Where each candidate gets a 5-10 minute window for opening statements, and instead of random and biased-as-hell attempted-"gotcha!" questions from an absolute cuck of a human being for the next hour and a half, the candidates are asked to clarify and respond to the statements they and their opponents wanted to make. Just bringing up random bs like the "fine people" myth by the moderator, along with not letting anyone actually speak for any extended period of time, isn't helpful for anyone.
Comments (8)
sorted by:
I agree.
They might as well have asked “President, do you feel bad for people dying of the COVID while you were in charge?”
That's a government trick to make sure nothing substantive ever gets talked about. Put a time limit on all responses, so you never get to the heart of the issue...... which would usually be bad for the government.
I feel like if POTUS had just stood there and never said a word except ask questions Wallace wouldn't, Biden would have hung himself completely.
Just some basic integrity. Is it too much to ask??
It is honestly a shit format intended to get sound bites for media playback.
I was embarrassed watching it. It’s a damn shame.
When the League of Women Voters stopped running the debates they turned into pure political theater. The silent sheep for an audience this time also makes them really dull. Just listen to the crowd after POTUS said to Hillary, "You'd be in jail" in 2016 debate and you realize how tyrannical it is to silence the voice of the People. Literally.
Media is the enemy of the people.