ABC News 'Moderators' Made a Joke of the Presidential Debate

By / / Gov & Politics / 5 minutes of reading



If moderators do their job correctly, nobody talks about them afterward. Unless one becomes a legendary moderator like Jim Lehrer, debate watchers don’t remember who the moderator was. Back in 2012 CNN debate moderator Candy Crowley let her bias get the best of her and incorrectly “corrected” Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s remarks about Barack Obama and the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, and her credibility was ruined.

In 2016 another CNN personality, Donna Brazile, leaked primary debate questions to Hillary Clinton, and while she’s not a journalist or a moderator, her actions even further damaged Americans’ faith in impartial and fair political debate moderators.

Back in June, even CNN’s assistance couldn’t help addled Joe Biden in his debate against Donald Trump, setting us up for Tuesday night’s debate between Trump and Kamala Harris.

Not a single sentient being expected ABC News moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis to be impartial in any way given their history of reporting on the candidates, but the partisanship and unequal treatment of the candidates went far beyond any expectations and set a new standard for how not to moderate a debate.

Muir and Davis repeatedly fact-checked Trump (with questionable or outright false “facts”); jumped in to help Harris when she was floundering by switching topics or interjecting “gotcha” questions at Trump; bird-dogged Trump to pin him down on a yes-or-no answer while not doing the same to Harris; ignored blatant lies by Harris, and inserted their own opinions and thoughts about Trump’s answers.

READ MORE: Kamala Shamelessly Lied Her Head Off Throughout the Debate

In less than two minutes, Fox News’ Trace Gallagher summed up the disparity:

After Trump brought up the issues with unchecked illegal immigration, including stories about Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio eating the pets of the people who live there, Muir interjected to say that they’d talked to Springfield’s city manager and they claimed there were no credible reports of that. Trump rightly pointed out that it’s the residents themselves testifying to this at public hearings, whether or not the city manager finds that credible.

And, late Tuesday afternoon The Federalist published the recording of a police phone call in which a Springfield, Ohio resident reported seeing a group of four Haitians carrying four geese through the streets just two weeks ago.

Apparently Muir wasn’t paying attention.

When Harris made false statements during the debate, they weren’t on issues where she could claim she was simply mistaken. As our Nick Arama detailed, Harris:

  • Repeated the “bloodbath” lie,
  • Claimed that couples are currently being denied IVF treatment due to “Trump Abortion Ban” laws,
  • Said Trump would sign a national abortion ban,
  • Claimed that Project 2025 is Donald Trump’s plan,
  • Repeated the “fine people on both sides” lie,
  • Lied about the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity,
  • Said Trump would “terminate” the Constitution if he’s re-elected,
  • Talked out of both sides of her mouth about the Afghanistan withdrawal and whose plan it was,
  • Asserted that 140 police officers were hurt by violent rallygoers on January 6, 2021,
  • … and more.

Not to mention Harris’ lies about her own origin story and policies.

Davis and Muir sat silent.

And when Trump rightly pushed back on Harris when she claimed that Trump would weaponize the government against political opponents, Muir cut him off to say they “had a lot of things to get to.” Here’s what Trump said:

I probably took a bullet to the head because of the things that they say about me. They talk about democracy, I’m a threat to democracy. They’re a threat to democracy, with their fake Russia, Russia, Russia investigation that went nowhere…

Of course, Muir wasn’t interested in asking Harris about the accusations Trump made. She probably wasn’t prepared for those questions.

Overall, Muir and Davis would have done well to heed the advice of Jeffrey McCall, a DePauw University communications professor who wrote an opinion piece at The Hill on Tuesday morning with advice for the moderators:

Muir and Davis must come through for America’s voters, making sure the presidential face-off is conducted with decorum, fairness and genuine substance. 

At all costs, the moderators must resist the urge to become pseudo-debaters. The second a moderator chastises a candidate, corrects them or asks a gotcha question, their credibility goes out the door and social media will light up with charges of bias. There is no need to rough up or fact-check Harris or Trump. That’s because the presidential opponents are right there on the stage, and presumably able to fact-check or scold each other. The moderators control the microphones, according to the debate rules, so there should be no need even for interrupting candidates. Moderators are there only to set the agenda for discussion, not to join the rhetorical fray. 

Questions should be framed so that each candidate can sensibly answer and have the same level of challenge. For example, Harris should not be asked, “Why didn’t you tell the nation about Biden’s failing cognitive ability?” And Trump should not be asked, “Why are you in courtrooms so often?” Such attack questions might be fine in a press conference or interview, but debates should not be reduced to dueling pressers. Questions need to be framed so that neither candidate directly benefits.

It would be refreshing to have such a debate between the two presidential candidates, but, like most Americans, I don’t believe that will happen this year – and I’m not sure it will happen at any time in the near future. It’s what the American people deserve, and what the legacy media refuse to allow.





Source link

Start typing and press enter to search

Scroll to Top