VP Debate moderator biased for Obama (CNN, McCain, American, election)

[*Danielle*]

Why? She will be asking questions to both people...The same question with the same time frame for an answer...So why? How could a bias effect the debate format? Plus, how do you know she is not a 'puglican'? She has recieved some Christian Journalist awards...so maybe her bias is right leaning...

[domergurl]

Originally Posted by bentlebee

This woman should resign by her self because of her being biased and her upcoming book, if that is not happening than she should be removed!

Wah wah wah ... even McCain doesn't care ... grow up!

I can see it now... Biden can give the debate to end all debates, he can be Abra-freaking-ham Lincoln debater and all you little marys are going to sit there in a huff and hold your breath because <turn it up to super whiney voice> Gwen Ifill is biassssssssssed ... the media isn't faiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir ... the liberal meeeeeeeeeeediaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ... poor sah-wah ...

As Bill the Cat eloquently says, ACK!!!

[justNancy]

Originally Posted by Pedro2008

I'm shocked I tell ya! Simply shocked!

Let me guess...

She's an African American female also

As if the Republicans didn't know this? We've known for weeks who the moderator was going to be. Why complain now? Jim Lehrer did not show ANY bias when he moderated Friday's debate. Out of curiosity, I just googled her name and got this as the first link. No worries about Gwen Ifill | Midwest Voices

"Ifill is one of the smartest, most respected journalists on the scene. She would no more taint her professional reputation by slanting a debate than dance on a tabletop during The NewsHour."

I agree 100%.

What do I think? I believe they need every excuse they can think of, because Palin is screwing up so much and they're afraid she might travel back into the Twilight Zone as she did during her last interview when asked about the bailout. All I could do was stare at my TV and go

We all know she won't be able to answer any difficult questions. However, she's been coached so much that if she has a good memory, she should skate by pretty easily if her answers are brief and controlled. That's why the format was changed by the Republicans. What more do they want? I know - a teleprompter! After all, the expectations for her have been set so low that if she completes a coherent sentence, the Republicans will say she won! She clearly didn't know Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae were privately owned, and she couldn't come up with a single Supreme Court Decision except for Roe v Wade. The latter is shocking to me. As I wrote in another thread, she could have kept it very general, i.e., slavery, affirmative action, death penalty issues, segregation, etc. She obviously doesn't read the newspaper, watch the news or care about anything tht goes on outside the State of Alaska. That said, Supreme Court rulings affect the entire country, don't they? One would think a governor would be up-to-date and just in June there was one on child rape & the death penalty. OMG! I just googled Supreme Court, Alaska and got this
Alaska politicians react to U.S. Supreme Court ruling on punitive damages - Juneau Empire
Well, I did read that she never goes to Juneau.

This campaign might actually hurt her political career if McCain isn't elected. The people in Alaska don't want a to be known as the state with the clueless governor. That's just my opinion.

Edit: So what does being a Black female have to do with it? Are you saying Blacks aren't voting for McCain or females?

[jkbatca]

Originally Posted by *Danielle*

Why? She will be asking questions to both people...The same question with the same time frame for an answer...So why? How could a bias effect the debate format? Plus, how do you know she is not a 'puglican'? She has recieved some Christian Journalist awards...so maybe her bias is right leaning...

Well then if both candidates are just going to be asked a set of pre-approved questions, and there's absolutely no interaction with the moderator or between the candidates themselves, then why bother having a "debate"? Where's the "debate" part of this at all? Might as well just go to both candidate's web site...

That's why the McCain/Obama "debate" was so void of any new information, everything was pure scripted... The result of the McCain/Obama "debate" was nooone was persuaded to choose the other candidate based on what transpired.

[*Danielle*]

Originally Posted by jkbatca

Well then if both candidates are just going to be asked a set of pre-approved questions, and there's absolutely no interaction with the moderator or between the candidates themselves, then why bother having a "debate"? Where's the "debate" part of this at all? Might as well just go to both candidate's web site...

That's why the McCain/Obama "debate" was so void of any new information, everything was pure scripted... The result of the McCain/Obama "debate" was nooone was persuaded to choose the other candidate based on what transpired.

They had to curb the rules of the debate for Palin...The McSame camp did not want to give them time to go back and forth...So uh...you can thank 'ole Johnny for that sexist rule in this debate... They said she would spend too much time "defending herself" instead of answering questions...


BOO HOO

[NCyank]

She may be able to be unbiased (but I don't think she has been in the past) but either way she will have the appearance of bias given her potential profit from a BO election win. She should, before asking one question, officially disclose her potential conflict of interest. Let the viewers of the debate decide if her questions are fair to both sides.

[justNancy]

Originally Posted by Old Gringo

If either of them could be neutral for one night and offer the same questions to each candidate, then OK. Limbaugh asking Biden, "Why do you hate America?" while asking Palin, "Could you explain your love for America?" would not be fair and balanced, for example. Just thought that needed to be pointed out to Limbaugh/Hannity followers.

I agree. If the moderator were Rachel Maddow, I'd say "she's openly liberal, so she should be replaced." From everything I've read (in reliable publications) the book is not praising Obama at all. In fact, in an earlier interview she said "I still don't know if he'll be a good president. I'm still capable of looking at his pros and cons in a political sense."

She added: "No one's ever assumed a white reporter can't cover a white candidate."

[brattpowered]

News of Gwen's book came out long before John McCain agreed to let her moderate.

Another poor vetting job by Mr. McCain.

[domergurl]

Originally Posted by NCyank

She may be able to be unbiased (but I don't think she has been in the past) but either way she will have the appearance of bias given her potential profit from a BO election win. She should, before asking one question, officially disclose her potential conflict of interest. Let the viewers of the debate decide if her questions are fair to both sides.

It's all over the place now. Gwen Ifill doesn't have to 'splain anything to anyone. Ya'll are acting like you are going to see that spoof debate SNL did with Hillary and Obama... suhlammmmmmmmmmmm dunk ... nailed it!

How has she been unbiased in the past? Are you referring to the so called nasty look she gave Dicky C??? Please ... don't act like a liberal.

[kidcanaduh]

The mod will not allow McPalin to get away with non-answers, dodges and weaves.

Johnboy's wet dream ends officially tomorrow night.