![\"Evil](\"http:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/Evil-Grin.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
To begin with, the debate for tonight was scheduled opposite the weekly NFL Monday Night Football game. Right off the bat, that would normally drop viewership of the debate by 20 points. However, since this is a match up between Clinton and Trump, and with Clinton\u2019s health being questioned, the new estimates of viewership are coming in at 100 million people. As Trump would say, \u201cThis is Yuuge!\u201d<\/p>\n
Already, we have seen stories regarding the Democrats trying to rig the debate in Clinton\u2019s favor. Almost the entire group of moderators are supporters of Hillary Clinton. Many people are remembering how the debate between Romney and Obama with Candy Crawley<\/a> was handled. This was after the Benghazi attack. Romney charged Obama with taking to long to declare the attack to be an actt of terrorism. Crowley leaped to the defense of Obama and attacked Romney, who was caught totally flat footed by it. As it turned out. Romney was right and Crowley was dead wrong.<\/p>\n Now we\u2019re seeing the Mostly Stupid Media, besides trying to rig the debate, already saying that Hillary Clinton won big time. Never mind that the debate hasn\u2019t even been held yet. Here are some of the details from Fox News<\/a>:<\/p>\n The New York Times and Washington Post editorial boards unleashed a broadside Monday against Donald Trump ahead of the first presidential debate, scrambling to make their case for why the Republican nominee should not be president as he gains on Hillary Clinton in the polls. <\/b><\/p>\n Well I can answer that one. The Times and Post are wholly owned subsidiaries of the Democrat Party and well paid shills for the Clintons.<\/p>\n The Times, after endorsing Clinton over the weekend, went a step further with a new editorial titled, \u201cWhy He Should Not Be President.\u201d <\/b>The 1,400-word essay<\/a> sought to systematically knock down Trump\u2019s own claims about his assets as a leader, describing him as a \u201cman far more consumed with himself than with the nation’s well-being.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n I have not read, nor plan to read the Time\u2019s propaganda screed. I have provided a link for you to follow if you feel like abusing your sensibilities. It doesn\u2019t surprise me one bit that they are backing Clinton. The New York Times stopped being an honest newspaper around the turn of the century. The last century that is. I find it remarkable that they think Trump doesn\u2019t care about the nation\u2019s well being. We already know that Clinton only cares about herself, money and power. But then, that describes most of the staff of the New York Times. Then we have the Washington \u201cDumb as a\u201d Post.<\/p>\n The Washington Post<\/a>, in its editorial, said \u201cthe stakes could not be higher,\u201d but asserted that Trump has \u201camply demonstrated his unworthiness\u201d to be president. <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s beyond his capacity in the upcoming 90-minute question-and-answer sessions to reverse or even substantially modify that conclusion,\u201d the editorial board wrote. <\/b><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n