W
WingedHussar
Guest
Or maybe the President of the United States does not take orders from a 3rd rate moderator and opponent hiding behind said moderator.
- Status
R
RolandThompsonGunner
Guest
If you agree to a debate, then yeah, you do kind of have to listen to the moderator. If you’re not willing or able to do that, then don’t agree to a debate. Or insist on a different moderator as a condition to debating. It’s not like the Trump team didn’t know Wallace was going to moderate.
It’s not like debates are statutory obligations. If Trump doesn’t want to, he doesn’t have to.
Last edited:
It does not follow that he is unclear because I interpreted differently than you.
Your logic there is fallacious.
W
WingedHussar
Guest
Then maybe the moderator should do his job instead of running interference for Biden.
R
RolandThompsonGunner
Guest
That’s fine, but “I’m the President and I don’t have to listen to moderators” doesn’t work either. If Trump feels like Wallace had his thumb on the scale, he’s free to insist on someone he thinks would be fairer as a condition to another debate. Or insist on different rules. Maybe “interruptions are cool” and the next debate can just be two old men blowing air horns at each other.
Last edited:
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
The quality of the moderator’s job is a value judgement. I’m not inclined to argue on those.
As for taking orders, ultimately no one on the stage has any obligations to the others beyond whatever agreements that they made.
W
WingedHussar
Guest
It does when Wallace starts running interference for Biden. If you want the moderator to actually be treated like a moderator, he has to actually act like a moderator.
No.
That is ambiguous.
Unclear is something that is difficult to understand.
While it could be argued that the moderator was talking over Trump at the time and therefore it is unclear; it would not be the fault of Trump.
Only because other people were talking at the same time.
P
Pattylt
Guest
My honest opinion of Trumps response of saying “Stand back and stand by” was interpreted by me as stay in the background but await my needing you. It seems the Proud Boys took it’s the same meaning I did and began printing T-shirts with the comment and “Yes, sir” added.
Honestly, I thought it sounded as a very odd response and immediately wondered if it was a dog whistle to those types of groups. It sounded like a slogan. A wink and nod. It certainly did not sound like a condemnation of any kind! At the time, I didn’t know who the Proud Boys even we’re other than being classified by Biden as a White Superiority type group.
If he truly had no idea who they were (like me) then after the debate it would have been nice had he added after claiming he didn’t know who they were that he also didn’t approve of that organization. YMMV.
Honestly, I thought it sounded as a very odd response and immediately wondered if it was a dog whistle to those types of groups. It sounded like a slogan. A wink and nod. It certainly did not sound like a condemnation of any kind! At the time, I didn’t know who the Proud Boys even we’re other than being classified by Biden as a White Superiority type group.
If he truly had no idea who they were (like me) then after the debate it would have been nice had he added after claiming he didn’t know who they were that he also didn’t approve of that organization. YMMV.
Do we really need to argue over the usage of the word unclear and ambiguous?
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
Oh c’mon you know” it depends on what the meaning of the word “is” is
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
Their leader is not even white.
Actually, when this part of the debate started, I initially figured Trump wasn’t going to say anything against any of the groups since he has already done so many times.
I was a little disappointed that he didn’t point that out.
Then I started wondering what they really wanted. Since Trump had already denounced racism many times and in many different venues, I have to wonder what exactly the moderator wanted. Other than to mention Trump and racist ideologues in the same sentence.
I was a little disappointed that he didn’t point that out.
Then I started wondering what they really wanted. Since Trump had already denounced racism many times and in many different venues, I have to wonder what exactly the moderator wanted. Other than to mention Trump and racist ideologues in the same sentence.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
He could have easily cleared his name and got things in his favor to contrast Biden’s refusal to condemn antifa.
Last edited:
Given the moderator protection of Biden, I doubt that would have gone far.
Nonetheless it was a missed opportunity.
P
Pattylt
Guest
I ve heard this…is it a national organization then where the Proud Boys acknowledges his leadership?
I ask because a similar situation within the BLM is the claim of a Marxist organization that isn’t recognized by the majority of BLM proponents.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
They have chapters and stuff so I think so.
P
Pattylt
Guest
Because this was a presidential debate where millions of people were watching and could hear him disclaim these groups once and for all. I agree he has denounced them before but many people have only heard one side of the story…or were still unsure of his position. That’s why I felt it was a missed opportunity for him to say it, loud and clear. A simple, “As I’ve said many times, I denounce these groups” would have settled it…National TV and prime time! Instead, it seemed as though he was not denouncing them…he was skirting around denouncing them!
And I’m not alone on my opinion…I e heard many others in conservative media and Republicans state it was a missed opportunity!
Well…
That is the rub.
When exactly is “once and for all”?
He has repeatedly spoken out against racism.
Many times, in fact.
When exactly does this “once and for all” happen?
I agree the missed opportunity happened.
But he also did denounce hate groups at that time. The moderator didn’t want that…he wanted something else, and kept pushing for that specific.
- Status