Meh Chris Wallace was still bias in favor of Hillary, people are gushing over him just cuz he was much better than the other commie faggots from hell who were bloody obvious about their bias.
I would give the debate to Trump on substance, I would give the debate to Hillary on style. That said the debate structure should be analyzed in detail.
Chris Wallace’s questions were fair to both and he moderated the debate fairly one would think. It was not fair.
In light of the recent Wikileaks Chris Wallace left many things of great importance not even mentioned. That was by malice and intent. He was not fair nor honest but was very very good at appearing to be an honest moderator. He was far from being an honest moderator.
Hillary Clinton’s answers to all questions were polished and seamless without hesitation nor thought for pause. Trump would pause a few seconds and then answer. Hillary would immediately go into a smooth practiced speech. She had the questions in advance without any doubt as was proved in prior debates.
Please note that Wallace did not touch the fact that Donna Brazil had the questions in the prior debate, thank you Wikileaks. To touch that question is poison for Mike Wallace.
On rare occasions I have seen Hillary answer questions without preparation or warning of what will be asked. She is hopeless in those instances and looks like a deer in the headlights. On such rare occasions she is quickly ushered aside by aides.
I tip my hat to Mike Wallace. He has made a totally staged debate look like a real debate. He is good. He is very good. He is also, “El Rey de Los Gusanos.”
The translation is, “The King of Worms.” However, in Spanish it much lower than a worm in English. It is not profane but would be more like saying he is a pustule.
Hats off to Mike Wallace, “El Rey de Los Gusanos.” I shall now refer to him as, “La Pustula.”
LOL!