Debate Moderator Fact Checks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know if I should go to HR or not over the adult conversations. If I am in earshot of them and they belittle my beliefs (although not directly attacking me) can this be considered harassment?

It literally makes me physically uncomfortable to hear them praise that man

What on earth makes you feel so entitled as to police opinions different from yours? And how did your parents let you become this fragile? They should be embarrassed.

NP I don’t think the issue is that he has different political opinions. It’s that he’s a despicable person (racist, sexist and a criminal). Having said that, I don’t think there’s much that can be done unless there’s a no politics rule at the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump had every opportunity to win the debate with substance. He failed, which is completely on-brand for him.

Where was VP Harris' substance? She couldn't even answer the very first question (do you believe Americans are better off than they were 4 years ago?) without pivoting quickly into her own alleged upbringing an what she planned to do. The real-time tracking of the debate showed independent voters tracking more with Republicans than Democrats. Likewise, independent voters who watched the debate expecting to learn more about VP Harris' policy positions and future plans came away with little more than they had before the debate.

Former President Trump lost his cool when baited by VP Harris. He shouldn't have, but doing so didn't do her any favors with independent voters. Yet at the same time, he made numerous key points that resonated with independent voters. Can VP Harris really say the same? The press doesn't seem to think so after interviewing independent voters, who mostly seemed to say that they wanted to "see the fine print" of her plans. By the same token, independent voters seem to remember how much better off economically they were under Former President Trump, a feeling that is difficult to dislodge without a clear path from VP Harris that she can do the same. The reason? She has been VP for over 3.5 years and many of the promised benefits of the legislation she voted for haven't come to pass, so promises of future prosperity fell flat. Things have gotten worse, not better, for most Americans.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sigh. The Washington Post is not exactly known as an unbiased news source.

That said, Trump could have cited the moderator's bias when it came to fact checking, and how even with that bias, their facts were wrong. There are already a few well-known examples where the moderators so-called facts were incorrect (or half-true). It's almost as if ABC News knew the question, knew the answer that it thought was correct, and was prepared to fact check Trump if he gave anything but that allegedly correct answer. ABC News should apologize for getting its fact checks wrong, but it won't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Republicans who are bothered by the moderators fact checking Trump but not Harris aren't looking at the big picture.

Trump lied about 30 times (possibly more), and was fact-checked about 6 times. So over 20 times he was not fact checked for his lies.

Harris possibly lied a handful of times, maybe as many as 5-6 times. And was not fact checked.

They still let Trump get away with about 3 times as many lies as Harris without fact checking them.

The moderator job is to make sure there is decorum and move questions along not fact check that is what the senators do to each other

Fact checking was specifically agreed upon and allowed at this debate by both campaigns. Don't whine because what they agreed to actually happened. And it's not ABC's fault one of the debate participants can't seem to stop blatantly lying at every turn.

A discussion moderator or debate moderator is a person whose role is to act as a neutral participant in a debate or discussion, holds participants to time limits and tries to keep them from straying off the topic of the questions being raised in the debate. Nothing to do with fact checking that is not what a moderator does. In fact it wasn't in the rules and is a violation

ABC News released the debate rules for "Kamala Harris and Donald Trump – ABC News Presidential Debate" on Tuesday, Sept. 10, at 9:00 p.m. EDT, which will air live on ABC and stream live on the 24/7 streaming network ABC News Live, Disney+ and Hulu, and is available for simulcast. The debate will take place at the National Constitution Center (525 Arch St., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19106). "World News Tonight" anchor and managing editor David Muir and "World News Tonight" Sunday anchor and ABC News Live "Prime" anchor Linsey Davis will serve as moderators. Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump have qualified for the debate under the established criteria, and both have accepted the following debate rules, which include the following:

- The debate will be 90 minutes with two commercial breaks.

- The two seated moderators, David Muir and Linsey Davis, will be the only people asking questions.

- A coin flip was held virtually on Tuesday, Sept. 3, to determine podium placement and order of closing statements; former President Donald Trump won the coin toss and chose to select the order of statements. The former president will offer the last closing statement, and Vice President Harris selected the right podium position on screen (stage left).

- Candidates will be introduced by the moderators.

- The candidates enter upon introduction from opposite sides of the stage; the incumbent party will be introduced first.

- No opening statements; closing statements will be two minutes per candidate.

- Candidates will stand behind podiums for the duration of the debate.

- Props or prewritten notes are not allowed onstage.

- No topics or questions will be shared in advance with campaigns or candidates.

- Candidates will be given a pen, a pad of paper and a bottle of water.

- Candidates will have two-minute answers to questions, two-minute rebuttals, and one extra minute for follow-ups, clarifications, or responses.

- Candidates' microphones will be live only for the candidate whose turn it is to speak and muted when the time belongs to another candidate.

- Candidates will not be permitted to ask questions of each other.

- Campaign staff may not interact with candidates during commercial breaks.

- Moderators will seek to enforce timing agreements and ensure a civilized discussion.

- There will be no audience in the room.

I bolded where the fact-checking comes in, and that explains why it was only deployed when Trump was spewing dangerous outright lies.

The laughing the smiling the giggling while the other person is talking is all civilized. I wonder if that happens often in a workplace.

She was laughing at Trump for taking the bait. I was laughing too. That is called being a human.

May be we can try this during office meetings when we dont agree with someone and see if they take the bait lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sigh. The Washington Post is not exactly known as an unbiased news source.

That said, Trump could have cited the moderator's bias when it came to fact checking, and how even with that bias, their facts were wrong. There are already a few well-known examples where the moderators so-called facts were incorrect (or half-true). It's almost as if ABC News knew the question, knew the answer that it thought was correct, and was prepared to fact check Trump if he gave anything but that allegedly correct answer. ABC News should apologize for getting its fact checks wrong, but it won't.

What facts did the moderators get wrong? These are definitely not well known.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sigh. The Washington Post is not exactly known as an unbiased news source.

That said, Trump could have cited the moderator's bias when it came to fact checking, and how even with that bias, their facts were wrong. There are already a few well-known examples where the moderators so-called facts were incorrect (or half-true). It's almost as if ABC News knew the question, knew the answer that it thought was correct, and was prepared to fact check Trump if he gave anything but that allegedly correct answer. ABC News should apologize for getting its fact checks wrong, but it won't.

What facts did the moderators get wrong? These are definitely not well known.

Correction, not well known outside of the MAGA conspiracy network. Those who frequent Fox, OAN, and other alternative news sources that only portray the alternate reality that MAGA live in, know full well the alternative facts of the mainstream news are wrong.

[Anonymous]

What the media and the Democrats don’t understand is that they are 100% killing democracy in order to save it from a potential threat. It’s so obvious to swing voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What the media and the Democrats don’t understand is that they are 100% killing democracy in order to save it from a potential threat. It’s so obvious to swing voters.

Ok

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sigh. The Washington Post is not exactly known as an unbiased news source.

That said, Trump could have cited the moderator's bias when it came to fact checking, and how even with that bias, their facts were wrong. There are already a few well-known examples where the moderators so-called facts were incorrect (or half-true). It's almost as if ABC News knew the question, knew the answer that it thought was correct, and was prepared to fact check Trump if he gave anything but that allegedly correct answer. ABC News should apologize for getting its fact checks wrong, but it won't.

What facts did the moderators get wrong? These are definitely not well known.

The VP made several statements that were incorrect and should have been fact checked by the moderators. But the most negligent thing they did was not getting answers from the VP on her policy flips and the economy. This was the one and only time voters will see her questioned and they were unable to get answers from her on WHY the 180 degrees flip on the border wall, immigration, mandatory gun buybacks, fracking, and most importantly whether the American people are better off today than four years ago. Voters know Trump is scum. But they don’t know Kamala at all.

[Anonymous]

The most insidious power of the media is to ignore like peaceful and patriotic, fine people, and losers and suckers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump had every opportunity to win the debate with substance. He failed, which is completely on-brand for him.

Where was VP Harris' substance? She couldn't even answer the very first question (do you believe Americans are better off than they were 4 years ago?) without pivoting quickly into her own alleged upbringing an what she planned to do. The real-time tracking of the debate showed independent voters tracking more with Republicans than Democrats. Likewise, independent voters who watched the debate expecting to learn more about VP Harris' policy positions and future plans came away with little more than they had before the debate.

Former President Trump lost his cool when baited by VP Harris. He shouldn't have, but doing so didn't do her any favors with independent voters. Yet at the same time, he made numerous key points that resonated with independent voters. Can VP Harris really say the same? The press doesn't seem to think so after interviewing independent voters, who mostly seemed to say that they wanted to "see the fine print" of her plans. By the same token, independent voters seem to remember how much better off economically they were under Former President Trump, a feeling that is difficult to dislodge without a clear path from VP Harris that she can do the same. The reason? She has been VP for over 3.5 years and many of the promised benefits of the legislation she voted for haven't come to pass, so promises of future prosperity fell flat. Things have gotten worse, not better, for most Americans.

Actually, KH nanswered the Moderators questions. Unlike Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sigh. The Washington Post is not exactly known as an unbiased news source.

That said, Trump could have cited the moderator's bias when it came to fact checking, and how even with that bias, their facts were wrong. There are already a few well-known examples where the moderators so-called facts were incorrect (or half-true). It's almost as if ABC News knew the question, knew the answer that it thought was correct, and was prepared to fact check Trump if he gave anything but that allegedly correct answer. ABC News should apologize for getting its fact checks wrong, but it won't.

What facts did the moderators get wrong? These are definitely not well known.

The VP made several statements that were incorrect and should have been fact checked by the moderators. But the most negligent thing they did was not getting answers from the VP on her policy flips and the economy. This was the one and only time voters will see her questioned and they were unable to get answers from her on WHY the 180 degrees flip on the border wall, immigration, mandatory gun buybacks, fracking, and most importantly whether the American people are better off today than four years ago. Voters know Trump is scum. But they don’t know Kamala at all.

Please enlighten me on what Kamala said that needed to be faced checked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sigh. The Washington Post is not exactly known as an unbiased news source.

That said, Trump could have cited the moderator's bias when it came to fact checking, and how even with that bias, their facts were wrong. There are already a few well-known examples where the moderators so-called facts were incorrect (or half-true). It's almost as if ABC News knew the question, knew the answer that it thought was correct, and was prepared to fact check Trump if he gave anything but that allegedly correct answer. ABC News should apologize for getting its fact checks wrong, but it won't.

What facts did the moderators get wrong? These are definitely not well known.

The VP made several statements that were incorrect and should have been fact checked by the moderators. But the most negligent thing they did was not getting answers from the VP on her policy flips and the economy. This was the one and only time voters will see her questioned and they were unable to get answers from her on WHY the 180 degrees flip on the border wall, immigration, mandatory gun buybacks, fracking, and most importantly whether the American people are better off today than four years ago. Voters know Trump is scum. But they don’t know Kamala at all.

You didn’t answer the question. PP specifically the moderators gave incorrect facts when they were factchecking Trump. Please provide an example of an incorrect fact they provided when factchecking him.