Bipartisanship: Both sides complain about next debate moderator

posted at 12:41 pm on October 15, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

There haven’t been many points of bipartisanship in this general-election season, so perhaps we should celebrate Mark Halperin’s report at Time of one rare instance — no matter how meaningless it is.  The next debate moderator, CNN’s Candy Crowley, offered her perspective on her role last week in tomorrow’s townhall-style debate, and both presidential candidates immediately filed objections with the Commission on Presidential Debates:

In a rare example of political unity, both the Romney and Obama campaigns have expressed concern to the Commission on Presidential Debates about how the moderator of the Tuesday town hall has publicly described her role, TIME has learned.

While an early October memorandum of understanding between the Obama and Romney campaigns and the bipartisan commission sponsoring the debates suggests CNN’s Candy Crowley would play a limited role in the Tuesday-night session, Crowley, who is not a party to that agreement, has done a series of interviews on her network in which she has suggested she will assume a broader set of responsibilities. As Crowley put it last week, “Once the table is kind of set by the town-hall questioner, there is then time for me to say, ‘Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?’”

The problem with that is the purpose of the format itself.  Crowley’s moderating strategy works fine in a normal debate format, with just two candidates, one moderator, and a live audience on mute.  In a townhall debate, it’s supposed to be the voters (likely voters supplied by Gallup, in this case) that drive the conversation, with the moderator on board just to monitor time allowances.  It’s the least-interesting format for a moderator, which is probably why Crowley has chafed at the limitations in the memorandum:

“In managing the two-minute comment periods, the moderator will not rephrase the question or open a new topic … The moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate or otherwise intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits, and invite candidate comments during the two-minute response period.”

The format itself is kind of a cheat, though.  Townhall debates use pre-selected questions, not extemporaneous choices, which makes it look more dramatic than it is.  The voters do drive the conversation, but only in a carefully-controlled environment.  Crowley might be pardoned for making the debate a little more honestly spontaneous than it actually will be.

Not that it will make much difference, anyway.  The crucial debate was the first one, where Mitt Romney had to show that he can stand on the same stage as Barack Obama and look every bit as presidential as the incumbent — and ended up looking far more presidential.  Obama wants to come back in this debate to recast himself as ebullient and energetic, but Bob Woodward explains why that might be a trap, too:

Any changes made by Obama in this debate will be considered in the context of his flop two weeks ago.  He can’t escape that, and in this format Obama has only limited opportunities to get aggressive with Romney, anyway.  The best he can hope is that Romney suffers an unprecedented failure, which is unlikely given the crucible of the twenty-plus debates in the Republican primary.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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 3

All that adds up to a chance for her to flex her, her network’s, and the press corps’ muscle by bringing a recalcitrant POTUS to task.

JohnGalt23 on October 15, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Whoa…dude… like, quit bogarting that joint dude…

SWalker on October 15, 2012 at 1:27 PM

I’m not sure that Crowley is a bad choice for Republicans. She regularly appears on Hugh Hewitt’s show and seems at least inclined to challenge Democrats on her Sunday talk show. And even if commenters think she’s hopelessly biased, can we stick to that rather than attacking her for her weight and appearance?

Ed Morrissey on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Joel Pollack at Breitbart appears to agree with you Ed.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/10/15/Candy-Crowley-Knows-Better-Than-Most?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

I’d still prefer we go with Larry Sabato’s idea though.

@LarrySabato

Ideal debate: candidates, no moderator, 90 mins, & police on standby to break up fights.

Flora Duh on October 15, 2012 at 1:27 PM

It’s embarrassing to have such nasty, cruel creeps on our side who would say such awful things about her physical appearance.

Especially since it is absolutely irrelevant.

itsnotaboutme on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM

So lose some weight, work out, eat healthier…you are talking about yourself, right?

That fact is, TV is appearance, how many commentators have beards (Rachel Maddow exempted)? It’s because appearance on TV is graded…that’s why, when moving from CNN to Fox, Greta had a whole facelift “redo” of her…because how you look on TV is all important.

Ugly people don’t get votes…ugly people don’t win elections…ugly people are not chosen for TV…ugly people can be on the radio however…

Here’s a stat for you, since the advent of TV, no President or VP has had facial hair…however, prior to that, they all did…

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 1:28 PM

It’s not much of an endorsement but Crowley is the least baised in a set of biased journalists. I don’t blame the Republicans for allowing her. What I heard happened is the left (I kid you not) wanted MSNBC hosts and the left said no to anyone from Fox. Once you have everyone from Fox eleiminated it is pretty narrow. Do we want Ifill? Well she got axed so they didn’t go with just anybody from our side.

Conan on October 15, 2012 at 1:28 PM

It’s embarrassing to have such nasty, cruel creeps on our side who would say such awful things about her physical appearance.

Especially since it is absolutely irrelevant.

itsnotaboutme on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM

+1100000!!!

Makes you all look like snobs. Same with you all that talk about Meghan McCain.

DethMetalCookieMonst on October 15, 2012 at 1:31 PM

You can blame Candy for wanting to “add value”. Based on the rules in this one, a 7-year-old with a stopwatch could moderate. Of course, that won’t stop her from butting in. After all, she’s THE FIRST WOMAN TO MODERATE A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE IN 100 YEARS!!!11!! or whatever.

KS Rex on October 15, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Why does our side always let this happen.

Where is Brit Hume? Chris Wallace? Heck Bret Baier?

D-fusit on October 15, 2012 at 12:54 PM

This! I would add Jake Tapper and Greta to the list. They ask good questions.

Conservative Independent on October 15, 2012 at 1:07 PM

With these two you probably named the only few unbiased ones left in the media, sort of the last of the Mohicans, if you wish :)….btw, why isn’t Tapper on the mderators list??? I uderstand the Dems would be indignant and screaming ‘bias’ to no end is a fox news person were chosen, but Tapper?? Why not?? He definitely has a better reputation of fair than Candy Crowley…

jimver on October 15, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Same with you all that talk about Meghan McCain.

DethMetalCookieMonst on October 15, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Yeah, but at least Candy is “more smarter” than the Rich Man’s Snooki.

Resist We Much on October 15, 2012 at 1:36 PM

@LarrySabato

Ideal debate: candidates, no moderator, 90 mins, & police on standby to break up fights.

I almost think you’d have to have a moderator. Sabato’s idea might be able to work at UVA where there is some civility but do you honestly think any politician would share the time without moderation?

That being said, and I’m only half kidding, I think there should be a giant wheel with various issues on it. Moderator spins the wheel and whatever topic comes up is the next one to be discussed. For added fun, there could even be a wild card option where the candidates get to introduce whatever issue they want.

Happy Nomad on October 15, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Whoa…dude… like, quit bogarting that joint dude…

SWalker on October 15, 2012 at 1:27 PM

… says the man who insists up and down the pike that California is in play.

Pass it over to me, dude…

JohnGalt23 on October 15, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Of course, Jeanie Moos makes Candy look like Julie Banderas.

CurtZHP on October 15, 2012 at 1:40 PM

+1100000!!!

Makes you all look like snobs. Same with you all that talk about Meghan McCain.

DethMetalCookieMonst on October 15, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Yeah, that’s easy for you to say…try following them in a buffet line…I did, and they closed it down for lack of food, I had to go to McDonalds…

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Plus, besides Fox, CNN recently, at least, has been asking the hard questions and presenting reasonably fair coverage of the Benghazi coverup. Would she be my first choice? Of course not, but she’s not as bad as many of the rest of whom the Commission (which needs to be re-tooled, period) could’ve picked.

TXUS on October 15, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Speaking of CNN:

@wolfblitzer

Has anyone checked the altitude for tomorrow’s @BarackObama v. @MittRomney debate at Hofstra Univ on Long Island? #CNNDebate

As far as using someone from FOX, why can’t they use someone like Jim Angle, or Paul Gigot?

Flora Duh on October 15, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Ugly people don’t get votes…ugly people don’t win elections…ugly people are not chosen for TV…ugly people can be on the radio however…

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 1:28 PM

You’ve seen the Democrat party, right?

John2A on October 15, 2012 at 1:44 PM

The best he can hope is that Romney suffers an unprecedented failure, which is unlikely given the crucible of the twenty-plus debates in the Republican primary.

Really? I’ll bet ya…$10,000!

Franklin S on October 15, 2012 at 1:45 PM

You’ve seen the Democrat party, right?

John2A on October 15, 2012 at 1:44 PM

What, you don’t think Maxine is sexy?? Ugly people appeal to ugly people…and I don’t mean “ugly” as being just physical.
But generally, look at the elected officials, or the commentators, they are selected by looks, not by brains.
Exceptions are Rachel, she was chosen specifically because she appeals to the gay/lesbian, pro-abortion, very liberal people…or,the other side, Christie is bigger than life (literally), so he doesn’t fit into the “fat man can’t win” belief.

But those are exceptions, generally speaking, politicians are “nice” looking…

That is why Candy is so unusual, she is like Rachel, she is fat, not very pretty, but she is liberal so she fits into the “liberal”, looks doesn’t matter…except for the president and vp…

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Free Candy.

bayview on October 15, 2012 at 1:58 PM

I hate to get so personal about these moderators but could we have one that doesn’t make me puke listening to them or need a bag over their head to keep from scaring my children that are watching with me?

jistincase on October 15, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Really? I’ll bet ya…$10,000!

Franklin S on October 15, 2012 at 1:45 PM

You are willing to bet $10,000 that Mitt will stumble tomorrow night?

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 1:59 PM

It’s embarrassing to have such nasty, cruel creeps on our side who would say such awful things about her physical appearance.

Especially since it is absolutely irrelevant.

itsnotaboutme on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM

So lose some weight, work out, eat healthier…you are talking about yourself, right?

That fact is, TV is appearance, how many commentators have beards (Rachel Maddow exempted)? It’s because appearance on TV is graded…that’s why, when moving from CNN to Fox, Greta had a whole facelift “redo” of her…because how you look on TV is all important.

Ugly people don’t get votes…ugly people don’t win elections…ugly people are not chosen for TV…ugly people can be on the radio however…

Here’s a stat for you, since the advent of TV, no President or VP has had facial hair…however, prior to that, they all did…

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 1:28 PM

I think you might be mistaken about the facial hair thigy and tv. Prior to tv there was FDR, Wilson, Grant among others. Not to mention Washington, Madison, the Adams, Jefferson, Jackson and the rest.

HiJack on October 15, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Really? I’ll bet ya…$10,000!

Franklin S on October 15, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Wow, $10,000. Of your own money? ’cause Obama bet $90 Billion of his own taxpayer money….

And lost. Lost big.

WisRich on October 15, 2012 at 2:01 PM

I don’t care what Crowley looks like on the outside. She’s a lib and that makes her pug-ugly where it counts. Romney ought to beat Barry like a red-headed step child in this debate. If Mitt loses, he may deserve to lose the election. The problem is that the country loses right along with him.

SKYFOX on October 15, 2012 at 2:08 PM

….. Miss Togar?

corncat on October 15, 2012 at 2:14 PM

It’s embarrassing to have such nasty, cruel creeps on our side who would say such awful things about her physical appearance.

Especially since it is absolutely irrelevant.

itsnotaboutme on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Sorry but Alinksky works, and the democratics have honed his principles over decades of use. If we try to stay above it all, that just gives them more power in its use.

slickwillie2001 on October 15, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Obama’s America

Schadenfreude on October 15, 2012 at 2:20 PM

I think you might be mistaken about the facial hair thigy and tv. Prior to tv there was FDR, Wilson, Grant among others. Not to mention Washington, Madison, the Adams, Jefferson, Jackson and the rest.

HiJack on October 15, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Wilson had a beard, Grant for sure, and I was also talking about candidates…many had mustaches, which is facial hair…but you get the drift…none after the advent of TV, no facial hair that I can find, except for Hillary…
BTW, 1864 both candidates (for the first time) for Prez had facial hair…McClellan vs. Lincoln, Andrew Jackson (who succeeded Lincoln was clean shaven)…

Also no really heavyweight (fat) candidates, or very short or very tall candidates…they have to look good on TV, Kennedy/Nixon debates confirmed that.

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 2:21 PM

When they say Obama will be aggressive they mean in slamming Romney on Bain, taxes, out of touch, religion etc.

Conservative4ev on October 15, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Awesome. Another pissed-off harpy.

John the Libertarian on October 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM

OT, don’t know which thread this belongs in but..please enjoy the taste of Markos’ tears:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/15/1144831/-Markos-Teases-Bad-Polling-News?detail=hide

Markos @markos
Bank it: Our PPP poll will have the most pessimistic Obama numbers of the week.

I can’t quite figure any of this out now. Yes, Obama gave a bad debate performance (no point arguing this), and Romney gave a good one. But the shift in polls over the past two weeks has made little sense. I mean, if you’re an independent, Obama may have come across as Milquetoast, but he certainly didn’t say or do anything disqualifying or viscerally awful. He was just … blah.

The people who should have been angriest about Obama’s debate are his supporters who were maddeningly frustrated that he didn’t give the fight to Romney. But why the heck would independents care so much? I just don’t know why the polls budged at all, based on the lack of any stylistic or even substantive home runs two weeks ago. TWO WEEKS AGO!

Ah, that’s just it. We’re still talking about a debate that happened two weeks ago. And even if we stop here at Daily Kos, it’s still being discussed everywhere else. And that’s why it continues to hurt. I just don’t know why it’s hurt THIS much.

*sniff* *sob*

Missy on October 15, 2012 at 2:32 PM

“Both sides complain .. ”
Someone point me to where anyone on the Dem side has complained about the makeups of moderators, whenever ??
Just how true can this statement be, anyway ??

pambi on October 15, 2012 at 2:35 PM

There needs to be MUCH DIFFERENT moderators when President Romney debates the Democrat nominee in 2016.

Khun Joe on October 15, 2012 at 2:35 PM

I’ve been considering the race today, and it occurred to me that the Democrats may have already recognized that they are going to lose this election.

IF this is the case, they what would the most serve the Democratic party?

Its seems to me that the most prudent move would be to try to excite the base, the core Democratic electorate, to get them to go to the polls and vote, and giving up on the independents.

Why?

Because it makes a major difference in the 2016 race. Consider the difference a landslide election favoring the GOP would make to the 2016 race. If Romney is elected in a landslide, it is a clear mandate from the electorate on the entire Democratic ideology. Policies, platform, current seated politicians, particularly coming on the heels of the 2010 election when a record number of seat went GOP. This makes it a much tougher sell in 2016 for the Democrats to say that only the Obama presidency was rejected, that people still believe that the Democrats have the right ideology, view, policies and candidates to lead the nation.

However, if the election was close, if Obama lost and Romney was elected by a much narrower margin, the case might still be made that the nation had only rejected the Obama presidency and administration, rather than Democratic leadership itself.

If this is the thinking in Democrat circles, then I would expect them to send Obama into this debate with clear instructions to be as angry, rude, aggressive, as possible, since that is exactly what seems to excite the Democratic party base. Biden’s rudeness, interruptions, snapping at the moderator, inappropriate laughter, condescension, and obvious contempt for Ryan excited much of the Democratic base. While Obama would look like a maniac doing something too similar to that performance, Team Obama might believe that anger and impatience might play just as well, while allowing Obama to still look even remotely presidential.

Its a gamble, but that’s the nature of the political dance. IF they already believe they have lost this election, mitigation of the damages for the next election would be at the top of the agenda.

thatsafactjack on October 15, 2012 at 2:41 PM

I expect that Romney learned something from Gingrich and, like his dealings with leftist hack lehrer, he won’t let leftist slimebag fat-@$$ crowley get away with unlimited OBOZO help (unlike the too polite Ryan did with OBOZO-girl raddatz). Calling-out these unethical, corrupt, biased MSM toads is something every reasonable voter understands – and appreciates.

TeaPartyNation on October 15, 2012 at 2:42 PM

She’s not eye Candy, but can she keep her mouth shut? We want to hear the candidates!

Steve Z on October 15, 2012 at 2:43 PM

She’s not eye Candy, but can she keep her mouth shut? We want to hear the candidates!

Steve Z on October 15, 2012 at 2:43 PM

She can’t obviously

Conservative4ev on October 15, 2012 at 2:47 PM

There is an easy way to fix the problem of intrusive moderators permanently: Simply forbid the cameras to ever show them, and never identify them during the course of the debate.

Alternatively, just have Brit Hume sitting off stage, and if they ask a single follow up, yank them off with a shepherd’s crook and replace them with him…

dougwinship on October 15, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Crowley would have been good for the VP debate instead of that ABC partisan. Crowley is liberal but is actually pretty fair and I like a lot of her work. The thing is, she agreed to these rules just like the candidates so she should stick to them.

Daemonocracy on October 15, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Debates should be easy…when it’s one candidate’s turn to speak, turn off the other’s mic. Switch at the exact point time runs out no matter where they are in a sentence. Heck, you could automate it and cut out the moderator entirely.

James on October 15, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Remember when moderators actually moderated, instead of letting the major parties get away with using it as a campaign event? Pepperidge Farms remembers.

mythicknight on October 15, 2012 at 3:08 PM

She’s not eye Candy, but can she keep her mouth shut? We want to hear the candidates!

Steve Z on October 15, 2012 at 2:43 PM

We already know that Obama will be the eye candy there, while the actual Candy will debate for him.

Archivarix on October 15, 2012 at 3:12 PM

It’s embarrassing to have such nasty, cruel creeps on our side who would say such awful things about her physical appearance.

Especially since it is absolutely irrelevant.

itsnotaboutme on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Oh boo hoo. Last I checked, the liberals called Condi Rice “Aunt Jemima”, Bush “Hitler” etc etc.

search4truth on October 15, 2012 at 1:23 PM

It’s wrong for the Left to do it, & it’s wrong for the Right to do it.

itsnotaboutme on October 15, 2012 at 3:12 PM

The thing is, she agreed to these rules just like the candidates so she should stick to them.

Daemonocracy on October 15, 2012 at 3:06 PM

No, she didn’t agree to them, the commissions agree to them, but the moderator does not…isn’t that strange?

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 3:12 PM

It’s wrong for the Left to do it, & it’s wrong for the Right to do it.

itsnotaboutme on October 15, 2012 at 3:12 PM

You may not like it, but it’s not “wrong”…unless you think you are the moral moderator for HotAir…just because you don’t like something, it doesn’t make it wrong.

The TV stations spend millions of dollars on set design, design to influence you, they spend thousands of dollars on clothes, to influence you, spend thousands on lighting, cameras, scripts, to influence you…and apparently that has worked.
But you can’t say anything about “appearance”, oh no, that’s “wrong”…meanwhile they are spending millions on appearance to influence you to watch them…how naive of you.

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Well, just saw a Breightbart clip of Ms. Crowley confronting Mitch McConnell about the Tea Party’s racism. Oh Candy, bless your heart. I know w/out reading the comments your ears are probably burning but I was gonna slide over this one. Consideration to a lady, lovely but shapely and no doubt chastised in your profession for it.
Now, I see what you are. You are no lady. You’re another of the king’s mindless media pigs. You grunt for O more slop. Mind you’re no uglier (inside or out)than Diane Sawyer, but I see you’re trying your best to root the others out of the trough.
I’ve lost my stomach for these facist drones. I’m ready for this country to call them out as accessories to tyranny. And the next facist drone that calls me a racist needs to go to jail for a very long time for a hate crime. Your rules Alinsky. Rot in jail or just go to hell.

onomo on October 15, 2012 at 3:17 PM

while the actual Candy will debate for him.

Archivarix on October 15, 2012 at 3:12 PM

I think “while the actual Candy will look adoringly at him” is more accurate.

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 3:17 PM

It’s embarrassing to have such nasty, cruel creeps on our side who would say such awful things about her physical appearance.

Especially since it is absolutely irrelevant.

itsnotaboutme on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM

she’s disgusting to look at. you and john mccain can play tiddlywinks with them all you want. i prefer to call a sow a sow.

GhoulAid on October 15, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Hypocrite. You’d freak out if someone said those things about your mom or your wife.
It would be nice to meet her, but tiddlywinks is not my thing.

itsnotaboutme on October 15, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Mitt may have a chance if he wears this

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Fat chance that Crowley will be fair and neutral as a moderator.

bayview on October 15, 2012 at 3:30 PM

She hit every branch on the way down.

tommyboy on October 15, 2012 at 3:46 PM

+1100000!!!

Makes you all look like snobs. Same with you all that talk about Meghan McCain.

DethMetalCookieMonst on October 15, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Meg McCain is a nasty person so I have zero sympathy for her when people attack her on her appearance.

Daemonocracy on October 15, 2012 at 4:02 PM

These hacks just can’t help themselves. Cowley is so desperate to be “the show”, she has no intention of being a moderator. mitt better be ready to put her in her place or he’s going to get cut off, regularly! This is the perfect example of the need for a Newt-type response!
Update on:How to take on the Obama Enemy media: http://paratisiusa.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-those-who-should-know.html?spref=tw

God Bless America!

paratisi on October 15, 2012 at 4:09 PM

wolfie defending the heck out of candy

she’s going to do her martha 2.0 speil come hell or high water

memo of understanding be damned

cmsinaz on October 15, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Give that photo of the person disscussed herein a buzz cut and a uniform ,, great for getting prople to join the Marines.

Very manly.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 15, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Well the photo might need a touch of 5 o’clock shadow.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 15, 2012 at 4:21 PM

Not meaning to be mean or petty, but how can somebody who claims to be a vegetarian be so heavy? Me thinks there is more to the story.

cat-scratch on October 15, 2012 at 4:22 PM

ps

Mark Hatpin is in lust for commie Obama too, he just wants to play hard to get.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 15, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Any one know if this person has been hanging around Lance Armstrong and the U.S. Postal team doctors.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 15, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Einhorn is Finkle. Finkle is Einhorn.

Christien on October 15, 2012 at 4:28 PM

OT, don’t know which thread this belongs in but..please enjoy the taste of Markos’ tears:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/15/1144831/-Markos-Teases-Bad-Polling-News?detail=hide

Markos @markos
Bank it: Our PPP poll will have the most pessimistic Obama numbers of the week.

I can’t quite figure any of this out now. Yes, Obama gave a bad debate performance (no point arguing this), and Romney gave a good one. But the shift in polls over the past two weeks has made little sense. I mean, if you’re an independent, Obama may have come across as Milquetoast, but he certainly didn’t say or do anything disqualifying or viscerally awful. He was just … blah.

The people who should have been angriest about Obama’s debate are his supporters who were maddeningly frustrated that he didn’t give the fight to Romney. But why the heck would independents care so much? I just don’t know why the polls budged at all, based on the lack of any stylistic or even substantive home runs two weeks ago. TWO WEEKS AGO!

Ah, that’s just it. We’re still talking about a debate that happened two weeks ago. And even if we stop here at Daily Kos, it’s still being discussed everywhere else. And that’s why it continues to hurt. I just don’t know why it’s hurt THIS much.

*sniff* *sob*

Missy on October 15, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Reposted in its entirety as it is too good to miss!

Typical leftist living in his bubble waiting for the collective to do his thinking for him.

People got a look at his candidate without the media covering for him, without his prompter and all on his own and didn’t like what they saw. That’s all there is to it.

Thanks for the share. The tears were delicious.

kim roy on October 15, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Sorry, Ed,

Didn’t see your post before making a stupid comment. *refudiates self*

Christien on October 15, 2012 at 4:34 PM

@LarrySabato

Ideal debate: candidates, no moderator, 90 mins, & police on standby to break up fights.

Flora Duh on October 15, 2012 at 1:27 PM

So, I am guessing that all 4 debates, presidential and VP, would end in what, about 20 seconds flat? Hussein would be screaming “No more wedgies, please!” and Biden would be calling his dentist for a new set.

riddick on October 15, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Missy on October 15, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Reposted in its entirety as it is too good to miss!

Typical leftist living in his bubble waiting for the collective to do his thinking for him.

Thanks for the share. The tears were delicious.

kim roy on October 15, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Oh, those tears were extra delicious.

WisRich on October 15, 2012 at 4:40 PM

People got a look at his candidate without the media covering for him, without his prompter and all on his own and didn’t like what they saw. That’s all there is to it.

Thanks for the share. The tears were delicious.

kim roy on October 15, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Its not just the debates. LSM has been forced to chime in on Benghazi and to some extent even on Fast and Furious via Univision. Just good timing, although first debate added to wave.

riddick on October 15, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Missy on October 15, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Nothing makes your day like liberal tears and exploding heads, thanks a lot for sharing this.

tkyang99 on October 15, 2012 at 4:42 PM

The pic. of the moderator looks like a botched sex change operation. If you can’t tune this in on the radio, at least darken the pic. to a blank screen and listen only to the audio. I thought the VP mod. was ugly, but she looks like Miss America compared to this.

Exit question. Would Bill Clinton even hit this?

they lie on October 15, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Drudge’s picture is way more realistic, his caption too.

TRICK OR TREAT: CANDY TOLD TO FOLLOW RULES

Schadenfreude on October 15, 2012 at 4:45 PM

“Fear the Wedgies”

Tea Party war cry.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 15, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Did Drudge get that off a shema@e web site?
If so he is going to get a strongly worded letter from Pres. O.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 15, 2012 at 4:48 PM

I have never ever ever seen a picture of Woodrow Wilson with a beard.

DavidW on October 15, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Did Druge get that photo on the other had off of the WWW web site.

Womens Wristleing of Wedgies

APACHEWHOKNOWS on October 15, 2012 at 4:51 PM

She’s not eye Candy, but can she keep her mouth shut? We want to hear the candidates!

Steve Z on October 15, 2012 at 2:43 PM

She’s not eye candy she’s a democrap

Wade on October 15, 2012 at 4:53 PM

This is a great article that explains exactly why Obama is going to lose:

Obama’s lack of a plan

tkyang99 on October 15, 2012 at 4:54 PM

can we stick to that rather than attacking her for her weight and appearance?

Ed Morrissey on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Hard not to notice, like lipstick on a pig

Wade on October 15, 2012 at 4:58 PM

I have a feeling when her parents named her Candy, they were hoping for something else…

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 4:58 PM

The thing is, she agreed to these rules just like the candidates so she should stick to them.

Daemonocracy on October 15, 2012 at 3:06 PM

No, she didn’t agree to them, the commissions agree to them, but the moderator does not…isn’t that strange?

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 3:12 PM

And as such, she is not party to them, nor bound by them.

However, if she wants to be invited back by the Commission for future debates, she might want to take those agreements to heart…

JohnGalt23 on October 15, 2012 at 5:03 PM

If Candy gets corny (get it?!), then all Mitt has to do is look past her into the camera. Easy.

SouthernGent on October 15, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Somehow I believe the ‘pool’ of people who ask the questions is tainted to begin with. Gallup Poll is responsible for picking the uncommitted voters who will participate. Candy gets to pick from ‘left’ or ‘lefter’ Qs.

darlus on October 15, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Missy on October 15, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Did you see this comment?

I am sure the MItt is full well aware that the corporate media is firmly in his back pocket and will question nothing that threatens their immense profits.

So, while it’s all in good fun to have 10 front page diaries here at DailyKos mocking him each day, against all odds he’s dead even in national polls (thank god he “wastes” much of that advantage being way ahead in dumbass states like Utah, Texas, and Kansas . .. . ).

And they call themselves a “reality based community.”

LMAO

Flora Duh on October 15, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Candy Crowley looks like a man in drag…

realitycheck on October 15, 2012 at 5:47 PM

I have a feeling when her parents named her Candy, they were hoping for something else…

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 4:58 PM

I told my wife the same thing about Ms. Crowley.

Kinda the exception to the General Theory of Chick Names, huh?

She was not aware of these advanced studies.

Droopy on October 15, 2012 at 5:55 PM

However, if she wants to be invited back by the Commission for future debates, she might want to take those agreements to heart…

JohnGalt23 on October 15, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Exactly, but it doesn’t mean she won’t bend the rules a bit to help out a fellow dem…

It’s not that she is so bias, it’s just that she will think what is mainstream and everyone thinks, is actually quite liberal, but she won’t see it that way.
Bernie Goldberg and his book Bias, is absolutely a must read for anyone who follows politics. It’s not a bias, they think that their thinking is absolutely, 100% mainstream, middle America…and any question that would hint at giving Mitt an edge would be extreme right wing propaganda.

When she says Ryan’s budget is draconian, she honestly believes that is what the vast majority of American’s think, because that is about 100% of whom she speaks to feels and expresses that same dreaded feelings…and if she thinks Mitt is a war on women, she will 100% be convinced that is what the majority of women think, since that is the only thought and discussion she has with women…except maybe a couple of women in Kansas or something, but they didn’t even go college so what do they know…

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 5:59 PM

CNN’s Candy Crowley

Never heard of her.

Why in the Hell is CNN even hosting a Presidential debate in the first place? In terms of viewership, it’s basically a fringe cable-access channel.

logis on October 15, 2012 at 5:59 PM

CNN’s Candy Crowley

Never heard of her.

Why in the Hell is CNN even hosting a Presidential debate in the first place? In terms of viewership, it’s basically a fringe cable-access channel.

logis on October 15, 2012 at 5:59 PM

CNN isn’t hosting it; it will be on all the networks like the first one. PBS didn’t host the first debate with Lehrah. She’s simply the moderator.

All of the debates are officially sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Del Dolemonte on October 15, 2012 at 6:04 PM

One of the few downsides of Romney winning so epically in the first debate is that since he’s a republican, people on the left will convince the rest of the media (all two of them) that Lehrer’s hands-off style was a bad thing. This already happened in the vp debate, and it was a real shame – she cut off Ryan sometimes, and Biden sometimes, and it was annoying no matter who she did it to; even when it was Biden who got cut off, it still meant I didn’t get to see how Ryan could have handled the question, and an independent voter couldn’t have seen Ryan shred Biden’s arguments.

Someone needs to tell these moderators that a quiz show is not a debate. Let the candidates stand on their own two feet.

RINO in Name Only on October 15, 2012 at 6:05 PM

I’m not sure that Crowley is a bad choice for Republicans. She regularly appears on Hugh Hewitt’s show and seems at least inclined to challenge Democrats on her Sunday talk show. And even if commenters think she’s hopelessly biased, can we stick to that rather than attacking her for her weight and appearance?

Ed Morrissey on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Really, Mr. Morrissey, are you this desperate to be recognized as ‘mainstream’? Or are the intellectual feints of an, at best, middling intellect such as Crowley’s enough to pull you off target?

In either case, you’re weak.

M240H on October 15, 2012 at 6:09 PM

I knew a Randy Crowley way back when… looked like he could be her brother.
Haven’t seen him in a long time.

Marcola on October 15, 2012 at 6:42 PM

“If you can’t lay your hands on them and feel the ribs pretty easily, they’re obese,” said Arn,

Wait, is this the wrong post, or the right one…these are starting to blur…

right2bright on October 15, 2012 at 6:53 PM

How about a woman at the townhall has a heart attack, Barry O faints and Mittens gives her CPR and saves her.

Game/Set/Match!

KirknBurker on October 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Candy just bashed Mitt while talking to Andy Cooper. She looks drugged.

Brat on October 15, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Not meaning to be mean or petty, but how can somebody who claims to be a vegetarian be so heavy? Me thinks there is more to the story.

cat-scratch on October 15, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Because, IMHO, most vegetarian diets are terribly unbalanced.

When you give up meat, you have to get your protein from combining sources of the different amino acids that make up a complete protein. That’s why just about every culture in the world has a grain+legume combination as a staple dish. However, the problem with doing it that way is that you get a lot more carbohydrates along with your amino acids, and carbs will really put weight on a person.

That wasn’t nearly as big an issue when most jobs required physical activity. Farmers, bricklayers, postal carriers and cops on the beat burn lots of calories during their workday; students, desk workers and TV presenters, not so much.

It is possible to eat a balanced vegetarian diet, but it’s difficult and time-consuming.

/not a nutritionist

Mary in LA on October 15, 2012 at 8:27 PM

There needs to be MUCH DIFFERENT moderators when President Romney debates the Democrat nominee in 2016.

Khun Joe on October 15, 2012 at 2:35 PM

So true! Why not Monica Crowley in 2016?

Sir Rants-A-Lot on October 15, 2012 at 8:59 PM

What I would like to see from Romney (but undoubtedly won’t) would be a couple of well-placed backhanded snarks aimed at Miss Candy – something along the lines of “gosh, Candy I think Paul Ryan did a pretty good job last week. Not bad for electoral suicide, no?” Just enough for him to let her know that he knows who and what she is, and to place enough commentary in the mix that not everyone in the media can ignore it, and the public will notice it. If done properly, the MSM bias can actually be the “story” of debate number two, with the media vociferously denying it, and the public (which already has no respect for the MSM) considering it as real.

Mr Galt on October 15, 2012 at 9:35 PM

I noticed in a photo of Candy Crowley’s debate rehearsal the stand-ins were a white and a black man. Can she not tell the difference between Mitt Romney and Obama?

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=candy+crowley+debate+rehersal&view=detail&id=94F5EDE69428A7F48E7D0559D6EC80BA8AC89AE7

diogenes on October 15, 2012 at 11:01 PM

@LarrySabato

Ideal debate: candidates, no moderator, 90 mins, & police on standby to break up fights.

Flora Duh on October 15, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Unless they put each in separate “soundproof booths” and cut off the microphones when time is up, Zero will drone on and on, never giving equal time to Romney.

My question: why always lib moderators? How about some with experience on various networks, such as:

Alexander Britton “Brit” Hume
A conservative political commentator and television journalist. For twenty years he was a correspondent for ABC, including Chief White House Correspondent.

Christopher “Chris” Wallace
- previous moderator of Meet the Press
- the son of Mike Wallace, longtime CBS 60 Minutes reporter
- stepfather, Bill Leonard President of CBS News from 1979 to 1982
- Washington bureau as a political correspondent for NBC News
- chief White House correspondent (1982–89)
- moderator of Meet the Press (1987–88)
- anchor of the Sunday edition of NBC Nightly News
- ABC News senior correspondent for Primetime Thursday and occasionally hosted Nightline

Oh, yeah. Both are with Fox News now (wonder why?), so that totally disqualifies them. Ridiculous.

IrishEyes on October 15, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Candy-O. “Candy”. The word itself is fine — I love candy, especially these days candy corn — and as a name for a Reno hooker it would be great. But what dings our dignity is that this supposed filter of some very important news doesn’t have enough awareness to think that perhaps a name change to something a little more distinguished might be in order — maybe something like, “Candace Murgatroyd Crowley.” Yeah that works. Something like this is well in her control. But no. Candy is fine with an objectifying moniker like Candy. From the first I ever heard of her her credibility suffered from it. But that’s just me. Perhaps she believes making her name less trivial will somehow shift her viewpoint to the right. Gasp!

curved space on October 16, 2012 at 7:14 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3