Posted on 10/05/2016 4:42:07 AM PDT by detective
Elaine Quijano continued the Candy Crowley debate tradition of favoring the Democrat. She constantly interrupted Mike Pence while he was attempting to answer questions but never interrupted Kaine to have him focus on what had been asked of him. She failed to control the debate by allowing Kaine to constantly interrupt Pence.
Despite this, Pence clearly won the debate both in style and in content.
Quijano allowed Kaine to constantly interrupt Pence, but when Pence tried to correct Kaine, then Quijano jumped in to tell Pence to let Kaine finish. When Kaine interrupted Pence, she also interrupted Pence, so both Kaine and Quijano were talking over Pence's answer.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Elaine Quijano is just a typical fifth-column leftist media skank.
I know. When I saw/heard her do that, I hollered at my TV calling her a word that begins with the letter ‘c’.
It seems that Trump's opponents are working overtime to prove his election theme that “The System Is Rigged” and reinforce that message to the voters as hard as they can .
“Why, oh why, do Republicans allow these liberal moderators?”
Quite simply while the mainstream press is clearly a left wing propaganda organ, Democrats and the press continue to insist to the public the journalism profession is unbiased and objective. The conclusion they draw is to have an unbiased debate you must use unbiased news anchors such as Lester Hold, not biased commentators such as Sean Hannity who have a specific point of view.
The choice is simply biased debates or no debates. There is no way the Democrats will agree to debates with a balanced moderator (Judge Napolitano, or Greta Van Sesteren for example) or conservative moderator (Hannity, O’Reilly). Democrats, who refuse to publicly acknowledge the mainstream press is biased, will be happy to accuse the Republicans of trying to rig the debate by forcing them to use “biased” moderators. Democrats will refuse to attend a biased debate. Republicans obviously feel it isn’t worth the fight and that leftwing biased debates are preferable to no debates at all.
Beginning with Candy Crowly in 2012, we are moving from an era where the debate moderators have a personal bias which subtly influence the questions and tone of the debate to an era where moderators actively intervene on behalf of the leftist candidate. The fiction of impartiality is gone. Kaine and Hillary have taken it to another level with the scripted debate, no doubt in collusion with the moderator. The Democrats seem to have the questions in advance and prepare focus group tested scripted soundbite responses. Neither the Democrats or the moderators make any attempt to have a real discussion of issues. Instead the moderator’s role becomes running the script, allowing the Democrat to make statements while shutting the Republican down and overtly disagreeing with the Republican.
The good news is many educated and informed voters can see through the theatrics. It doesn’t matter for the majority of voters since low information voters don’t spend time watching debates, they wait to be told what to think and do.
The construct of the debates and the bias of the moderators have ruined their value. They need to either be revamped, or discontinued.
I vote for discontinued.
Every time Pence said emails or Clinton Foundation the moderator changed the topic.
That would be fun. And wouldn’t he be a good choice because as a Canadian he can’t vote in US elections?
You can bet Anderson Cooper is practicing his zingers right now.
Pray America wakes
Guns, care to comment?
The dems are a bunch of morons EXCEPT when it comes to selecting debate moderators.
The liberal absolutely not wanting to listen to a rational statement. Not keeping their own personal inner feelings to themselves. Making outlandish comparisons. The conservative attempting to politely state their points. A willingness to listen to the other side. Good manners included.
When the moderator is a member of the Ministry of Propaganda, they are going to be a propagandist, working for the Democrats.
One day I hope to see actual journalism......
Some here wanted a Canadian to be President.
Nathanbedford, I do agree that Trump could learn from studying how Pence handled things (like with your earlier Reagan example on deftly pivoting), although I don’t think their debates will be entirely comparable. I’d certainly think that this proves continually interrupting is a very bad idea, and I hope Trump really takes that to heart. Kaine badly shot himself in the foot by doing that incessantly, and Pence did a good job at not letting himself get needled too much by Kaine and becoming defensive—something Trump failed to do when Hillary and Holt went after him.
It will be hard for Trump to emulate Pence in general, though, as it’s not his character (acting too far out of character didn’t help Kaine at all), and he may just not be experienced enough to do that. Perhaps even more importantly, Hillary is far too slick to ever act like such an idiot as Kaine did and self-destruct. Trump got a more thorough pounding directed at him last time than Pence received last night (100% of the tough questions went to Trump, 100% of the softball questions went to Hillary).
Although the interruptions were at insane levels, the attacks on Pence himself were fairly mild; I will be shocked if that’s true about Trump in his remaining debates. He needs to be prepared for war. I expect Radditz, Cooper, and (probably also) Wallace to attack Trump aggressively and personally with loaded questions, and Hillary will likely be at least as much on the attack against Trump as before. Also, I’m not so sure Trump can get away with mostly ignoring well-framed serious charges when they’re leveled against himself in the way that Pence often did with Kaine’s clumsy attacks on Trump, but he can at least work on minimizing how much time he spends on the defense.
With Hillary right in front of him, I still think it would be a big mistake not to hit her hard and repeatedly, while making sure to talk about his policies too. If he had never raised his voice or interrupted last debate, I still don’t think most non-Trump supporters would have seen him as the winner against an aggressive, confident, at-ease, skilled (compared to Kaine) Hillary always on the offense and doing him real damage with Holt’s help. He needs to do more than that and show her up as disqualified for the job, as she’s already tried to do to him. He better make sure his attacking pivots make sense in context, though, with none of this disjointed shifting from 9/11 to taxes nonsense that Kaine attempted. A lot of people did seem to think tone mattered last night, so overall I do agree that Trump would do well to learn what he can from Pence here. Overall, I think Trump should:
—Keep on the offense and not defense and not allow Hillary and the mods to make it all about his “scandals” and none about hers
—Not interrupt Hillary frequently; save a few well-timed interruptions for when they are really needed to make a point that it would be foolish to let slide (Pence interrupted some, but he was more strategic with it); on the other hand, though, I applauded Trump’s interruptions of the moderator, when the moderator tried to prevent him from answering Hillary’s charges or misrepresented the facts—he can’t allow the mods to throw the debate to Hillary
—Not look aggravated and needled; if Trump raises his voice it should be with authority and strength for effect, not out of annoyance and resentment; he needs to project strong leadership
—Loosen up; Trump is often charismatic and entertaining at his rallies (and during some of the primary debates), but he seemed a little uncomfortable, frowning, nervous, upset, etc. at the debate, which lost him one of his appeals over boring, stiff, unnatural Hillary
—Really pound home his most fundamental and appealing policy differences with Hillary and not let her get away with lying about what he stands for
Fortunately, Trump’s taking a few days off before the debate this time. I’ve said on another thread that I thought he won on substance—unfortunately substance is only part of the larger strategic game that are debates. I hope he can be more of his old self in regard to projecting confidence, strength, and dominance, but with more tactical self-control and focus. I don’t know how skilled at debating, taming his reactions to vicious attacks, and smoothly pivoting he can become in half a week’s time, but here’s hoping he figures out what will work best for him.
She’s an amnesty cheerleader.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.