Letter: Analysis wrong: Clinton won
Reading your “Who Won?” political analysis of the first Clinton-Trump debate, forgive me if I feel like I stumbled into an episode of “The Twilight Zone.”
The “analysis” by the four political scientists gives one the distinct impression that the debate was about a draw. This could not be further from the truth.
As an unrepentant political junkie, I’ve read analysis and focus group reports from more than 10 sources, and I have yet to find one, not one, analyst or source that scored the debate anything but a resounding victory for Hillary Clinton.
The “analysis” in our paper does the readers a real disservice if they read only this coverage and didn’t see the debate.
However, I suppose Donald Trump interrupting Clinton more than 50 times, grimacing, acting like a child when talking over the moderator and Clinton, and his multiple, impenetrable “word salad” answers mean nothing to these political scientists who mentioned them barely or not at all.
To all those who complain that this paper has a left-leaning bias, you might think again.
Bruce Doneff
Beaufort
This story was originally published September 30, 2016 at 1:07 PM with the headline "Letter: Analysis wrong: Clinton won."