In the Oct. 10 debate, everyone, including the media, became so immersed in the sophomoric utterances of the candidates that they missed a critical and extremely dangerous point on national security [“A tense town hall,” News, Oct. 10].

On Syria, Hillary Clinton called for a no-fly zone. Russia is flying the bulk of the pro-Bashar Assad air missions. Does Clinton really want U.S. forces involved in direct conflict with Russian forces?

James Ward, Huntington


The moderators of the second debate seemed more interested in sex talk and emails than policy. When the discussion of Aleppo finally came up, Hillary Clinton said she would create a no-fly zone and send in special forces, while Donald Trump said Aleppo is already lost.

Shouldn’t the moderators have followed up and asked Clinton what would happen in the inevitable confrontation between our planes and the Russians’? Would she shoot down a Russian or Syrian fighter? Does she really want a direct confrontation with Russia? Is Aleppo already lost?

Thomas Calabrese, Farmingville

advertisement | advertise on newsday


I was a supporter of Paul Ryan [“Speaker: I won’t help Trump,” News, Oct. 11]. However, like other Republicans, he morphed into a person selfishly watching out for himself instead of remaining loyal to the party’s presidential nominee.

It’s apparent to me that the political establishment fears Donald Trump because of his two giant faults. The man cannot be bought. Therefore, those on both sides of the aisle will no longer be able to fatten their pockets on our dime.

Second, Trump tells the truth. He told the truth in the second debate regarding Hillary Clinton’s lies, corruption and the desire to continue President Barack Obama’s multitude of failing policies, domestic and foreign.

Politicians who’ve abandoned Trump should be ashamed.

Sign up for The Point

Go inside New York politics.

Norm Misrok, Bellmore