At 10/14/16 01:54 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: You must of watched a different debate. I understand that you dislike Donald, but he did do a much better job than the first debate.

He waited longer to shit the bed, and he didn't interrupt as much. Also he got an easy (if scary to most rational people) applause line by threatening Hillary with jail. There doeth the positives end. At one point he once more ran out of material and went to crazy town. Between the tape, and the threat of more, and two poor debate performances in a row....it's not hard to see why people are jumping off the Trump boat.

At 10/14/16 02:41 PM, gumOnShoe wrote:

At 10/14/16 01:54 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: You must of watched a different debate. I understand that you dislike Donald, but he did do a much better job than the first debate.

You may have a point though; because I don't "watch" debates. I listen to them and analyze what's going on. What I do is deeper than merely absorbing a series of frames and generating a feeling based on those images and the audio is more to me than some sort of syncopated mix tape. I suppose if you don't care about content, it may indeed appear that Trump did better, but only because he didn't look like he was high on cocaine and then crashed. And if we're really willing set the bar so low we should just elect someone who plays president on TV. They'll meet all of your checkboxes and be just as vapid (but maybe less dangerous) than your current candidate.

You should try watching the third and final debate. Clinton has the same fake smile the entire time. She has been called cold before, and it really comes across while watching her. Donald Trump looks confident, but still has the underdog vibe going for him. Even if he does not become the President, I am proud of him for not giving up. His critics, swore he would never run. They also swore he would quit before the end. I know most people would not be able to handle the constant attacks and insults like he has.

At 10/14/16 06:15 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 10/14/16 01:54 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: You must of watched a different debate. I understand that you dislike Donald, but he did do a much better job than the first debate.

He waited longer to shit the bed, and he didn't interrupt as much. Also he got an easy (if scary to most rational people) applause line by threatening Hillary with jail.

Many people believe that what Hillary did was wrong, and if it was anybody else they would already be in jail. That was a great thing to watch.

There doeth the positives end. At one point he once more ran out of material and went to crazy town. Between the tape, and the threat of more, and two poor debate performances in a row....it's not hard to see why people are jumping off the Trump boat.

Trump has had many haters since the beginning, many have been within the GOP. I look forward to his third debate. Hopefully, he continues to be aggressive with Clinton. He was too nice in the first debate.

At 10/14/16 06:34 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Many people believe that what Hillary did was wrong, and if it was anybody else they would already be in jail. That was a great thing to watch.

Many people believe the Earth is flat. Many people believe that black people are gentically inferior to white people. Just because "many people" believe something, doesn't make it true. Nobody has put up any real or solid evidence so far that the FBI acted improper in any way shape or form. Nobody has provided their credentials as someone who could judge the investigation. All I've heard essentially boils down to: Hillary Clinton is Satan, so of course she's guilty, but because she secretly controls the government, of course she got off.

It's the same as the Flat Earth argument, or the Blacks inferior argument. It's just what people want to tell themselves and there's no facts behind it, just a lot of innuendo and suspicion. Ring me back when you've got something real, and in fact by HARPING on these made up scandals, it'll make it that much harder to nail her should a real one arise. "Boy that cried Wolf" syndrome.

Trump has had many haters since the beginning, many have been within the GOP. I look forward to his third debate. Hopefully, he continues to be aggressive with Clinton. He was too nice in the first debate.

Unless his poll numbers do some kind of a rebound before then (which seems unlikely) a third debate can only hurt him to my eyes since Hillary basically just toys with him, and let's him blow up and dig his own grave. I mean, when the guy is suspicious of even an obvious compliment....you really don't have to do much to win against that. Can't wait for this shit show to be over.

At 10/14/16 07:17 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 10/14/16 06:34 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Many people believe that what Hillary did was wrong, and if it was anybody else they would already be in jail. That was a great thing to watch.

Many people believe the Earth is flat. Many people believe that black people are gentically inferior to white people. Just because "many people" believe something, doesn't make it true. Nobody has put up any real or solid evidence so far that the FBI acted improper in any way shape or form. Nobody has provided their credentials as someone who could judge the investigation. All I've heard essentially boils down to: Hillary Clinton is Satan, so of course she's guilty, but because she secretly controls the government, of course she got off.

They don't call her Crooked Hillary for no reason. She has either broken the law, or come very close to it. Will she go to jail, of course not. She has way too many friends and political power to avoid any jail time.

Unless his poll numbers do some kind of a rebound before then (which seems unlikely) a third debate can only hurt him to my eyes since Hillary basically just toys with him, and let's him blow up and dig his own grave. I mean, when the guy is suspicious of even an obvious compliment....you really don't have to do much to win against that. Can't wait for this shit show to be over.

Even if the third debate hurts Donald, it will still be fun to watch. It might be his best performance so far?

At 10/15/16 01:14 AM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:.

They don't call her Crooked Hillary for no reason. She has either broken the law, or come very close to it.

First, yeah, they DO call Hillary crooked for nothing - the only reason she has "Crooked" there is because Donald put it there. I'll concede he's very good at name calling.

Also, er, I don't know how to tell you this, but almost doing something illegal doesn't merit legal action.

"Sir, you're going to jail."

"But why, officer?! I've done nothing wrong."

"You almost forgot to pay for that piece of gum in your pocket. That's close enough."

At 10/15/16 09:18 AM, Gario wrote:

At 10/15/16 01:14 AM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:.

They don't call her Crooked Hillary for no reason. She has either broken the law, or come very close to it.

First, yeah, they DO call Hillary crooked for nothing - the only reason she has "Crooked" there is because Donald put it there. I'll concede he's very good at name calling.

I agree that it is a great nickname for her.

Also, er, I don't know how to tell you this, but almost doing something illegal doesn't merit legal action.

Donald Trump has explained about the subpoena to turn over the e-mails, and then she deleted more of them. That is the illegal thing she did. Will she go to jail, nope. Should she go to jail for doing an illegal things, probably.

At 10/15/16 02:02 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

Donald Trump has explained about the subpoena to turn over the e-mails, and then she deleted more of them. That is the illegal thing she did. Will she go to jail, nope. Should she go to jail for doing an illegal things, probably.

clintons... she won't. she'll deny, play ignorant, lie, play with words, and the media will spew what lines they're given for the day.

At 10/15/16 01:14 AM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: They don't call her Crooked Hillary for no reason.

Only Donald Trump and his supporters do that. They do this for reasons of negative branding. That is the reason.

She has either broken the law, or come very close to it.

Prove it, she has been investigated over and over again, and nothing has come up. Until it does, or until you can prove to me you have the credentials to read the evidence and point out some point the investigators missed, I'm going to continue to disregard this talk.

Will she go to jail, of course not. She has way too many friends and political power to avoid any jail time.

Or maybe she hasn't done anything? Maybe the investigations into her are actually correct? I mean, Donald Trump has half a hundred pending, proveable instances of criminal conduct but you people are still harping on someone who's never had anything stick. You aren't just hypocrites anymore, it's now up to obssesive and willful ignorance.

Even if the third debate hurts Donald, it will still be fun to watch. It might be his best performance so far?

I feel like no, it's gonna be another shit show. But then I think back to the adage about a "blind squirrel finds a nut every once in awhile". It's possible he gets his game together.....unlikely, but possible

At 10/15/16 02:35 PM, billybobthwarten wrote: clintons... she won't. she'll deny, play ignorant, lie, play with words, and the media will spew what lines they're given for the day.

I know, Bill got out of impeachment, and Hillary will get away with any thing as well.

At 10/15/16 05:29 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: I know, Bill got out of impeachment, and Hillary will get away with any thing as well.

Or maybe she hasn't done anything? Maybe the investigations into her are actually correct? I mean, Donald Trump has half a hundred pending, proveable instances of criminal conduct but you people are still harping on someone who's never had anything stick. You aren't just hypocrites anymore, it's now up to obssesive and willful ignorance.

Going to keep posting this every time you say something like this till you either deal with this elephant in the room, or give the fuck up with your easy shit.

At 10/15/16 02:02 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

At 10/15/16 09:18 AM, Gario wrote:

Also, er, I don't know how to tell you this, but almost doing something illegal doesn't merit legal action.

Donald Trump has explained about the subpoena to turn over the e-mails, and then she deleted more of them. That is the illegal thing she did. Will she go to jail, nope. Should she go to jail for doing an illegal things, probably.

The e-mails were deleted after the subpoena, but there is zero evidence that SHE was involved in that. It's possible that she secretly, off-the-record told her employee personally to delete the e-mails, but that is virtually impossible to prove.

"Almost illegal" isn't (and should never be) good enough to imprison someone. Of course, the big deal is that he's bringing this up to scare and intimidate his opponent. That's the action of a certified dictator, which thankfully he isn't able to act on. Yet.

At 10/16/16 04:37 PM, Gario wrote:

At 10/15/16 02:02 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Donald Trump has explained about the subpoena to turn over the e-mails, and then she deleted more of them. That is the illegal thing she did. Will she go to jail, nope. Should she go to jail for doing an illegal things, probably.

The e-mails were deleted after the subpoena, but there is zero evidence that SHE was involved in that. It's possible that she secretly, off-the-record told her employee personally to delete the e-mails, but that is virtually impossible to prove.

If she did not actually do it, they should investigate the person or people who actually did it. That would be a good start.

"Almost illegal" isn't (and should never be) good enough to imprison someone.

It should be looked into. The whole thing seems very fishy.

Of course, the big deal is that he's bringing this up to scare and intimidate his opponent. That's the action of a certified dictator, which thankfully he isn't able to act on. Yet.

Donald Trump is not a dictator. He is a business man.

At 10/16/16 05:12 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

At 10/16/16 04:37 PM, Gario wrote:

At 10/15/16 02:02 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Donald Trump has explained about the subpoena to turn over the e-mails, and then she deleted more of them. That is the illegal thing she did. Will she go to jail, nope. Should she go to jail for doing an illegal things, probably.

The e-mails were deleted after the subpoena, but there is zero evidence that SHE was involved in that. It's possible that she secretly, off-the-record told her employee personally to delete the e-mails, but that is virtually impossible to prove.

If she did not actually do it, they should investigate the person or people who actually did it. That would be a good start.

They did. Did you not read the link? There's no way to prove Hillary said something to the underling or if he did it on his own remembering her request. That is literally impossible to prove without a doubt, save for self-incrimination.

"Almost illegal" isn't (and should never be) good enough to imprison someone.

It should be looked into. The whole thing seems very fishy.

It already has.

No, it's not fishy.

Of course, the big deal is that he's bringing this up to scare and intimidate his opponent. That's the action of a certified dictator, which thankfully he isn't able to act on. Yet.

Donald Trump is not a dictator. He is a business man.

Hey. Read the sentence again. I didn't call him a dictator. I called his actions those of a dictator. He isn't one because he doesn't have office, and hopefully enough intelligent people vote to keep it that way.

At 10/16/16 06:14 PM, Gario wrote: They did. Did you not read the link? There's no way to prove Hillary said something to the underling or if he did it on his own remembering her request. That is literally impossible to prove without a doubt, save for self-incrimination.

I suppose that is true.

It already has.

No, it's not fishy.

Maybe fishy is the bad word. How about questionable?

Hey. Read the sentence again. I didn't call him a dictator. I called his actions those of a dictator. He isn't one because he doesn't have office, and hopefully enough intelligent people vote to keep it that way.

It would be a great surprise if Donald won. Just imagine the look on Hillary's face. It would be priceless.

At 10/16/16 05:12 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: It should be looked into. The whole thing seems very fishy.

It was, they found no evidence that was compelling enough to bring an indictment. In any other case, that's the end of the discussion.

At 10/16/16 11:02 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 10/16/16 05:12 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: It should be looked into. The whole thing seems very fishy.

It was, they found no evidence that was compelling enough to bring an indictment. In any other case, that's the end of the discussion.

If Trump does not mention it in the third debate, than it will go away.

What Donald really needs is one or two good knock out punches in this last debate.

At 10/17/16 06:31 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: If Trump does not mention it in the third debate, than it will go away.

But he can't not mention it. His whole campaign hasn't really been about what he'll do (because his policies are either the opposite of what he says, or they simply can't be done). All he's got to run on is the image that Hillary Clinton is an evil criminal who's election would doom the world.

What Donald really needs is one or two good knock out punches in this last debate.

I don't think he has any as the last couple proved. He's in full snit mode now and the more he screams "the election is rigged! It's going to be rigged!" the more this looks to me as his last hail mary to try and save face in the face of what looks to be a very very bad defeat for him and potentially the rest of the party. If your brand is "winning" and "success" then if it looks like your going to lose, you have to find a way to flip that narrative so that the "loss" isn't the same as "losing". Convincing a significant portion of the country that he didn't actually lose is really the only way to keep his image and his brand alive, which he'll need for whatever his post-election plans are.

At 10/17/16 06:58 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: But he can't not mention it. His whole campaign hasn't really been about what he'll do (because his policies are either the opposite of what he says, or they simply can't be done). All he's got to run on is the image that Hillary Clinton is an evil criminal who's election would doom the world.

Maybe he could put a new spin on it. I do agree that he to keep making Hillary look evil and that she will doom the world.

I don't think he has any as the last couple proved. He's in full snit mode now and the more he screams "the election is rigged! It's going to be rigged!" the more this looks to me as his last hail mary to try and save face in the face of what looks to be a very very bad defeat for him and potentially the rest of the party. If your brand is "winning" and "success" then if it looks like your going to lose, you have to find a way to flip that narrative so that the "loss" isn't the same as "losing". Convincing a significant portion of the country that he didn't actually lose is really the only way to keep his image and his brand alive, which he'll need for whatever his post-election plans are.

I heard a rumor that she has Multiple Sclerosis. Trump has way better sources than I do. He needs to find a copy of her medical history and bomb away with it. That would really back up his claims of her not having the stamina for the job. Even if he lost the election, and he was right about what he said, would make him look amazing.

At 10/17/16 07:21 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Maybe he could put a new spin on it. I do agree that he to keep making Hillary look evil and that she will doom the world.

The problem now for both of them I think is there's nothing new they can really say or do 3 weeks out. Also I think Trump has looked more and more crazy and flustered with the way he attacks her. I think we've hit the ceiling for what the alleged "scandals" and problems with Hillary will do to convince voters. I think the gun is firing blanks for the most part right now. He can only preach to the converted, but can't convert the undecideds. That's my feel anyway.

I heard a rumor that she has Multiple Sclerosis.

From who? Conspiracies r us? The Enquirer? Come on....

Trump has way better sources than I do.

Lol, no. He's cited tabloids, vague rumors, "things I've heard". Those are not sources.

He needs to find a copy of her medical history and bomb away with it.

How is he going to do that? Nobody is going to get that without some kind of criminal action occuring, or her releasing it. Even if she did, if it didn't show anything they alleged, he'd just lie and say it's a fake. That's the problem with a fact free campaign.

That would really back up his claims of her not having the stamina for the job.

Unless they turned up nothing that he or others have alleged. You need to be aware that is also a possible outcome.

Even if he lost the election, and he was right about what he said, would make him look amazing.

I don't see it happening though. It hasn't happened so far, so like his tax returns, it's something people will never see. But in the end it's never been about the truth, or proof, or any of that with Trump. He's the style over substance guy and always has been.

At 10/17/16 07:37 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 10/17/16 07:21 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Maybe he could put a new spin on it. I do agree that he to keep making Hillary look evil and that she will doom the world.

The problem now for both of them I think is there's nothing new they can really say or do 3 weeks out. Also I think Trump has looked more and more crazy and flustered with the way he attacks her. I think we've hit the ceiling for what the alleged "scandals" and problems with Hillary will do to convince voters. I think the gun is firing blanks for the most part right now. He can only preach to the converted, but can't convert the undecideds. That's my feel anyway.

There are still undecided voters out there. If Donald can do something remarkable, or make a great point it might help with the undecided. The problem is he needs to keep be aggressive, but also maintain his underdog feel.

He needs to find a copy of her medical history and bomb away with it.

How is he going to do that? Nobody is going to get that without some kind of criminal action occuring, or her releasing it. Even if she did, if it didn't show anything they alleged, he'd just lie and say it's a fake. That's the problem with a fact free campaign.

If a a fact free campaign won't help Trump, what would be a better plan?

Even if he lost the election, and he was right about what he said, would make him look amazing.

I don't see it happening though. It hasn't happened so far, so like his tax returns, it's something people will never see. But in the end it's never been about the truth, or proof, or any of that with Trump. He's the style over substance guy and always has been.

I do think something is up with Hillary's health. I would not be surprised if she " just finds out " that she has a major health issue in a year or two. Donald could still smile and say , " I told you so. "

Tomorrow is the last Trump vs Clinton debate ever. Make sure you have your snacks and drinks ready. This will be the last Presidential debate for four years.

At 10/17/16 09:25 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:
If a a fact free campaign won't help Trump, what would be a better plan?

A plan based in reality, since the president has to deal in reality. I'm actually shocked you're suggesting a fact-free campaign is the best option via implication.

At 10/18/16 04:58 PM, Gario wrote:

At 10/17/16 09:25 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:
If a a fact free campaign won't help Trump, what would be a better plan?

A plan based in reality, since the president has to deal in reality. I'm actually shocked you're suggesting a fact-free campaign is the best option via implication.

Somebody else said a fact free campaign would not work. I was asking what would be a better way to go. I was not suggesting Donald should use a fact-free campaign. Thanks

At 10/18/16 05:07 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

At 10/18/16 04:58 PM, Gario wrote:

At 10/17/16 09:25 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:
If a a fact free campaign won't help Trump, what would be a better plan?

A plan based in reality, since the president has to deal in reality. I'm actually shocked you're suggesting a fact-free campaign is the best option via implication.

Somebody else said a fact free campaign would not work. I was asking what would be a better way to go. I was not suggesting Donald should use a fact-free campaign. Thanks

Fair enough.

How about a campaign based in fact? That should be a better way to go - he hasn't tried that, yet.

At 10/18/16 05:16 PM, Gario wrote: Fair enough.

How about a campaign based in fact? That should be a better way to go - he hasn't tried that, yet.

That seems very harsh. He may of exaggerated some facts, or added some of his personal thoughts, but he is not been 100% untruthful.

At 10/17/16 09:25 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: There are still undecided voters out there. If Donald can do something remarkable, or make a great point it might help with the undecided. The problem is he needs to keep be aggressive, but also maintain his underdog feel.

I think you're underestimating all the damage that has been done since the access hollywood tapes, the new accusations, and the way he's handling them. I think the campaign at this point is well past "on fire" and is now "terminally ill" if not already DOA. Republicans are leaving him in droves (and as he continues to attack people like Paul Ryan, he makes it easier for them to do so), he retreats into conspiracy (screaming it'll be rigged, Hillary plots with the banks to undermine sovereignty). The game seems over to me and I cannot think of a single thing this guy could honestly do at this point to right the ship (and that doesn't even touch the revelations yesterday that his advisor and buddy Roger Stone looks ready to destroy him and stick him in even worse legal hot water. If this turns out to be true, we're talking fucking espionage and borderline treason here).

If a a fact free campaign won't help Trump, what would be a better plan?

Quit. No, seriously, I'm not trying to be an asshole here, even though it sounds like I am. The best thing I think he can do is run away now, try to bow out gracefully, let Mike Pence try to rally the supporters and go from there. Because he is getting hit with scandals, potential legal action, and just all sorts of things that will not simply go away when the campaign ends and if he decides to completely retreat from the political arena there after. I think he's done himself lasting, lasting damage, and depending on how his pending court cases go it could only get worse. There's no chance with three weeks left to completely change the way he campaigns and has campaigned up until now.

I do think something is up with Hillary's health. I would not be surprised if she " just finds out " that she has a major health issue in a year or two. Donald could still smile and say , " I told you so. "

No, it really wouldn't. Because if as you say "she finds out in a year or two she has a major health issue" that does not mean she had that health issue now. Or, if she did, she may not have known she had it now. I can use myself as an example, I had a very severe problem with my asophagus in 2010 that in a nutshell made it impossible to swallow and was causing me all sorts of related problems, not the least of which was an inability to receive vital nutrition (and thus a series of consequences from that) until I got surgery to fix that (I'm fine now, thanks for asking, but also just so we can keep this in the realm of the example I'm trying to make it). As I recovered and spoke to some of the wonderful doctors and nurses who took care of me, they asked me a lot of questions (it's a rare condition, a lot of them have never been near it before, and I was happy to try to help them understand it because it might help them better help the next poor bastard that has it and comes in), but they also said I Probably had it all my life and just never knew it. So, if that happened to me, and I'm someone that has been in and out of doctor's offices my whole life, and been to numerous specialists for numerous things, and yet they never caught this. So yeah, it's actually entirely possible for Hillary Clinton to have an issue she doesn't know about right now because it's just something she's not presenting symptoms for and nobody is looking. It's also entirely possible if she develops something in the next "year or two" that it will be completely new and unrelated to her health now. This is just stretching to try to turn a nothing situation into something....kind of like every investigation of Clinton ever so far.

At 10/18/16 05:21 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

At 10/18/16 05:16 PM, Gario wrote: Fair enough.

How about a campaign based in fact? That should be a better way to go - he hasn't tried that, yet.

That seems very harsh. He may of exaggerated some facts, or added some of his personal thoughts, but he is not been 100% untruthful.

He's been 85% untruthful. 72% untruthful, if we give him half-truths. His honest moments seem like an accident, at this point - there isn't a precident on a candidate being this insanely untruthful.

Why do people keep ignoring this?

At 10/18/16 05:34 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: I think you're underestimating all the damage that has been done since the access hollywood tapes, the new accusations, and the way he's handling them. I think the campaign at this point is well past "on fire" and is now "terminally ill" if not already DOA.

I think it all comes down to how much voters dislike Hillary. If Donald is her only competition, he will gain the benefit of her bad reputation.

Quit. No, seriously, I'm not trying to be an asshole here, even though it sounds like I am. The best thing I think he can do is run away now, try to bow out gracefully, let Mike Pence try to rally the supporters and go from there.

That might make sense in theory, but Trump will never quit. The GOP and the world will have to watch and see how this all unfolds.

No, it really wouldn't. Because if as you say "she finds out in a year or two she has a major health issue" that does not mean she had that health issue now. Or, if she did, she may not have known she had it now.

I meant to say that she has an issue now, and is lying about it. Like the way she lied about her walking pneumonia. Also, she continues to stay at home and " prepare for the debate " for how long, a week? Any other candidate would still be touring, like Trump has been doing. It just seems odd. If Hillary is perfectly fine, her actions are just fueling this issue. If I was her, I would be touring and doing active things in public.

At 10/19/16 03:29 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: I think it all comes down to how much voters dislike Hillary. If Donald is her only competition, he will gain the benefit of her bad reputation.

She wouldn't have had this many leads and what not if it was that simple. Both candidates have high unfavorables. I think with everything that's happened so far, unless there's something that disqualifies her or him, changing the field....seems to me the "hold your nose for Hillary" camp will carry the day.

That might make sense in theory, but Trump will never quit. The GOP and the world will have to watch and see how this all unfolds.

Mores the pity for him and his future prospects and the country as a whole that he's going to choose to keep this horrible campaign going till the end.

I meant to say that she has an issue now, and is lying about it.

Prove it.

Like the way she lied about her walking pneumonia.

That was a mistake. She should have been more honest there.

Also, she continues to stay at home and " prepare for the debate " for how long, a week? Any other candidate would still be touring, like Trump has been doing. It just seems odd.

No, any other candidate wouldn't be. Especially if they were running against someone like Trump that's in yet another campaign destroying scandal. The smart candidate does what Hillary is doing, stay out of sight, do nothing, say nothing. Let all the attention divert to the opponent who's rocked by scandal and doing seemingly everything he can to make the thing worse.

If Hillary is perfectly fine, her actions are just fueling this issue. If I was her, I would be touring and doing active things in public.

No, no point. Ignoring the dumb conspiracy is the best way to let it go away. People like you aren't voting for her anyway, so she doesn't need to prove anything to you. She needs to focus on the people who will or might still vote for her. By staying out of sight till debate time tonight, she's doing that.