Fox News moderator for tonight's debate. Should be, interesting...
I actually think it'll be totally unremarkable.
First, it's Chris Wallace, who has always been their "see? See, look at this guy! He seems relatively sane, right? Don't you think? I told you we're not a propaganda outlet!" He knows his role in that regard.
Second, that effect is going to be more pronounced because it's their first time having one of their anchors do one of these debates, and they're going to want to show that their guy can do it well and impartially. They're going to want everything to go as smoothly as possible.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
So, uh, about those email servers. No, not those ones...
Quote:
Servers on the Trump Organization's domain, TrumpOrg.com, are using outdated software, run Windows Server 2003 and the built-in Internet Information Server 6 web server. Microsoft cut off support for this technology in July 2015, leaving the systems unpatched for the last 15 months.
Fox News moderator for tonight's debate. Should be, interesting...
True but Chris Wallace is a registered democrat though he says that is for convenience. In D.C. if you want to vote for mayor or councilman etc you need to be affiliated with a party and democrats are the only game in town. He has said he has voted for both parties in the past. As far as Fox news people go they likely picked the fairest possible moderator.
Though he has said he won't fact check the candidates but just keep time. Which I don't think is the correct way to go. You don't want to go overboard but some fact checking should occur to weed out the blatant lies.
If Donald Trump says the word “rigged” five times or more during tonight’s debate, bookies will be paying out. Oddsmakers are even taking bets on whether the presidential candidates will shake hands.
Gambling on politics is forbidden in the United States, but informal betting still goes on in this city that is all about the odds.
And offshore gambling operations are reporting a surge in wagers not only on who will be the next U.S. president, but even what the point spread will be in Ohio.
Pat Morrow, chief oddsmaker for Bovada, an offshore betting company based in the Caribbean, said in a phone call from Antigua that he was now giving 50-50 odds that Trump and Clinton will shake hands at the opening of the debate. Bovada will pay out if “WikiLeaks” is said four times or more, and Trump needs to say “tremendous” nine times for any payout.
“Sports is more quantifiable,” said Morrow, talking out Bovada’s usual line of betting. As the saying goes, he said, “Politics is the wisdom of the crowd — and the crowd doesn’t always have much wisdom.”
True but Chris Wallace is a registered democrat though he says that is for convenience. In D.C. if you want to vote for mayor or councilman etc you need to be affiliated with a party and democrats are the only game in town. He has said he has voted for both parties in the past. As far as Fox news people go they likely picked the fairest possible moderator.
Though he has said he won't fact check the candidates but just keep time. Which I don't think is the correct way to go. You don't want to go overboard but some fact checking should occur to weed out the blatant lies.
He has said that but he did fact check Trump during the primaries.
I'd definitely bet under 5 for "rigged" wordcount, Trump definitely has a "debate vocabulary" and has avoided lots of words and phrases that he uses constantly elsewhere.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Maybe the mod will hold them to task about actually answering the question as asked instead of just pivoting to their talking points. Hahaha I dare to dream...
Clinton's camp supposedly asked to dispense with the candidates' families' handshakes before the debate, which makes sense with who knows who they'll drag out.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
More than just not have the handshakes, they made sure they won't even cross paths.
Quote:
At previous debates, former President Bill Clinton has shaken the hand of Melania Trump — and sometimes the hands of the children of Donald J. Trump — as part of the predebate protocol.
It provides the audience in the room, and the people watching at home, with a moment of graciousness and a touch of celebrity.
But for the final debate, Hillary Clinton’s campaign wants a different setup, according to two people with direct knowledge of the situation who requested anonymity to speak candidly about debate negotiations.
Quote:
But the Clinton side is not taking any chances at the final presidential debate, on Wednesday night in Las Vegas, and has apparently gained approval of a different protocol for the entry of the candidates’ spouses and families into the debate hall.
The new arrangement calls for the candidates’ spouses to enter the hall closer to their seats, rather than crossing the room, and each other’s paths.
That would avoid any potential for confrontations, given Mr. Trump’s penchant for dramatic stunts.
On Tuesday, an aide to Mrs. Clinton declined to comment on the change, and aides to Mr. Trump did not respond to an email seeking comment.
It is possible, of course, that further negotiations could result in a different arrangement, if both sides agree, by the time the debate begins at 9 p.m. Eastern.
I get the feeling that after this election the debate commission is going to do some serious revamping to their rules to prevent a lot of the theatricality and showmanship we've seen this year.
I get the feeling that after this election the debate commission is going to do some serious revamping to their rules to prevent a lot of the theatricality and showmanship we've seen this year.
Why?
These have been the most watched debates in history.
These have been the most watched debates in history.
The reason for the high viewership is people rubber-necking to see the car crash. If you want to turn the election into even more of a reality show I suppose that's fine. I'd rather have it treated seriously with serious topics, serious discussion and most importantly, serious candidates.
The reason for the high viewership is people rubber-necking to see the car crash. If you want to turn the election into even more of a reality show I suppose that's fine. I'd rather have it treated seriously with serious topics, serious discussion and most importantly, serious candidates.
So would I but I don't think the commission is that interested in it otherwise they'd probably not have a gallery full of people and stronger moderators.
Keep in mind both major parties use the commission to negotiate and needle for slight advantages here and there. They are part puppet in this game.
