Candidates clash over Russia, ISIS at final debate

Students crowded into Wallis Annenberg Hall for a viewing of the third and final presidential debate on Wednesday evening. Debt and entitlements, immigration, the economy, the Supreme Court, foreign hot spots and fitness to be president were some of the issues raised, and for both candidates this was their last chance to face off against each other before Election Day on Nov. 8.

The Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics and USC Annenberg’s Center of Communication Leadership and Policy co-hosted the event, which included a pre-debate and post-debate panel. The panel featured Nick Germain from USC College Democrats; Alan Arkatov, the Katzman/Ernst Chair for Educational Entrepreneurship, Technology and Innovation for USC Rossier School of Education; Mary Perez, the vice president of USC College Republicans; and Justin Wallin, chief operating officer and chief marketing officer at Probolsky Research. Moderators included Dan Schnur, the director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics, and Lily Vaughan, editorial director at the Daily Trojan.

The crowd cheered as the final debate began and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton walked onto the stage, yet booed when Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump walked onto the stage.

Wallin said the debate would not change voters’ minds about who to vote for.

“The election is set. The winner on this was really [moderator Chris] Wallace who I think did a remarkable job, and for once allowed for a sensitive talk about policies,” Wallin said. “If you listened, there were some distinct differences between the candidates, but I don’t think in terms of the election it did anything whatsoever.”

Germain discussed what he termed one of Clinton’s more memorable moments.

“I believe the most memorable moment of the night was when Donald Trump leveraged an attack against Secretary Clinton that she had essentially accomplished nothing over her 30 years in public life, and she countered that with a decade-by-decade juxtaposition of what she was doing during that time and what Donald Trump was also embarrassingly doing at the same time,” Germain said. “I think that moment stuck with me and stuck with many voters at home.”

Perez argued that though Donald Trump didn’t strengthen his stance with voters, he managed to not hurt his position.

“He did an adequate job in remaining civil in comparison to the first two debates,” Perez said. “I think many people already knew who they were going to vote for and this debate didn’t change that.”

Nick Hernandez, a sophomore majoring in accounting, was among those watching the debate and was one of the few cheering for Trump.

“I support Trump because Clinton has lied so much, and if she does become president, it will be like having another Obama term,” Hernandez said. “Trump will fix our economy, and if Clinton gets elected, nothing will change.”

Sandra Chang, a junior majoring in communication, cheered as Clinton gave her closing statement asking for the votes of every American.

“I am voting for Hillary Clinton because she is the candidate with the experience needed to lead our country,” Chang said. “Trump will destroy every single thing I love about this country. He is racist, sexist, homophobic and completely unfit to be president.”

Students were also able to register to vote during the event.