Muted mics were only supposed to be used if things went off the rails. But this was a civil policy back and forth about what voters say is the most or second most important issue in this election! We can't have debating in a debate! Shut up now! https://t.co/aC69URTs9O
— Ben Domenech (@bdomenech) October 2, 2024
October 2, 2024
"At one point, Vance wanted to correct something about how Haitians got into this country — and he was RIGHT...."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
58 comments:
As I keep saying, it's a really bad idea for the moderators to act as fact checkers. (Especially when they're heavily biased against one of the debaters.
"Those laws have been on the books since 1990"
Sure have Timmy. They were wrong then and they're wrong now.
I remember this part, and the moderator's snarky comment that 'you didn't hear what was said, because the microphones were cut,' said with a snide tone. I think it would be at this point, where neutral observers would have been most affected. The moderators also had a habit of taking Vance's point, and re-directing them back at Walz, offering them up as 'allegations' to be dismissed or disproven on his terms. This happened quite a few times, but the same opportunity was never offered to Vance. In fact, a couple of times, the moderators shut him up when he wanted to rebut a point made falsely by Walz.
The Democrat Party media are infuriating.
It's time to get rid of debate moderators
Each participant gets to ask the other side X questions, w Y minutes to answer and 1/2 Y minutes to respond to that answer
Questions have to be publicly posted a week before the debate.
No surprise gotyas, just actual debate
One thing I think Vance missed was to highlight the shear magnitude of the wave Biden/Harris has let into the country. At one point Walz said the number of border crossings now is lower than when Biden entered office, or some such claim. Though I'm sure there's some technical manner in which this is true (it was obviously a prepared talking point) it's obvious nonsense. Vance rolled his eyes but didn't come back to the point. The number of undocumented people that have entered the country during Biden's tenure exceeds the population of something like three quarters of the states. More people have entered illegally than live in the state of Wisconsin, for example. It's a very big deal.
If the Debate moderators are from any of the Soviet-like State-Run Democrat Party Media institutions - the debate is fixed and unfair for any non-Soviet Democratic.
Maybe a compromise? Moderators, but no women. It's quite obvious MSM ladies need to get the last word in despite not being behind the podium, as usual.
Gentleman, you can't argue in here. This is the debate room!
They aren't walking across the southern border, if we are flying them in.
When will we ever see a "moderator" who can actually ask a simple question and let he candidate run with it? All of these "moderators" start with a speech painting the world as they wish (or think) it should be. Not a single question in a dozen efforts.
Was that part of the contract to get Walz to show?
CBS, "What evidence do you have?"
JD Vance, "After the debate I'd be happy to share with you a study from the Federal Reserve."
JD stuck the knife in with a smile.
They should just do this on the Munk debates.
As a former member of my college debate team...I can attest that these shows are NOT debates by any definition. In a real debate a topic is proposed, a motion. The opposing teams put together their arguments for the pro or for the con side. After presenting the arguments....there is a rebuttal where the teams summarize their position, rebut some of the statements of the opposition and bring up arguments for their own side that might have been missed in their first presentation.
There are no moderators asking loaded questions or inserting themselves into the debate process or trying to help out one team over the other. There are judges...in this case it would be the voters...who determine who "won"
the debate. The moderator's function is to read the motion and keep track of the alloted time for each speaker/team
A REAL debate where there are a list of topics of interest to the judges and where the opponents cognitively present their case in a succinct manner and keep to the topic at hand.....would be a wonderful thing. We might actually learn something useful to help US make a judgement.
For example.......Motion: abortion should be decided at the State level or at the Federal (nationwide) level. State your case!
Instead we get this horrible, useless dog and pony show.
that was his best cheshire cat move,
well said...but apparently everybody loves them and has no idea who to vote for unless we have them, where 'everyone' are the same people who complain they wish they had someone else to vote for...
Dust Bunny Queen!
The left refer to all speech they don't approve of as "disinformation" -
Tell me how that isn't Soviet.
👋 Howdy
I wonder why the Cuomos got shived by the Democratic establishment. Was the older brother hiring enough of the right people to make it look like he was going to run a primary challenged against Joe Biden? The Democrats can kind of get away with keeping people like Cornell West and RFK Jr. off tickets, but a well-known sitting Governor of New York, maybe not. Regardless, seeing Chris Cuomo try to ingratiate himself to a new audience comes off as insincere and therefor unpalatable.
Hey DBQ how have you been,
These moderators aren’t journalists, they’re Democrat activists… as are virtually all of the corporate media talking heads.
One might think that this episode would be a source of embarrassment for Brennan and O’Donnell, but one would be wrong. These pale, far-left females don’t embarrass easy.
Shrieking, liberal narcissists can fuck right off.
She's back!
They thought that Cuomo, Gabbard, Kennedy, Deplorables, babies et al were a "burden". They were right.
Ben said the exact same thing live on Hugh Hewitt's show this morning. He's right. Cuomo's right. Vance was right. It's pretty clear Brennan only cut him off to keep him from exposing their hypocritical and incorrect fact-checking. Ironically, after she mutes JD Walz blurts out "that app has been use since the '90s." Which is another Walz falsehood. Misspoken. Or outright campaign lie. CBP1 is an app developed by the Biden-Harris team to circumvent border delays and move mass quantities of foreigners in with "temporary protected status" that will expire and no one will follow up and the Haitians will exist in a kind of immigration limbo in which they are neither here quite legally nor illegally.
So Brennan lied. Walz lied. JD tried to correct the false "fact check" and got muted. CBS now joins ABC in the heap of malfunctioning moderators who should not be let anywhere near another presidential campaign.
And not in possession of facts. One really needs reliable facts to be a "fact checker." But I'm a grumpy old conservative, what do I know!
Was the CBP1 app being used in 1990, Timmy?
Good succinct summary of the malfeasance.
Or even one who is moderate, not an activist Leftist?
The left/hack media machine simply do not care, MJB. The lie is told, and damage is done. Their lie lives on... in the minds of the faithful.
And should be based on the top concerns of voters. "Global warming" always makes an appearance in these things although it is far down the list of priorities for the voting public. DBQ, you should check out the sorry state of intramural HS "debates" now. Heavily deformed by DEI.
Yes, but trust in news media is low and trending lower. They can't correct their errant ways. Although, fake Jake Tapper had no qualms about saying Vance won. Not even CNN trusts CBS's fact checking.
Vance fully explained his tainted version of why the Haitians are in this country illegally:
"Margaret. The rules were that you guys weren't going to fact check, and since you're fact-checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on. So there's an application called the CBP One app where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole, and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand. That is not a person coming in, applying for a green card, and waiting for ten years."
Vance’s explanation of the Customs and Border Patrol application document misrepresents how it functions. CBP officers still have full authority to accept or deny any application based on the case's merits. Migrants are still subject to screenings and must meet the legal requirements for asylum or humanitarian relief.
When Vance complained that, “The rules were you weren’t going to fact check,” he was falsely claiming the Haitians in Springfield were undocumented. It was a tell. Vance and Trump need these false claims to sow division. They need these false claims to attack rationality but the Haitians under no circumstances were these immigrants working in Springfield illegally. And what is this BS about waiting 10 years before immigration can occur and a green card issued? And so now we know how Vance will spend time as VP if elected - signing off on immigration applications.
Hi all, nice to be back...I'm good. @Mike...yes...the topics should be those relating to the concerns of the voters and not idiotic gotcha type of questions from the "moderators" who also preface the questions with a speech to support the Democrat side.
What % of the people applying on the app in the last year have been rejected?
Unless you can provide that number, and it's 90% or higher rejected, the JD's description is entirely correct
No more debates. Instead a 2 hour LIE DETECTOR event.Each candidate given question both must answer,the person with most lies or skirting the question with no direct answer LOSES! Its the 21st Century LETS GO..You can't just say "I THOUGHT YOU WEREN'T GONNA FACT CHECKME, meaning if I lie no one should know.
Moderators will go the way of the horse and buggy. Mark my words. They are on their last legs this election, and my guess is will be relegated to the dustbin of history in 2 years. Don't need them. Just let the candidates ask questions of each other.
I added a music-cultural pop-quiz question at the bottom of the Cure thread.
The media (which is really just 6 very rich men), are manipulating our elections. These elections aren't "real" in the sense that they occur organically. They're fake. They show us what they want to show us and then they announce a winner and nobody is allowed to question (legally or otherwise) what these 6 men say the winner was.
It's all fake.
Only because we do NOTHING about them.
The lie detector test would be confounded by Costanza's Law, to wit: It's not a lie if you believe it.
Brit Hume had it right last night. He said the "moderators were obnoxious".
Now these debates are and have been essentially political dog and pony shows for a long time. They are badly in need of reformation.
Bernard what's is name from CNN had a huge effect in 1988 when he asked Dukakis a simple question.
I just kept thinking "Jane, you stupid slut".
"We can't have debating in a debate! Shut up now!"
LOL. What did you think was the purpose of these "debates?"
Anyway, what does it matter? If they weren't sure they could fraud her across the finish line, the folks in charge never would have put that birdbrain at the top of the ticket.
It was a tell.
Please explain how challenging the moderator is a "tell".
Gadfly explains why no one here.believes anything he posts.
I think it was "ignorant", not "stupid".
Good to see you back.
The Democrats won't Agree.
CBP be 2 months old…
DBQ, does the plumber still have the '57 Chevy pickup?
Howdy! Good to see you back! I started collecting some Fiesta mugs because of you. LOL.
Now can Vance sue them for the cut off mic??
Evidently, there were two different debates. Dueling headlines from Real Clear Politics today:
Walz Failed To Reveal the Real Vance During Debate Jill Filipovic, The Daily Beast
America Finally Got To See the Real J.D. Vance Sasha Stone, Substack
Post a Comment