Vice Presidential/presidential debate.

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2777156
True, but they don't have a book coming out after the election based upon Obama winning the presidency, the current moderator does, so can she be unbiased? she is a PBS employee which is where you are loosing me. You clearly say someone with a financial interest should not mediate, then say let PBS do it. so are you saying she should be switched out?
I said PBS because everyone says CNN, MSNBC, FOX are all too biased.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2777158
I don't know who picked the moderator but they should have asked a very important question.
I think its too late to replace her now but maybe not. If I was McCain I would say leave her as the moderator. At least there is proof this one is in the tank for Obama.
She's moderated before... I don't see a conflict.... because her book is not about Obama winning the presidency... but more about the modern african american politician and the history of it... book covers as I mentioned Condi Rice as well... its not a partisan book...
I initially thought that perhaps if what "Hannity" was saying on his radio show were true... that she is some avid pro-Obama supporter who was writing a Bio on him to come out in Jan... that she shouldn't do it..
I however after researching have determined its not a conflict.

 

[crimzy]

I think the whole format of the debates should be changed. (Maybe this is a different thread). I think it would be much more enlightening and entertaining if the candidate was allowed to ask the questions of his/her opponent. That way they each could present the opposition's weaknesses in an open environment.
Anyone agree?

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2777175
She's moderated before... I don't see a conflict.... because her book is not about Obama winning the presidency... but more about the modern african american politician and the history of it... book covers as I mentioned Condi Rice as well... its not a partisan book...
I initially thought that perhaps if what "Hannity" was saying on his radio show were true... that she is some avid pro-Obama supporter who was writing a Bio on him to come out in Jan... that she shouldn't do it..
I however after researching have determined its not a conflict.
25% of the book is Obama. The book title is "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama"
Are you that friggin blind?
That looks horrible. There is no way she should have been picked to be a moderator under these circumstances.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by crimzy
http:///forum/post/2777236
I think the whole format of the debates should be changed. (Maybe this is a different thread). I think it would be much more enlightening and entertaining if the candidate was allowed to ask the questions of his/her opponent. That way they each could present the opposition's weaknesses in an open environment.
Anyone agree?
I liked the way the saddleback forum was ran. Debates are a poor measure of a candidates abilities. A president doesn't create policy in sound bites and quick answers.
I'd like to see a panel ask each candidate one question on economics, foreign policy, domestic policy etc. and give the candidate time for an in depth answer.

 

[reefkprz]

no. he isnt impartial about anything, he is about as opinionated as it gets.. he would try and steer the debate towards his own views/agendas.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by crimzy
http:///forum/post/2777236
I think the whole format of the debates should be changed. (Maybe this is a different thread). I think it would be much more enlightening and entertaining if the candidate was allowed to ask the questions of his/her opponent. That way they each could present the opposition's weaknesses in an open environment.
Anyone agree?
I tend to agree, it is pretty lame. You got all this hubbub about oh the debate, but rarely does anything interesting come from them. It typically is simply candidates regurgitating they campaign lines over and over saying it a little bit differently each time.
Then you get all this "analysis" of oh he never look at the other candidate. Or he looked bored or looked bad. Just all this wild tangent stuff that someone has decided to focus on in an attempt to influence you and your decision.
I did like the saddle back forum, because it juxtaposed the candidates views, by asking them the same questions. And them not being aware of what the other candidate said. It really did contrast the two candidates.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by reefkprZ
http:///forum/post/2777254
he would try and steer the debate towards his own views/agendas.
Isn't that what the moderators do to begin with?

 

[hlcroghan]

I don't see anything wrong with someone moderating simply because they have done research about someone for a book. About a fourth of the book is about Colin Powell too. I think she could do a fine job of moderating. I haven't seen where she is super extreme one way or another. It is well known that Rush is very conservative republican. That does present a conflict. And before anyone says it's simply because I am liberal, I wouldn't be okay with Howard Stern doing it either if he were a candidate for it.

 

[bigarn]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2777303
Isn't that what the moderators do to begin with?
they have to find a middle ground and take it from there.

 

[reefraff]

At this point this whole thing plays into McCain's hands. Iffle is going to have to be very careful not to be seen as favoring Obama's campaign and could very well end up favoring Palin in the debate. It is just absurd that Iffle was chosen having wrote this book. If she failed to disclose that little factoid then she should be pulled from the debate.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by hlcroghan
http:///forum/post/2777312
I don't see anything wrong with someone moderating simply because they have done research about someone for a book. About a fourth of the book is about Colin Powell too. I think she could do a fine job of moderating. I haven't seen where she is super extreme one way or another. It is well known that Rush is very conservative republican. That does present a conflict. And before anyone says it's simply because I am liberal, I wouldn't be okay with Howard Stern doing it either if he were a candidate for it.
Colin Powell isn't running for president. Colin Powell's name isn't part of the book title, Obama's is. This book has a release date that is the same day the next president takes office. Would you suppose Obama being inaugurated the day your book was released that it might be a major boost to the book sales?
Iffle has always appeared to be left of center but pretty fair in her reporting. She should have had sense enough to decline this debate.

 

[gonefishcrazy]

The Washington Post wrote an article on Gwen a month ago.

When asked about Obama, she said she said she was not sure about him and that she needed to know more about him. The book info been on Amazon for months.

I guess because we dont know publicly who the mod from pres. debate is voting for it was ok.

Have you guys seen the other debates she has done? Then you can compare tomorrow night with them.

We all know no matter how fairly the moderator is, if Sarah mess up , they are going to blame mod.

 

[sickboy]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2777301
You got all this hubbub about oh the debate, but rarely does anything interesting come from them. It typically is simply candidates regurgitating they campaign lines over and over saying it a little bit differently each time.
I completely agree with this. This is pretty much exactly what both of them did in the last debate. I wish it was more of a confrontational debate instead of passive, answer the question, debate.

 

[1knight164]

I think Iffle is going to have a difficult time being unbiased knowing that if Obama gets elected her book will do well. It has got to be in the back of her mind and could affect the way she enforces the rules during the debate. Let Lehrer do it. He did fine. Better yet, Dennis Miller!

She should have mentioned the book when offered the job as moderator and let both parties decide.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by 1knight164
http:///forum/post/2777935
I think Iffle is going to have a difficult time being unbiased knowing that if Obama gets elected her book will do well. It has got to be in the back of her mind and could affect the way she enforces the rules during the debate. Let Lehrer do it. He did fine. Better yet, Dennis Miller!

She should have mentioned the book when offered the job as moderator and let both parties decide.
problem is that book is not based on him winning or losing.

 

[oscardeuce]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2776997
you are slick....
as a moderator... your job is to ask fair questions to both sides... if you can't do that than you shouldn't be the moderator.. if a person has a financial interest than possibly that is another issue.
Eiffel should not be a moderator, but then when you are a democrat, its different.
Here is what Eiffle thinks of Palin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zafLsAtp_Q
Palin "belittles" Obama.
She's so biased she CANNOT be fair.
She needs to set down.
But then again she's a democrat, so she will get a pass.

 

[1knight164]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2778313
problem is that book is not based on him winning or losing.
IMO, if Obama becomes Prez, the book will sell like hotcakes. If he loses, who's going to care about the book? Obama will sink into the "also ran" category. Sure the book will still sell, (maybe) but not nearly as much if he becomes Prez.

 

[reefraff]

Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2778338
Eiffel should not be a moderator, but then when you are a democrat, its different.
Here is what Eiffle thinks of Palin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zafLsAtp_Q
Palin "belittles" Obama.
She's so biased she CANNOT be fair.
She needs to set down.
But then again she's a democrat, so she will get a pass.
Yeah, I doubt you would have heard her or 90% of the rest of the media use the term belittle to describe Obama's attacks on McCain.
It's all good man. Have you seen what's happening to the New York times readership? The general public is finally catching on to this crap and rejecting it.
I heard last night that she failed to tell the debate commission about the book. Because of that I think she should have been removed for failing to disclose an obvious conflict but I am not worried about her being unfair, too much scrutiny.