I expect an overly aggressive moderator to protect Obama in the next debate (voted, Senate)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The CIA is probably implanting a two-way mic system in Obama as we speak. His new bionic eye will have a heads-up display with a virtual teleprompter. :grin:
Oh boy. First I read hear that the Liberal media protects Obama and that their projections of him "winning" the debate would surely ensure that he "won the debate." So, he doesn't win the debate and even the Liberal media's consensus was that he didn't win the debate and the tin foil hat brigade is STILL spinning there arses over this. It is just way too weird.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,460,349 times
Reputation: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38
She will just eat both candidates.
Yes, Candy Crowley will have little patience with Romneys attempt at the Gish Gallop tactic(aka, baffle em with b.s.). Not surprisingly it was started by creationists in debates, where they would spew forth torrents of error that the evolutionist didn't have a prayer of refuting within the format of a debate. But Crowley seems to run a pretty tight ship on her shows.
Lehrer was mesmerized and googly-eyed at Willard, letting him do whatever the hell he wanted and was a terrible moderator.
I hope the next debate, the moderator does their job and tells Willard to shut his mouth if he tries to act like a thug again.
The CIA is probably implanting a two-way mic system in Obama as we speak. His new bionic eye will have a heads-up display with a virtual teleprompter. :grin:
Mitt Romney won the original despite in spite of, and not because of, Lehrer. Lehrer allowed the President an additional five minutes of air time.
Mitt Romney was not a thug, nor a bully in the debate. The President has to learn to frame his answers in the time he's given. If he can't, he shouldn't attend the debate.
If the new moderator interrupts Mitt Romney and gives the President even more time, that will not be a debate. That will be a debacle. Granted, a successful debacle that might convince people who aren't aware that a debate format should promise equal time to each speaker, but a debacle nonetheless.
EDIT: Actually, not having looked up this Candy person as I'm a BBC watcher, I just did some marginal research and I think Candy will do a fine job.
The Huffington post leans very strongly liberal and they were clearly pushing her to say she would interrupt the candidates. She seems to indicate that they're both capable of pointing out the failures of the other. When she can come across as being neutral in a Huffington Post article, that's a good indicator she won't be bullied by either side. I think it will be interesting.
It's Obamas only hope. Lehrer tried to cut Romney off, and Mitt had to fight to be able to just say his peace..and even then Obama still had 5 minutes more total speaking time than him. There was favoritism towards Hussein Obama in the first debate, and I think there will be even more show n towards him in 2nd debate.
Yeah, right, watch willard wincing.
Willards only hope is that he doesn't gaffe again, or flip flop.
I think President Obama should play the part of "no more Mr. Niceguy"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.