I think Conservatives and Republicans need to get over this.
I watched debate and I think Ifill was fine. In fact, for a known partisan, I think she was better than almost anyone else in MSM.
Ifill was much less professional and unbiased than Jim Lehrer in the first debate.
It has been estimated that Gwen Ifill will net $500,000 from her new book on Obama, but only if Obama is elected President. The book will be a dud if McCain is voted in.
Ifill didn’t even have the common decency to inform the television audience of her conflict of interest regarding her Obama book.
Ifill could have been worse.
Who recommended that she wear that awful looking green blazer?
Is she trying to make ‘the Worst Dressed’ list?
Couple of points, a question about Cheney’s view of the vice presidency was biased b/c Cheney is unpopular as was his legislative/ executive stand.
The question before or after that was how your admin will differ from the prez if he dies and you take over. I think that was aimed at McCain’s age.
Also, questions about “which promises are you not going to keep” are idiotic.
Gwen is a liberal, so to phrase a question in conservative terms is probably not in her pay grade. But she did try to be neutral and I have to give her credit for that.
I do wish people like Gwen would at least sit down with a conservative friend (if she has any) and seek ways to phrase things that will not have such a leftist perspective.
I felt she was a non-factor as far as the outcome of the debate. That said, she was not very good either. At one point, she asked both candidates different questions at the same time.
Ifill to Biden following debate, “You did GREAT!!”
(The list of questions he had access prior to the debate were probably quite helpful.)
Laher was fair and Ifell was awful.
Pray for W, McCuda and Our Troops
She gave Gov Palin a great opportunity to shine: indeed, the Governor was excellent in the face of tough questions.
Re: But the worst, most politician-indulging questions came at the end. This was the most distasteful question of the night: how would you abandon your running mate’s legacy if he croaked?
I think that was a fair question. It is asked at almost all of the VP debates I can remember.
"Gwen, that question ought to be taken out and shot. Unless you've got some toast to go with it, so we can have scrambled eggs and toast, you should throw it away and move on to one that actually qualifies as a legitimate question."
Or, she should have simply answered, "Yes," and then stood there silently, looking placidly at Ifill.
I watched the whole debate and saw Gwen Ifil as fairer and more professional than I had expected.
Sarah was great dispite the hard fact that Ifill was openly biased in her choice of questions and how she posed them. For Palin to score that well before a partial moderator in a tilted forum is, well, beyond excellent.
To me, there is an exponential element to her success that the MSM will obviously not recognize. But let’s hope Main Street does.
She was on pain pills! I’ll cut her some slack.
I don’t care how well (or poorly) she did during the debate - she failed the professional ethics test.
I think {gulp} she did a fine job. I know she was under tremendous pressure from both sides. I thought she was fair and balanced, and conducted herself very professionally and with a certain grace we aren’t accustomed to seeing in these debates. I am very grateful for that.
So who has the next debate?
I expected the worst from Ifill but found her quite decent. She must have bent over backward to appear less partisan than she is, as per her book. She did fine.
This was probably due to all of us having the b*lls to keep talking about her conflict of interest for days before the debate, to the point where the MSM had to talk about it as well. Well done for us.
Oh, and we should give the angry, tight-lipped Katie Couric some of the credit as well. Spanish Inquisition tactics backfire.
Besides, knowing she (Ifill) had a stake in the debate gave cover in case Sarah had a bad outing. But no worries - She Hit a Grand Slam!!! - Way to go, Sarah!
She will get everyone’s approval. Her method was letting the candidates respond with any answer they wanted regardless of the question she asked. She was a potted plant. Both candidates did well with the opportunity they had to put forward their campaign’s talking points. They both hit it out of the park for their side. Now on to the main event.