Did soft bias again affect the debate?
posted at 8:10 am on October 8, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Last night, I wrote that Tom Brokaw did a credible job as moderator and showed no obvious bias during the debate. Indeed, the one time when Brokaw enforced the no-response rule came when he shut down Barack Obama, much to Obama’s obvious frustration. But as with Gwen Ifill, complaints about a more subtle bias in the debate have arisen in the choice of questions Brokaw offered.
In fact, there are two complaints being heard about Brokaw’s performance. The less-substantive gripe is that Brokaw asked too many of his own questions, supposedly making a mockery of the town-hall format. That format died when everyone agreed to have Brokaw and his team vet the questions and decide which would be asked. A real town hall forum uses spontaneity for its energy. All we got last night were Brokaw’s chosen questions, delivered by his selected writers. Brokaw just outsourced his writing staff. The union should file a complaint of its own.
The question of questions is a stronger accusation. Like Ifill, Brokaw managed to avoid the following topics:
- Abortion
- Gun control
- Judicial nominations
- Immigration
With the current financial crisis, an emphasis on economics was expected. Brokaw did ask about entitlement reform, which hasn’t gotten nearly enough attention. However, the topics above have driven presidential politics for decades and have single-issue constituencies that matter in elections. For the second straight debate, Americans didn’t hear candidate views on any of them.
Does that oversight help Barack Obama? On the first topic, most definitely. It would have provided an opportunity for McCain to hammer Obama for his opposition to the Illinois version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act and explain to a national audience how Obama acted to protect infanticide. Gun control would have allowed McCain to challenge the Con Law expert on why he couldn’t take a stand on the Second Amendment before Heller. Judicial nominations would have spoken to the base in both parties, and on immigration, little daylight exists between the two candidates.
I’d call the latter two topics a draw, but McCain got hurt by not getting a question on the first two. Brokaw made the decision on questions, and he has to take responsibility for his choices. The lack of queries on these perennially hot topics should raise a few eyebrows. Will the American public get a chance to hear the candidates answer on them in the third and final debate?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
Ed, hammering Obama on abortion would have done nothing to attract independents and moderates. And the Republican base isn’t enough to elect McCain.
But I did think that many of the questions were skewed to Obama’s strengths.
Meryl Yourish on October 8, 2008 at 8:13 AM
I don’t know if it’s bias or not, but in the two debates there have been plenty of questions that gave opportunity for Obama to shore up his perceived weaknesses.
Spirit of 1776 on October 8, 2008 at 8:15 AM
heh Funny..as Im reading this, the Fox early show asks the question..”was their bias in the questions? Brokaw bias?”
I believe there was bias…and we need more questions asked on social issues.
becki51758 on October 8, 2008 at 8:15 AM
In the event McCain loses, I trust no one will sift through the ashes to suddenly discover the MSM torpedoed his candidacy.
McCain had/has every opportunity to get his message across, hostile media environment or not. McCain could have even used the media bias in his favor. McCain could have easily quipped to the lib Brokaw that he was surprised that Americans asked no questions about x,y, and z. That would have killed two birds with one stone by suggesting that the candidates would have significant differences, and skewering the media for trying to obscure them.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 8:16 AM
The bias wasn’t so much in the questions as in the tone.
The MSM is helping Barry run out the clock. Keep the questions broad and wide and right down the middle. And keep it boring.
Nothing to see here, folks. Vote for Barry and move along.
Typhoon on October 8, 2008 at 8:18 AM
Foreign Policy, Economy, Health Care. The bias question can be answered thusly. Weren’t these the major topics of the Dem primary season? Certainly, as I recall, there were others for the Reps.
p0s3r on October 8, 2008 at 8:19 AM
I’ve taken to going back to watching Cspan with the viewer call ins in the morning…I’ve about had it with all the commercial networks.
A lady just called about the bias, and of course the two print journalists featured this segment disagree with her lol.
surrounded on October 8, 2008 at 8:19 AM
I have to say, I thought Brokaw was far, far more even handed than so many prior debates with respect to treatment of the candidates. The questions are another matter. Certainly McCain’s “buy mortgages” plan isn’t helpful. This continual effort to poke the base in the eye isn’t going to help those down-ticket when some of the base stays home. McCain is still the preferred choice over Obama, but there are some angry folks today.
CC
CapedConservative on October 8, 2008 at 8:20 AM
As Fred Barnes said last night, Rick Warren’s Saddleback Forum blew Brokaw out of the park.
That being said, the McCain campaign is to be faulted for agreeing to this stifling format in the first place. No followups? Are you *&^#ing kidding me?
Buy Danish on October 8, 2008 at 8:20 AM
Immigration?
Please.
They don’t differ one (substantive) iota on immigration. What would’ve been the point?
Purple Fury on October 8, 2008 at 8:21 AM
Bingo. Blaming the moderator is lame.
“She blew me off, I believe, is the technical term.”
- Gwen Ifill, on Sarah Palin
BigD on October 8, 2008 at 8:22 AM
Yes, indeed. And I know many family members for whom that strategy is working to a tee. They no almost nothing of Obama’s other side, and don’t really have the brains to assess his abilities, or lack thereof.
If the “TV” put him in a debate with the other candidate, he must be ok.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 8:22 AM
They shouldn’t even call these debates. They talk to the moderator, not each other. I want to see them debate each other and of course, have followups.
ctmom on October 8, 2008 at 8:24 AM
Yes, that really wasn’t a townhall forum, and Browkaw was more worried about overtime than he was in giving viewers a better feel for the candidates’ positions on a wide range of issues.
surrounded on October 8, 2008 at 8:24 AM
As Im listening to it, some fellow said there were 2 conservative questions, 2 liberal questions and the rest were in the middle.
I agree..none of the commercial networks are worth watching. Im just waiting for Laura Ingraham’s show to start.
becki51758 on October 8, 2008 at 8:24 AM
Both candidates are talking about the fact that DC is broke and needs reform in the worst of ways. We all can agree on that and this is supported by the 10% approval rating for Congress, and the 27% approval rating for the WH.
At least one question should have cornered both candidates on this topic. If both candidates agree that DC is broken, what exactly will they do (EXACTLY) to bring about change to DC.
Just words, just speeches… Both of these men need to explain their plans in detail. Both men need to show an understanding of just how DC got broken in order to have a solution they can sell to the public. I haven’t heard any such thing coming out of either candidate. These debates should back each candidate into a position where they must talk directly to the people and be forced to detail their plans for correction.
How DC got broken is complicated and involves loads of powerful people and institutions. Will either of these two men have what it takes to really address this cancer, or is this just politics as usual.
One things for sure, they all fear Sarah Palin will actually be the one to address this cancer!
Keemo on October 8, 2008 at 8:25 AM
In respect to bias, am I alone in thinking that Obama spoke about twice as much last night as McCain? Well, that may be an exaggeration, but I would like someone to look at last night with a stopwatch in hand and report how much time each one spoke.
Obama is a gassbag, and while a couple of times Brokaw seemed to try to get him to follow the rules, it seemed to me that in the end, Browkaw simply gave up and let him talk. McCain, as usual, was a follow-the-rules guy, except for the one time he asked for a follow-up.
labwriter on October 8, 2008 at 8:25 AM
McCain agreed to this style, and the rules, and the moderator.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 8:25 AM
With all due respect, I disagree. I showed two very moderate ladies at work the video of the nurse who had testified before Congress about infantacide, as she talked about nurses being ordered to put babies who had lived through the abortion into a dingy linen closet to die, and holding an aborted baby herself until the baby died. She talked of Obama’s support for this with great clarity and passion. They were both horrified. Both said they could not vote for Obama in light of this ghoulish behavior.
Patrick S on October 8, 2008 at 8:25 AM
Was McCain sick? With how he performed, I wouldn’t doubt it. He and Mrs. McCain didn’t hang around for long afterwards, but the cameras stayed and treated us to about another 20 minutes of Obama worship there in the hall. It was pretty hard to take.
surrounded on October 8, 2008 at 8:27 AM
I thought the debate format looked more like a game show than a debate between the two people who are vying to be the leader of the free world.
I was waiting for the candidates to answer in a question format.
“What is…uh…um…uh…57 states?”
coffee260 on October 8, 2008 at 8:30 AM
All I can say at this point is Hillary had better have the mother of all October surprises or her chances of ever being president are nil !!
She’s not getting elected at 70.
patrick neid on October 8, 2008 at 8:31 AM
“Eh” for this vapid care of independents. I registered as an independent after the whole immigrations/Bush debacle but certainly not because I waffle between the two sides. I am 100% a conservative voter. Just as Rush said yesterday, the pandering to independents is useless. If they are able to swing left to right so easily, they were never conservative in the first place and we should never EVER abandon the truth of conservative principles (aka John McCain in a nutshell) to appease a few. Liberal ideology is a farce. They do nothing but offer quick solutions to long term issues. They undermine the very fabric of who we are and our success in the process and seek only to pacify a permanent, dependent underclass they NEED TO NEED THEM to win elections. If conservatives ARTICULATE the conservative ideology PROPERLY, it will win votes. Reagan was able to do this. Palin *might* be able to, if give enough time. McCain? He ISN’T a conservative so why do we ever think he could deliver a message he doesn’t believe in? with that said, there has been a CURIOUS lack of social conservative questions and zero mention of faith. This has not been unnoticed and certainly has been intentional to throw the election Obama’s way. If not, why talk about in the primaries and not in the general? It is a willful snub of “values-voters” they KNOW are watching. PHILOSOPHY MATTERS.
Mommypundit on October 8, 2008 at 8:31 AM
I’m so disappointed with McCain. Obama gave him an excellent opportunity to nail him on Iraq & McCain either didn’t notice or refused to acknowledge Obama’s blinding contradiction. Paraphrasing: “We should interfere in countries on moral grounds, like Sudan & Rowanda, because it’s the right, moral thing to do.”… but we should have left Iraq in the hands of a murderous dictator & his degenerate sons.
.
I hope a national commercial shows up on just this.
artlover on October 8, 2008 at 8:31 AM
Yeah, I truly wonder if Ifill and her ilk had any idea how sweet it was to hear her say that. We don’t respect the media. We want our side to blow them off at every opportunity. Bush and McCain might enjoy taking blows, but I don’t.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 8:32 AM
Bias or not, McCain could have, and should have none better.
Next time out I recommend a week of prep, a good nights sleep, and a Red Bull or two.
Dorvillian on October 8, 2008 at 8:33 AM
I’d like an answer with ACTUAL numbers on Obama’s tax increases. We take in $2.1 TRILLION in income taxes, how is raising the taxes on the top 5 percent a few percentage points going to PAY for Baracks Programs and STILL cut our deficit?
IF the DEFICIT is so bad for the country, then shouldn’t ALL monies raised go to cut our deficit?
How is ALTERNATIVE energy going to pay for itself? Wouldn’t McCains plan of Alternative energy AND drilling work better? The world revolves around OIL and oil means money to US
originalpechanga on October 8, 2008 at 8:33 AM
Tks. for the laugh. There hasn’t been much to smile about lately.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 8:33 AM
The saddest part about it all is that there was no bias in McCain saying that the government should buy up all mortgages in crisis (with taxpayer money) and re-negotiate a new mkortgage based on current market values.
That folly was all his own.
awake on October 8, 2008 at 8:34 AM
Good points, Ed.
To your list of issues avoided, I’d add a fifth one:
* Abortion
* Gun control
* Judicial nominations
* Immigration
* Fitness of character and judgment
petefrt on October 8, 2008 at 8:34 AM
Oh hell yes, there was bias. Brokaw was instructed to “let no harm happen to Obama”. Those were nothing but stump speech questions. He didn’t ask anything that required much of a stretch- to either candidate. Not only was Brokaw biased, but he had zero control- if someone timed the actaul speaking time each candidate was given, Obama had much more.
Off Topic- What is the deal with Huckabee? I’m done with his jealous, bitter attitude! Why does FOX keep asking his dumb opinion about anything? He might as well wear a shirt that says, “If it were ME on the ticket, we’d be kicking ass” I think not Chuckapuck!
anniekc on October 8, 2008 at 8:35 AM
I agree there was soft bias, no “Mr. Dukakis, if Kitty Dukakis was raped and murdered, would you favor the death penalty for her convicted killer?” And that was from a liberal moderator. No, now adays it’s a nice big swill of Maalox for Obama. Can’t upset his stomach.
Marcus on October 8, 2008 at 8:38 AM
Artlover- ITA. I sat this with my husband, like, “Dude, he is blowing his chance right now by sticking with the useless ’surge’ crap,” which, in my opinion, only die hard supporters of the war in the first place truly understand. Sometimes even I need a refresher on why we went there in the first place! I can’t imagine why he would follow Obama into that rabbit hole. What Obama has/is making a case for is the recklessness of Iraq IN THE FIRST PLACE and twice now McCain is assuming the short-attention-spanned population remembers why we went there. WE DON’T and all we hear is more Iraq crap we don’t practically live out in our daily lives, right or wrong. He blew it again.
(Don’t flame me. I have been a supporter of the US invasion…I think the surge has been fantastic. I just think the average guy/girl is “over it.” I know that sounds glib…but they just forget.)
Mommypundit on October 8, 2008 at 8:40 AM
Was that one of those highfilltootin’, ourdoor toilets Brokaw was sitting in? I could’ve sworn I saw bottle of Benefiber under the table too…or was that a can of prunes?
Oh well… it all comes out in the end anyway….
CynicalOptimist on October 8, 2008 at 8:40 AM
I think we need an alternate meaning for BDS. “Bias-Derangement Syndrome”.
crr6 on October 8, 2008 at 8:41 AM
After I heard him say it twice (and my wife fell asleep), I turned it off.
I think McCain actually believes that when the auction of the bad mortgages begins, that a “value” will be known for each house and that the people living in them will have their mortgages reduced to that level.
I truly couldn’t tell if he was dreaming, or pandering.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 8:41 AM
Fox is the #1 Cable News Network by a mile, right? Why don’t they get to participate. I know the answer, but can’t they fight it with the debate organizers?
marklmail on October 8, 2008 at 8:41 AM
Marcus…hahahaha…
Mommypundit on October 8, 2008 at 8:42 AM
I will only say that we are all going to die.
Bishop on October 8, 2008 at 8:42 AM
Ya think?
EricPWJohnson on October 8, 2008 at 8:42 AM
You always reach the wrong conclusion. At least somethings are still the same.
Nobody denies the bias. We simply expect our candidates to go around it.
You, on the other hand, deny it, yet survive on it. Priceless.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 8:43 AM
crr6 on October 8, 2008 at 8:41 AM
You are not to speak. I don’t like you.
Bishop on October 8, 2008 at 8:43 AM
Bias yes.
Obama was permitted to blather on as long and as unfettered as he desired.
Brokaw said squat.
It was exactly what you’d expect.
drjohn on October 8, 2008 at 8:44 AM
I though that the ORIGINAL Paulson plan was to reset the value of these mortgages? What the heck did we give them all that money for, then, if Johnny is only going to make us chuck up more?
Gosh, it’s like “battle of the socialists” in Washington.
Mommypundit on October 8, 2008 at 8:44 AM
Yes, the candidates campaigns sign actual negotiated contracts as to the style,format,moderator, network,etc.
McCain agreed to it all. He’s 70 something years old, and a US Senator for decades. He wasn’t “tricked.”
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 8:45 AM
The Dems are sucky, whiney babies and they’ll cry RACIST and refuse to come on… They know they’d have to answer some tough questions off-the-cuff and not get the moderator’s crib sheets before hand…
CynicalOptimist on October 8, 2008 at 8:45 AM
The Republicans have always complained about bias but they do nothing to counter it. It is sickening to see how the RNC meekly allows all that is happening. Too late now. McCain is not a skilled debater and the fact that he is already 72 does make one wonder whether McCain has it in him to become President. I really hate to see this spineless man becoming President, but I better get used to to the words “President Obama” from now on. I believe Palin will be a great VP. Just too bad McCain is on top of the ticket.
Birdseye on October 8, 2008 at 8:47 AM
Speaking of filtering and bias, how come my Windows Mail program by default blocks email from state and national GOP, blocks Rush Limbaugh, etc. but doesn’t block the email from Obama’s campaign? Anyone else notice this?
Then, when you go to unblock it, there’s another warning that makes you think your computer might explode if you risk it.
petefrt on October 8, 2008 at 8:48 AM
Birdseye on October 8, 2008 at 8:47 AM
Bullshit.
Bishop on October 8, 2008 at 8:50 AM
Ed complaining about bias happens regularly enough that you could set your watch to it.
Obviously it was Brokaw’s fault that McCain dropped all those lousy jokes that fell flat?
e-pirate on October 8, 2008 at 8:50 AM
It’s a funny thing. I can’t stand to watch debates, but I surfed through it 6 or 7 times, and every single time, Bambi was talking. I didn’t hear McCain utter a single word.
I’m sure it was just a coincidence.
misterpeasea on October 8, 2008 at 8:51 AM
McCain should a done a Palin and changed the subject or modified his reply to include attacks on Obama on other subjects.
Obama is just laying low, trying not to look threatening or be the angry black man. McCain needed to provoke him, but does not know how to do it effectively.
I would like to see a debate between Palin and Obama.
I will be interested to see how many people watched the debate. If it is the same or lower than the last Obama/McCain debate then it is close to being over - people have decided.
albill on October 8, 2008 at 8:53 AM
Just saw on Gretawire that Carl Cameron said Obama got 40 minutes, McCain, 35. Guess Obama just feels he’s due since he’s up about that much in the polls. Blechhhh.
anniekc on October 8, 2008 at 8:53 AM
Forgive me, Ed, but if you believe McCain lost the debate because Brokaw didn’t ask about abortion or immigration, then I fear you are deluding yourself. Abortion and judicial nominations and so forth just aren’t major issues right now, and the polls bear that out. (And I say this being involved in leadership of the Federalist Society, for which judicial nominations ARE a huge issue!)
I think the larger problem with the debate was the fact that there were a ton of boilerplate questions (i.e. “Brokaw picked the questions he’d ask himself”) and the time periods for response were unreasonable. Every time the candidates would get a “back and forth” going (which, in my view, benefitted McCain), Brokaw would jump in, cite the “rules,” and change the subject. That’s why I liked Jim Lehrer’s debate — fewer topics, and much more time for follow-ups.
BTW — I already have three (3) e-mails from Obama supporters I know gloating about the now almost-certainty of an Obama victory. Niiice.
Outlander on October 8, 2008 at 8:57 AM
Seriously though, It must be exhausting to feel the need to find examples of bias even when there clearly is none. I imagine Ed waking up this morning and thinking…”man, Brokaw was pretty fair last night but I really need an obligatory bias post”. After slaving away for a while desperately searching for examples on the internet he settles on “he didn’t ask questions on immigration or something”. I guess that’ll have to do this time.
crr6 on October 8, 2008 at 8:58 AM
Obama refused to allow ABC or Fox to participate in the debates because the believed they were biased. McCain should have called him out on it, but didn’t — just like how McCain should have called him on refusing to do townhalls, but didn’t.
I’m actually starting to get depressed now. It’s sad.
Outlander on October 8, 2008 at 9:00 AM
No debates would have been a big improvement over these MSM sideshows. The “fix” is obviously in to avoid anything that would make Obama look bad or McCain look good. There was no winner last night but I’m sure a lot of viewers went to sleep.
duff65 on October 8, 2008 at 9:05 AM
This debate was a travesty.
The questions were dull, the format was awful.
It seems to me it was a “Town Hall” in name only because they had eighty people sitting there looking serious and pretending to be interested.
OT: I’ve moved on to a more dispiriting subject: ACORN and all of this voter fraud. Fox just reported 11 states where there are investigations.
At this rate, it will be a coronation, not an election. Ugh.
tru2tx on October 8, 2008 at 9:05 AM
Town hall meeting? Are you kidding? The crowd was probably filled with extras from recent B-movies.
The debate was a draw, with McCain being more specific about certain plans, and Obama trying to play the populist angle a little too hard. But let’s face it; McCain is not Reagan. He’s not even Palin. He tends to repeat certain well-hashed platitudes which, while true, do not box his opponent in a corner. He’s gotta play some serious hardball from this day forward, and never let up. And he has to let Palin be Palin (which means letting her go to Michigan and talk to the factory workers). Letting McCain be McCain isn’t enough at this point.
manwithblackhat on October 8, 2008 at 9:07 AM
Big deal. The important thing is, CNN is covering the same story. At least in Nevada.
manwithblackhat on October 8, 2008 at 9:08 AM
Brokaw is a liberal media stooge. Once again, we’re not debating whether there’s bias in the MSM. We’re debating whether it’s an excuse. And it’s not.
Your assertion that there is none isn’t intelligent. Every thinking person is biased, as he should be. What’s not intelligent is to believe that because someone works for the media, or owns a media company, that their biases disappear.
LONG LIVE BIAS!
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 9:09 AM
The top 5% have only about 20% of the total income, and they are already taxed at 36%. (Not including whatever the states tack on.)
There isn’t enough money in the top 5% to pay for the tax cuts that Barack is proposing, much less to also pay for the $100’s of billions in new spending he has been talking about.
MarkTheGreat on October 8, 2008 at 9:09 AM
Soft bias or horrible questions.
carbon_footprint on October 8, 2008 at 9:10 AM
they refuse to let the Public find out about Obama and Live Birth Abortion
jp on October 8, 2008 at 9:11 AM
I agree with the soft bias against immigration. The media elites don’t like the masses getting uppity and “xenophobic”.
However, I can understand why Brokaw avoided abortion. People who care about the issue have already made up their mind. The only interesting question involving abortion is who would have brought up Sarah Palin first? Obama or McCain? Among people I know, Palin is brought up as the deal breaker when I bring up Obama’s flaws.
thuja on October 8, 2008 at 9:11 AM
I have tremendous respect for you Ed. You are primarily the reason I come here 100 times a day.
I dont care how much of a bias there was last night, hell, Brokaw could have stood up and claimed anyone voting for McCain is insane, and it wouldnt change the fact that I cannot vote for John now.
He blew it. Buying peoples mortgages? WTH!?!?
He isnt fighting, he is building his own coffin.
xRos on October 8, 2008 at 9:13 AM
that was the worst debate i think i ever saw .
trailortrash on October 8, 2008 at 9:19 AM
So then, I respectfully ask you, and I mean respectfully, what’s your alternative?
labwriter on October 8, 2008 at 9:19 AM
Released: October 08, 2008
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby Poll:
Obama 47%, McCain 45%
The telephone tracking poll shows neither candidate with a clear advantage in the national horserace
UTICA, New York - The race for President of the United States remains far too close to call between Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain as both candidates head toward the finish line, a recent Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby daily tracking telephone polls shows.
Data from this poll is available here
The survey, including a three-day sample of 1,220 likely voters collected over the previous three days - approximately 400 per day from Oct. 5-7, 2008 - shows that Obama holds a slight advantage amounting to 1.9 percentage points over McCain. This represents a bit of a recovery by McCain, who had been sliding in some polls before his running mate, Sarah Palin, put in a strong performance in her one and only debate performance last Thursday.
If Obama doesn’t open up a double digit lead by November 3rd, this election goes to McCain/Palin.
Keemo on October 8, 2008 at 9:24 AM
Vote for Sarah Palin, then.
BigD on October 8, 2008 at 9:24 AM
Don’t vote for John. Vote for Sarah, and I don’t mean in 2012.
Marcus on October 8, 2008 at 9:25 AM
Soft bias? For a presidential debate to take place without mention of the Supreme Court, in a term where any number of new appointments might take place, is just unbelieveable.
The passions aroused by the Supreme Court nominations make discussion of the economy look like traffic court. This issue needs to get put on page one of something, right now.
Jaibones on October 8, 2008 at 9:26 AM
Ah. You must live in one of the districts around the country that has no House or Senate representation. Sorry to hear it.
You’re right, too. Better to elect the party that created the mortgage mess, than to put McCain in there with his silly socialist idea about supporting the economy.
Jaibones on October 8, 2008 at 9:28 AM
John has somehow managed to diminish the fire he started when he selected Sarah. Degree of diffilculty of such a maneuver is high but nevertheless significant. The nose must be held a little firmer today.
Fuquay Steve on October 8, 2008 at 9:29 AM
Since I remember, I have never seen a Presidential Republican candidate win a debate. No matter how well these candidates do the left wing liberal media gives the win to democrats. In my opinion Mc Cain did well considering the circumstances. My gut feeling is that this debate was formatted to help Obama. I don’t like McCain that much, but I will no vote for a guy who wants to bring communism to the USA. I went thought this crap once in my life. We need to stop complaining and give our support to McCain, because the alternative is worst.
pukara61 on October 8, 2008 at 9:30 AM
The “Oprah” effect. Before Oprah - specific policy questions. After Oprah - how do you feeee-eeeel?
Marcus on October 8, 2008 at 9:30 AM
All you nay sayers need to think about what you are doing. Regardless of McCain, there are a number of down ticket candidates that will need supported. The objective of demoralizing the opposition is to suppress turnout. I see an awful lot of people trying to suppress turnout… for what? So you can come and crow on Nov 5 “See, I was right!”. I am constantly amazed at how few people manage to think a situation all the way through.
If you want Obama as President, continue. If you do not want Obama as President, you should be re-doubling your efforts to help get out a McCain vote. Jesus H. Christ… no wonder we’re sliding deeper and deeper into a welfare society. When your doorbell rings, you better run and hide. It just might be a girl scout selling cookies.. What a bunch of p*ssies.
CC
CapedConservative on October 8, 2008 at 9:32 AM
Bravo, J! Everyone has bias. Differentiation and generalization are survival skills. It’s not the bias of media that I mind, but their preposterous claim that they are not biased and their fraudulent representation that their version of things is ‘objective journalism.’
petefrt on October 8, 2008 at 9:40 AM
Bob Schieffer is the moderator of the last debate. He has a great BS detector and I think we may see some of these questions come out. He won’t want the last debate to be as boring as this one was. Schieffer has already drawn brickbats fron the Left in this campaign for being insufficently fawning over The One.
DO NOT FORGET that George Stephanopolous changed this campaign and exposed Barack Obama, and it was in the last debate with Hillary Clinton, the one that most people watched. Obama did a complete face-plant in that debate and lost Pennsylvania by 10% as a result. He was so rattled that he canceled the last two debates that had been scheduled, risking serious PR damage rather than have to answer more questions about his shady associations.
This is NOT over.
rockmom on October 8, 2008 at 9:46 AM
Thanks for the reminder. Sometimes watching the campaign and the debates is like watching a home game on your local channel. In some way, you really only see and hear half the game. But see that game on ESPN, and suddenly you see two sides. You’re reminding me that Obama has to “win” also. And maybe this dude will, as they say, never be able to close the deal.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 9:53 AM
The media will have polls that show a double digit-lead even if they have to outright fabricate it. Headlines the day before will be, “Is American too Racist for a Black President?”
It will be vicious.
BigD on October 8, 2008 at 9:56 AM
The McCain camp will never learn that these MSN people do not want him to win .McCain should have raised hell about the modrators used so far.
thmcbb on October 8, 2008 at 9:57 AM
Do what the rest of us are doing and vote AGAINST Obama. I don’t want to live in a dangerous, socialist America.
anniekc on October 8, 2008 at 10:00 AM
And this is precisely our way out. McCain, and Republicans more generally, should not complain about bias, but merely remind audiences every time to question the source of their info. Remind people that the media, like everyone else, is divided in their political views. If Dem’s want the editorial board of the NY Times to moderate a debate, we should be able to handle that. You merely never forget that the questioner and the opponent are on the same team, and point that out to the listening audience. Always question the premise of the question. Question the topics omitted and included. Inform people as to how what they’re seeing is skewed to one point of view or another. I am never annoyed at the questions–only many of our responses.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 10:01 AM
I dvr’d it and am seriously thinking about the stop-watch thing today…just for my own personal satisfaction. Obama stretched the time limit every single time and Brokaw cut him off once. It was so frustrating.
My other take-away - positive towards McCain - was the genuine appreciation he showed the Navy veteran. McCain gave him an “atta-boy” on the shoulder and sincerely shook his hand. Obama was choking on his insincere thanks to the vet and barely looked at him and would not approach him.
I really liked the way McCain moved to the questioners and directly answered their question (I mean Brokaw’s question that they read). He at least seemed sincere in his fellow American’s concerns.
ConMom on October 8, 2008 at 10:12 AM
Exactly. Allowing them to frame the issue as “Is there a media bias” cedes them their premise (that there is, or can be media that is unbiased/objective), hence the debate.
Sometimes I wish there were a FCC requirement that media declare its partisan preferences, though a formal editorial statement or something. But then I realize circumvention would be easy enough.
petefrt on October 8, 2008 at 10:21 AM
The social experiment of providing affordable housing to the unqualified buyer IS the major cause of the current financial crisis. While attempts were made, no one put this policy in check while the program swelled to catastrophic debt levels.
Obama’s UNIVERSAL health care policy/program goes far beyond McCain’s health care credit plan to purchase private care. Obama’s plan IS another government owned program that will make FM/FM look like a popsicle stand.
Next up, Obama’s insistance the higher education should also be “free” (with the government again picking up the tab)
Throw in Obama’s “tax give-away” to 95% of the “middle class”—-40% who PAY NO TAXES—-and you have spending and entitlement plans the run into the TRILLIONS.
AND GUESS WHO PAYS FOR ALL THESE GRAND SOCIAL SCHEMES? Every middle class worker/taxpayer who’s struggling to make ends meet.
Can this nation really afford even four years of Barack Obama’s socialist disaster?
Rovin on October 8, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Anyone notice if Obama was wearing his bracelet last night? Just for s**** & giggles.
I’d sure like to see a closeup of that wrist from last night!
Marybeth on October 8, 2008 at 10:25 AM
What would have happened if McCain had simply turned to the folks and asked if any of them had a question that they would like answered? Would Brokaw complain?
csdeven on October 8, 2008 at 10:31 AM
He would howl like a wounded bitch.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 10:42 AM
Well, I have already filled out a new voter registration card and have it in a stamped envelope. In a few days I will be an independent. I have been a life-long (20 years this year), loyal until last night, Republican.
I honestly dont know exactly what I am going to do now. I will vote, but I will not vote for McCain or Obama.
I love Sara Palin, but she isnt any more ready to serve than Barry is. Maybe in 4 years I will feel differently.
Just keep in mind, I did not leave the Republican Party, John McCain forced it away from me.
xRos on October 8, 2008 at 10:43 AM
The ‘debates’ (ha ha) were as dull as ditchwater. Whining about ‘bias’ from Ifill and Brokaw just makes you look like a pussy.
LimeyGeek on October 8, 2008 at 10:44 AM
You said it best ;)
LimeyGeek on October 8, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Here I think Rush Limbaugh can help. I believe him to be an avid HA reader, and with his phone lines so tied up, this is often an alternative.
Rush, thank you for single-handedly exposing the liberal bias of the media, and for making that nearly common knowledge. But now perhaps you can focus less on how it’s an evil, and more on how it’s natural, even for those who work in media. People ought to choose their media like they choose their clothing–personal preferences are required.
JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 10:48 AM
From my point of view we witnessed what might as well have been a rerun of a Obama/Clinton debate.
The chosen audience questions and Brokaw’s were fully loaded for Dem hot button issues.
The only conservative oriented question was from the Navy Chief who seemed to be the token to try to point to a ‘balanced’ approach.
The world peace question halfway through deserved pictures of a unicorn and rainbows to illustrate the point.
CommentGuy on October 8, 2008 at 10:48 AM
Brokejaw’s whitewashing of selected topics - as Ed points out - made the whole thing an exercise in frustration and turned what could have been a valuable debate into a boring futility.
That’s what you get when you allow the enemy to moderate.
This culture war will be lost as long as Republicans want to appear fair and be liked by the other side.
Obama lies, McCain doesn’t counter. He lets him get away with it. The Dems steal the country because the Republican cowards let them get away with it.
A true leader confronts the enemy and protects the weak from harm.
So many comments in the thread exhibited frustration at the realization that McCain wasn’t going to bat for them. I watched the debate for about 15 minutes and then turned it off.
Thanks Brokejaw.
rishika on October 8, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Does anybody know how to get a copy of the agreed rules for the debate last night and what limits were placed on the candidates?
I have a sneaky feeling that the ground rules mandated the tone and outcome to make this a lackluster debate of little value.
CommentGuy on October 8, 2008 at 10:50 AM
I think the format was indeed flawed — as are most presidential ‘debates’. I also think that Brokaw did the best he could with what he was given.
While I disagree that there was bias present in the debate last night, JiangxiDad is absolutely right here. McCain has had every opportunity to make his case and he has simply blown it.
thePajamaPundit on October 8, 2008 at 10:53 AM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »