Last night’s presidential debate was the first debate between the presidential candidates that I paid attention to watch and took notes. It was very impressive how aggressive it got. It was also very interesting how my peers reactions were.

Since I am not a US citizen, I don’t have abundant information to decide who is a better choice to be president. As a result, I think I am pretty objective in terms of their debating skills judging only from last night’s performance.

Hilary Clinton is a very experienced public speaker. Being a politician for 30 years, she knows how to seize audience’s attention by heart. She started by focusing on the programs that she wants to emphasize on, which made it easier to build a point. During the course of the debate, she kept a smiling face, which made her same more affinity. She looked confident, but not aggressive, which is an attribute I like. She used personal anecdotes - the story of her father providing for her family as a middl-class. This improves people’s touch.

The disadvantages that she has is that she kept talking about her 30 years experience and attacks Trump for lack of experience. She said "when I was the secretary of state" at least three times. Authority and experience is good, but for debates bragging to much about it seems annoying. She also questioned Trump’s tax report and donation, which seems rather irrelevant for running for president.

On the other hand, I think Trump did a worse job. He was not very respectful because he interrupted Hillary many times which is not very polite. He kept emphasizing that America is in “deep deep trouble.” He pointed out Hillary’s problems directly, accusing her for not doing what she should have done in the last 30 years. However, he did not elaborate what his plan is going to be except for mention that he is going to cut the tax rate from 35% to 15%. Lack of detailed information makes his position seems unreliable.