Agreed a lot. Overall, for me Trump was unprepared, preferred pride over success (over answering, talking about his kid, whatever), and bombed, blame on him.
That said, it's incredible for me that Trump got 5 tough, direct (and legitimate) questions about taxes, Irak, the birther issue, Clinton look and stop and frisk policies, and was challenged or fact-check on every single answer while Clinton was not challenged or given a tough question a single time, whether it's Benghazi, the private server, the Clinton Foundation, medical records or the DNC/Bernie scandal, basket of deplorable. For me that's absolutely unthinkable there could be such a massive bias in a presidential debate in front of million people, it looked like a third world country debate.
Also, while Hillary as a politician was technically vastly superior, is it really OK she could get rid of much problem that concern voters just by smiling and looking at Trump like if he was a fool ? I mean, for example, he's talking about the DNC scandal, and she just shut him down by her attitude, is she not supposed to answer ? Ok, nice profiling, great preparation, superb script, but is it really good or not, I don't know. She win the argument, but regarding the overall picture, she does not improve her likeability, does not prove her accountability, she mostly shows that she is a veteran, well prepared politician. And people already knew that.
For me, regardless of her debate domination, I see this blatant bias, her arrogance, absence of accountability, and I'm still "anything but her". So, I don't know how people, undecided people will think, but it goes beyond a technical point by point analysis.
