Debate Moderator Fact Checks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump was given the last word on multiple topics -- a chance to respond after Harris spoke. She was not accorded the same opportunity. He was given longer to speak than Harris (by about five minutes). Seems like these facts suggest the moderators were biased in favor of Trump, not Harris.

He spoke longer because the moderators decided to ask him follow up questions. Which was awesome. Next time ask both candidates follow up questions. It’s call journalism!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump was given the last word on multiple topics -- a chance to respond after Harris spoke. She was not accorded the same opportunity. He was given longer to speak than Harris (by about five minutes). Seems like these facts suggest the moderators were biased in favor of Trump, not Harris.

Trump was given the last word on EVERY topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

No she didn’t. First question out of the gate was are Americans better off than four years ago. Her answer? She has a “passion for small business.” Wut? She literally has never worked a day in the private sector in her adult life. She’s never met a regulation she didn’t like. Did the moderators press here for a yes or no? Of course not.

She had a summer job when she was in college, so I guess it depends on how you define “adult”. From my perspective, I’m impressed by her career-long dedication to public service— given that she’s running for the ultimate public service job. I prefer that — by far — to someone who was given money and jobs by his daddy yet actually managed to lose money while stiffing his contractors and others that he owed. The reality show gig doesn’t make his resume look any better. It’s wild that so many people who claimed that government should be run like a business voted for someone with a string of failed businesses.

As to “passions” — you don’t have to work for a small business to have a passion for supporting them. I’m sure you can come up with your own analogies, but I don’t have to be an artist to have a passion for supporting the arts; I don’t have to be a chef to have a passion for good food; I don’t have to be a pilot or a tour guide to have a passion for travel; I don’t have to write books to have a passion for reading them. You get the idea.

Your boy’s “passions” are better left undescribed, but cozying up to dictators, cheating on his wives, hanging out with people like Epstein and Roy Cohn, and fomenting hate aren’t admirable interests for a US President.

PP, you are a rock star!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

No she didn’t. First question out of the gate was are Americans better off than four years ago. Her answer? She has a “passion for small business.” Wut? She literally has never worked a day in the private sector in her adult life. She’s never met a regulation she didn’t like. Did the moderators press here for a yes or no? Of course not.

She had a summer job when she was in college, so I guess it depends on how you define “adult”. From my perspective, I’m impressed by her career-long dedication to public service— given that she’s running for the ultimate public service job. I prefer that — by far — to someone who was given money and jobs by his daddy yet actually managed to lose money while stiffing his contractors and others that he owed. The reality show gig doesn’t make his resume look any better. It’s wild that so many people who claimed that government should be run like a business voted for someone with a string of failed businesses.

As to “passions” — you don’t have to work for a small business to have a passion for supporting them. I’m sure you can come up with your own analogies, but I don’t have to be an artist to have a passion for supporting the arts; I don’t have to be a chef to have a passion for good food; I don’t have to be a pilot or a tour guide to have a passion for travel; I don’t have to write books to have a passion for reading them. You get the idea.

Your boy’s “passions” are better left undescribed, but cozying up to dictators, cheating on his wives, hanging out with people like Epstein and Roy Cohn, and fomenting hate aren’t admirable interests for a US President.

PP, you are a rock star!

Kamala, who knew? A gun toting, McDonalds eating, border wall loving, pro fracking gal!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump was given the last word on multiple topics -- a chance to respond after Harris spoke. She was not accorded the same opportunity. He was given longer to speak than Harris (by about five minutes). Seems like these facts suggest the moderators were biased in favor of Trump, not Harris.

He spoke longer because the moderators decided to ask him follow up questions. Which was awesome. Next time ask both candidates follow up questions. It’s call journalism!

Rewatch the debate. On most occasions, Trump interrupted the moderators to "get the last word in" and they let him. That wasn't the moderators asking for it. He barged in and took it. It was rude as hell, and it was only because he was so unhinged that it was remotely tolerable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Still waiting for someone to respond to this

It’s an uncomfortable subject to talk about. But from the Minnesota Department of Health indicates that eight babies were born alive following botched abortions during Walz’s time as governor, three in 2019 and five in 2021. Only three of the infants, one in 2019 and two in 2021, were reported to have received “comfort care measures.” None of the infants survived. That, plus comments from former Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, who said that he supported measures in which “the infant would be kept comfortable” after birth until the mother decided what to do. Also, the a state legislators across the country that have pushed legislation removing all limits on the procedure.

Trump made a mess of his answer, as usual. But this isn’t as cut and dry an issue that most people think. So for the ABC moderator to jump in with a voice of God answer (ironically) was incorrect and inappropriate.

This topic will be brought up in the VP debate and Walz will have an appropriate response because HE WILL BE PREPARED. Unlike Donald who brought serious drunk uncle vibes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Still waiting for someone to respond to this

No one will, because it was yet another false assertion from a MAGA who heard it in the echo chamber, repeated it here and realized they cannot back it up.

I think they are still processing how thoroughly Harris demolished Trump on the debate stage. They expected their god emperor to trounce her with his typical bombast and vitriol. In the weeks leading up to the debate, they latched onto "she's stupid and incoherent" because she wouldn't do a press interview or speak without a teleprompter/notes or publish her policy positions (never once giving her leeway to vet/select a VP, put a campaign together and fundraise from a running start in late July). The fact that a career prosecutor who has also been an AG, Senator and VP wouldn't be prepared is laughable. But they drank the Koolaid anyways and are now struggling to cope. It can't be because she was prepared and talented. It has to be because she cheated or the moderators were unfair. After all, she's a POC woman and Donald Trump is a "man's man who always tells it like it is". To think otherwise, would violate their worldview. I relish watching them struggle to cope with a younger, more talented opponent who has all of the energy and momentum right now.

Demolishing Trump wasn’t victory though. No matter how good it felt. Victory was explaining to the undecided voters why she isn’t a continuation of the Biden policies. Which the vast majority of American hate. Which she completely failed to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Still waiting for someone to respond to this

No one will, because it was yet another false assertion from a MAGA who heard it in the echo chamber, repeated it here and realized they cannot back it up.

I think they are still processing how thoroughly Harris demolished Trump on the debate stage. They expected their god emperor to trounce her with his typical bombast and vitriol. In the weeks leading up to the debate, they latched onto "she's stupid and incoherent" because she wouldn't do a press interview or speak without a teleprompter/notes or publish her policy positions (never once giving her leeway to vet/select a VP, put a campaign together and fundraise from a running start in late July). The fact that a career prosecutor who has also been an AG, Senator and VP wouldn't be prepared is laughable. But they drank the Koolaid anyways and are now struggling to cope. It can't be because she was prepared and talented. It has to be because she cheated or the moderators were unfair. After all, she's a POC woman and Donald Trump is a "man's man who always tells it like it is". To think otherwise, would violate their worldview. I relish watching them struggle to cope with a younger, more talented opponent who has all of the energy and momentum right now.

Demolishing Trump wasn’t victory though. No matter how good it felt. Victory was explaining to the undecided voters why she isn’t a continuation of the Biden policies. Which the vast majority of American hate. Which she completely failed to do.

Vast? Ehhh, ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Still waiting for someone to respond to this

It’s an uncomfortable subject to talk about. But from the Minnesota Department of Health indicates that eight babies were born alive following botched abortions during Walz’s time as governor, three in 2019 and five in 2021. Only three of the infants, one in 2019 and two in 2021, were reported to have received “comfort care measures.” None of the infants survived. That, plus comments from former Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, who said that he supported measures in which “the infant would be kept comfortable” after birth until the mother decided what to do. Also, the a state legislators across the country that have pushed legislation removing all limits on the procedure.

Trump made a mess of his answer, as usual. But this isn’t as cut and dry an issue that most people think. So for the ABC moderator to jump in with a voice of God answer (ironically) was incorrect and inappropriate.

Your characterization of Northam’s statement is false, since it wasn’t about abortions but about how to care for babies who are born with conditions not compatible with life. I’m going to therefore assume what you have to say about Minnesota is also BS, but feel free to link a reliable source if you actually want people to discuss this.

Sorry, but you’ve got it incorrect. Northum was absolutely responding to a question about abortion. I’m pro choice BTW. I’m also pro press not putting their thumbs on the scale during elections.

DP. While it was in a conversation about legislation related to the third-trimester abortions, the quote was about providing comfort care to infants with severe abnormalities incompatible with life rather than subject them to invasive resuscitation measures.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-ralph-northam-virginia-abortion-952598071326

The overarching view of Democrats when discussing this legislation is that third-trimester abortions should be a conversation between a women and her doctor, not decided by the government. Women are not waking up one day and requesting an abortion at 8mo pregnant. Doctors are not performing abortions on healthy, late third trimester fetuses (and this should go without saying, but not live babies either). More often than not these are very wanted pregnancies that have some kind of developmental issue or fetal demise. The fact that the right are portraying women as requesting late third trimester abortions without a thought is just insulting to women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Still waiting for someone to respond to this

No one will, because it was yet another false assertion from a MAGA who heard it in the echo chamber, repeated it here and realized they cannot back it up.

I think they are still processing how thoroughly Harris demolished Trump on the debate stage. They expected their god emperor to trounce her with his typical bombast and vitriol. In the weeks leading up to the debate, they latched onto "she's stupid and incoherent" because she wouldn't do a press interview or speak without a teleprompter/notes or publish her policy positions (never once giving her leeway to vet/select a VP, put a campaign together and fundraise from a running start in late July). The fact that a career prosecutor who has also been an AG, Senator and VP wouldn't be prepared is laughable. But they drank the Koolaid anyways and are now struggling to cope. It can't be because she was prepared and talented. It has to be because she cheated or the moderators were unfair. After all, she's a POC woman and Donald Trump is a "man's man who always tells it like it is". To think otherwise, would violate their worldview. I relish watching them struggle to cope with a younger, more talented opponent who has all of the energy and momentum right now.

Demolishing Trump wasn’t victory though. No matter how good it felt. Victory was explaining to the undecided voters why she isn’t a continuation of the Biden policies. Which the vast majority of American hate. Which she completely failed to do.

Vast? Ehhh, ok.

Biden had a 33% approval rating when he dropped out. So, yeah, vast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Still waiting for someone to respond to this

No one will, because it was yet another false assertion from a MAGA who heard it in the echo chamber, repeated it here and realized they cannot back it up.

I think they are still processing how thoroughly Harris demolished Trump on the debate stage. They expected their god emperor to trounce her with his typical bombast and vitriol. In the weeks leading up to the debate, they latched onto "she's stupid and incoherent" because she wouldn't do a press interview or speak without a teleprompter/notes or publish her policy positions (never once giving her leeway to vet/select a VP, put a campaign together and fundraise from a running start in late July). The fact that a career prosecutor who has also been an AG, Senator and VP wouldn't be prepared is laughable. But they drank the Koolaid anyways and are now struggling to cope. It can't be because she was prepared and talented. It has to be because she cheated or the moderators were unfair. After all, she's a POC woman and Donald Trump is a "man's man who always tells it like it is". To think otherwise, would violate their worldview. I relish watching them struggle to cope with a younger, more talented opponent who has all of the energy and momentum right now.

Demolishing Trump wasn’t victory though. No matter how good it felt. Victory was explaining to the undecided voters why she isn’t a continuation of the Biden policies. Which the vast majority of American hate. Which she completely failed to do.

Vast? Ehhh, ok.

Biden had a 33% approval rating when he dropped out. So, yeah, vast.

You're equating approval rating with hate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Still waiting for someone to respond to this

No one will, because it was yet another false assertion from a MAGA who heard it in the echo chamber, repeated it here and realized they cannot back it up.

I think they are still processing how thoroughly Harris demolished Trump on the debate stage. They expected their god emperor to trounce her with his typical bombast and vitriol. In the weeks leading up to the debate, they latched onto "she's stupid and incoherent" because she wouldn't do a press interview or speak without a teleprompter/notes or publish her policy positions (never once giving her leeway to vet/select a VP, put a campaign together and fundraise from a running start in late July). The fact that a career prosecutor who has also been an AG, Senator and VP wouldn't be prepared is laughable. But they drank the Koolaid anyways and are now struggling to cope. It can't be because she was prepared and talented. It has to be because she cheated or the moderators were unfair. After all, she's a POC woman and Donald Trump is a "man's man who always tells it like it is". To think otherwise, would violate their worldview. I relish watching them struggle to cope with a younger, more talented opponent who has all of the energy and momentum right now.

Demolishing Trump wasn’t victory though. No matter how good it felt. Victory was explaining to the undecided voters why she isn’t a continuation of the Biden policies. Which the vast majority of American hate. Which she completely failed to do.

Vast? Ehhh, ok.

Biden had a 33% approval rating when he dropped out. So, yeah, vast.

You're equating approval rating with hate?

When the alternative is Donald Trump? Heck yeah.

[Anonymous]

The “moderators” should have either fact-checked BOTH candidates or neither. Kamala Harris told some whoppers too:

- Trump *opposes* a national abortion ban.
https://apnews.com/article/republicans-abortion-party-platform-trump-rnc-5561e857c5501df9864ab8ca666d8bc5

- He favors IVF and has even said the government should pay for it, for crying out loud!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-wants-make-ivf-treatments-paid-government-insurance-compani-rcna168804

- He *condemned* the Charlottesville neo-Nazis. Her claim that he called them “very fine people” has been debunked.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

Sure would be nice to watch a debate in which both candidates are treated equally. CNN did a good job in this regard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump was given the last word on multiple topics -- a chance to respond after Harris spoke. She was not accorded the same opportunity. He was given longer to speak than Harris (by about five minutes). Seems like these facts suggest the moderators were biased in favor of Trump, not Harris.

He spoke longer because the moderators decided to ask him follow up questions. Which was awesome. Next time ask both candidates follow up questions. It’s call journalism!

Rewatch the debate. On most occasions, Trump interrupted the moderators to "get the last word in" and they let him. That wasn't the moderators asking for it. He barged in and took it. It was rude as hell, and it was only because he was so unhinged that it was remotely tolerable.

Trump had 6 extra minutes to speak in total than Kamala Harris during the debate because the moderators let him get away with it. That he chose to use that time to babble about immigrants eating cats and crowd sizes was his own bad judgement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The “moderators” should have either fact-checked BOTH candidates or neither. Kamala Harris told some whoppers too:

- Trump *opposes* a national abortion ban.
https://apnews.com/article/republicans-abortion-party-platform-trump-rnc-5561e857c5501df9864ab8ca666d8bc5

- He favors IVF and has even said the government should pay for it, for crying out loud!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-wants-make-ivf-treatments-paid-government-insurance-compani-rcna168804

- He *condemned* the Charlottesville neo-Nazis. Her claim that he called them “very fine people” has been debunked.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

Sure would be nice to watch a debate in which both candidates are treated equally. CNN did a good job in this regard.

Trump is a serial liar and has been getting away with it for years because nobody's challenged him on it. He's fortunate he got off this lightly. He lost the debate because he doesn't know a single thing about policy. He lost the debate because he has a "concept of a plan" for health care that he started talking about in 2015 (i.e., he's got nothing). He lost because he couldn't control his emotions. He lost because he was talking about the imaginary eating of pets. But he's got MAGA to make excuses for his failure, of course...