My first though after watching the VP debate is that Vance was much more prepared to answer questions, and did so in a clear an concise manner, usually managing to end his answers seconds before his time limit. He didn't try to extend his time to finish thoughts. Walz seemed much more like he had a list of talking points that he had memorized and simply repeated or tweaked them regardless of what the question was. The moderators, again, were clearly on team Walz and in at least one instance egregiously closed a topic misrepresenting Vances' answer. I didn't watch the whole thing, but I hope that they held Walz's feet to the fire about the multiple lies that mark his biography.
As someone who lives under Walz's rule, I'm just shocked that the MN media has not exposed any of his lies in his previous runs for office, seems like one more epic fail for the MSM.
3 comments:
I did watch the whole thing, and while I didn't feel compelled to puke, it did present examples of bias on the part of the moderators. The questions alone were biased as they did little to address what polling data suggests are among the greatest concerns of the American people (next to nothing about crime, for example).
They did, however, address Walz's lie about being in Tiananmen Square during the protests there. He waffled and pretended he "misspoke".
I also wasn't compelled to puke, and thought it was much more civil than the POTUS debate. I agree that the questions were framed in ways that were intended to reinforce Walz's positions, and undermine Vance's. But Vance seemed to be prepared for that and handled it well.
They did hit the China lie, but none of the others apparently. Which is too bad.
It seems clear that as long as the DFL candidate gets the primary say on who the moderators are or which networks they'll accept that it's a given that the moderators are going to be biased.
I saw a proposal by Musk that they have a debate live streamed on X, with minimal restrictions and that only questions submitted by the audience would be asked. I suspect that some GOP candidate will have to agree to something like that and show up alone to take questions before a DFL candidate would venture outside of the safe harbor provided by the MSM.
Beyond that, I don't think the moderators understand how much of a disservice they do to both the voting public and to the candidates by not asking tough questions and by letting them get away with not answering and no follow up.
Post a Comment