Hillary flatly refused to answer the question about the Goldman Sachs speech transcripts, after REPEATED insistent repeating of the question (by Dana Bash. See here ). What exactly is this? Is this acceptable? It’s quite concerning if you want to place candidate transparency at any level of importance. JUST ANSWER the question, Hillary. This should be a HUGE, AWFUL demerit on her “Debate perfomance”. Not to mention the absolute drubbing she took on the Climate issue. This is actually what tipped the scales for me. The Climate response CANNOT be done “patiently”. The EcoSystem does not CARE about what is “possible”. We either work furiously at changing our energy and agricultural infrastructure, or we continue to contribute to increasingly worse consequences in the rapidly approaching dismal future. And that level of “dismal” is also accelerating, the longer we wait, adding energy to the feedback loops as we kick the can down the road. Hillary seems unaware of this. If she is, she is resistant to communicating that. Can’t help but think it’s because of her fossil-fuel connections. Her refusal to address the issue of her Goldman-Sachs speeches raises, once again, the question of her being beholden to the big banks. It’s difficult to see how this doesn’t just SCREAM “big banks and big oil”