As many are aware, this past Monday was the Presidential Debate between the Democratic and Republican nominees, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, respectively. This was the first time that the nominees were able to face off, outside of attack campaigns, and really show what they had to offer the American people in regards to the policies they plan to implement if elected Commander In Chief.

Sitting down with a bag of popcorn, I was ready and excited to see and hear about the stances of each candidate on foreign trade, job growth and the economy, the war on terror and ISIS, and any potential plans of moving toward reliance on sustainable energy sources. I was even anxious to see how my chosen candidate would measure up to the other and how they would rebuttal any attacks they might face. In many ways, this debate was a chance for each candidate to move past the labels that have defined them thus far in the election. Unfortunately, “Crooked Hillary” and “Amnesty Don” failed to deliver their stances and instead focused on attacking each other, disrespecting the moderator, and blatantly disregarding the individual time regulations of the debate. What was intended to be an intellectual debate, ended up being an hour and a half of mudslinging with little to no actual policy substance—on either side.

The point of a debate is to depict yourself and your stances in the best light possible while at the same time taking away the credibility of your opponent, and for the first fifteen minutes of the debate, this actually occurred. What happened after can only be described as an unprofessional and certainly unpresidential rehashing of the same points that have been the subject of media attention and attack ads for months. The topic of Donald Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns while under audit was under scrutiny instead of his tax plans. The instance of Hillary Clinton’s 33,000 illegally deleted emails was brought up instead of her past and present stances on foreign policy. Even the trade agreement that was a landmark of Bill Clinton’s presidency, NAFTA, was brought to the discussion table—a topic with little to no relevancy considering it was Hillary, and not her husband, behind the podium.

So with this in mind, what did the American people actually get out of the debate? In my opinion? Absolutely nothing. The majority of the material brought up for discussion was largely the same material that was the subject of attack ads and tweets, with Clinton even quoting one of her own saying “A man who can be provoked by a tweet should not have his hands anywhere near the nuclear codes.” The little policy that was brought up was described so vaguely that they simply reaffirmed the generic policy stances of each party. There was no substance. Actions and comments were not presidential, they were petty.

I am hoping that with the next Presidential debate, along with the Vice Presidential Debate, we are able to get a clearer picture of our candidates and their stances, because as of right now, I am not hopeful for the next four years; no matter what direction the U.S. chooses to vote in November.