You know the moderators are there to enforce the rules of the debate, right? They aren’t live fact checkers. Their job is to manage clocks, present questions, and occasionally, ask a followup question, not to defend one particular position or person.
Strawman, nobody is arguing the point you’re trying to make about the moderators themselves? I’m citing CNN as host and moderator, their anchors are just deaf weight seat filters under strict orders from zaslov and the billionaire.
They are saying that the network that wraps and produces the entire thing should have done it with a real time overlay graphic fed by a room of professional fact checkers working in real time to provide context (you did notice that the debate was coming into your living room through a magic plastic box and it was not actually a tiny window into a tiny room in your home that held two tiny old men inside arguing, right?)
This is extremely simple and completely necessary with trump - simple because he just repeats the same 5 lazy, limp lies, you wouldn’t even need to research in real time, just 5 big brightly colored buttons to press that display pre-written fact check graphics for each of those stale lies.
Imagine in your opinion though, a plain text box that says, "There is no support CNN has found for Mr. trump’s claim that ‘everyone in Mexico is a terrorist that is both murdering, and has just been murdered, at all times.’ is “defending one particular position or person”.
…how well he did quickly processing and responding to trump’s gish gallop and unchecked stream of consciousness mistruth firehose with little help from the impotent moderators
This ain’t you fam? Maybe read what you wrote before you accuse someone else of building a strawman.
You know the moderators are there to enforce the rules of the debate, right? They aren’t live fact checkers. Their job is to manage clocks, present questions, and occasionally, ask a followup question, not to defend one particular position or person.
Strawman, nobody is arguing the point you’re trying to make about the moderators themselves? I’m citing CNN as host and moderator, their anchors are just deaf weight seat filters under strict orders from zaslov and the billionaire.
They are saying that the network that wraps and produces the entire thing should have done it with a real time overlay graphic fed by a room of professional fact checkers working in real time to provide context (you did notice that the debate was coming into your living room through a magic plastic box and it was not actually a tiny window into a tiny room in your home that held two tiny old men inside arguing, right?)
This is extremely simple and completely necessary with trump - simple because he just repeats the same 5 lazy, limp lies, you wouldn’t even need to research in real time, just 5 big brightly colored buttons to press that display pre-written fact check graphics for each of those stale lies.
Imagine in your opinion though, a plain text box that says, "There is no support CNN has found for Mr. trump’s claim that ‘everyone in Mexico is a terrorist that is both murdering, and has just been murdered, at all times.’ is “defending one particular position or person”.
Child.
This ain’t you fam? Maybe read what you wrote before you accuse someone else of building a strawman.
Now take your shitty ad-hominems and fuck off.