It became apparent to me that Monday evening's debate began to wane in proven and relevant material as time progressed. Both Trump and Clinton, in several areas, abandoned their arguments entirely in order to assert a claim of incorrectness regarding the opposing candidate. A great deal of Hillary's ambitious jabs at Trump were, more often than not, provable and well applicable to the subject of debate, which frequently acknowledged the invalidity of points argued by Trump to be truthful or worthy of general acceptance. Contrarily, Trump's resentful swings at Hillary were often given motion by unsubstantiated gossip, most often regarding Clinton's E-Mails, her personal characteristics of which deviated far from her capability to perform adequately as president, along with several references made to the previous wrongdoings and shortcomings of her husband, most of which being either unverifiable or lacking in relevance and effectiveness to his claim. Upon the grounds of argumentative strength, material, and pertinence, Hillary Clinton has successfully achieved, in this particular instance, a position of advantage.
In conclusion, although both candidates were indeed blameworthy of numerous digressions from the direction of the debate to separate extents, Hillary's tended to manifested a semi-consistent standard of which conformed to valuable and notably potent information to each of the few subjects explored during this segment of the presidential debates.