Just another way that the process is in the tank for Hillary Clinton, IMO.  That is the most offensive thing about this entire election; the paving of the way for Hillary, both in the primary and in the general.  Trump's done his share to bury himself, and he is what he is, but the "in the tank" process that sells these debates as something less fixed than WWE has gotten beyond the point of outrageous.

Grow up

Those folks asked OK questions, some better than others.  It's not that these were the folks asking the questions; they're citizens, and voters, and all that.  I'm not knocking the questioners.  I'm knocking the packaging. 

So the questions were fine but you didn't like that the folks who asked the question weren't white...? Huh?

 Again, I say to you - Grow up. You're not losing because the election is rigged. You are losing the election because you nominated a massive loser.

[Gustaf]

Just another way that the process is in the tank for Hillary Clinton, IMO.  That is the most offensive thing about this entire election; the paving of the way for Hillary, both in the primary and in the general.  Trump's done his share to bury himself, and he is what he is, but the "in the tank" process that sells these debates as something less fixed than WWE has gotten beyond the point of outrageous.

Grow up

Those folks asked OK questions, some better than others.  It's not that these were the folks asking the questions; they're citizens, and voters, and all that.  I'm not knocking the questioners.  I'm knocking the packaging. 

So the questions were fine but you didn't like that the folks who asked the question weren't white...? Huh?

 Again, I say to you - Grow up. You're not losing because the election is rigged. You are losing the election because you nominated a massive loser.

Well, to be fair, he's losing the election because all those pesky non-whites are asserting their right to vote.

[Speed of Sound]

Just another way that the process is in the tank for Hillary Clinton, IMO.  That is the most offensive thing about this entire election; the paving of the way for Hillary, both in the primary and in the general.  Trump's done his share to bury himself, and he is what he is, but the "in the tank" process that sells these debates as something less fixed than WWE has gotten beyond the point of outrageous.

Grow up

Those folks asked OK questions, some better than others.  It's not that these were the folks asking the questions; they're citizens, and voters, and all that.  I'm not knocking the questioners.  I'm knocking the packaging. 

So the questions were fine but you didn't like that the folks who asked the question weren't white...? Huh?

 Again, I say to you - Grow up. You're not losing because the election is rigged. You are losing the election because you nominated a massive loser.

Well, to be fair, he's losing the election because all those pesky non-whites are asserting their right to vote.

I assure you that he prays for his African-Americans and his Hindus every night, thank you very much. They're just days away from finally escaping the war-torn American inner cities.