SURPRISE! Moderator of Tonight’s Democrat Debate Met With Campaign Teams Yesterday

[Stephanie]

get a load of this BS. NOT only are these Progressives only ALLOWING six debates. Now they are holding one on a Saturday when hardly anyone will care to watch. but the so called, moderators, are holding MEETINGS with the candidates. but there won't any bias I'm sure they will swear to it. How slimy is that party? vote them out in 2016

SNIP
In case you haven’t heard, there’s a Democratic Party debate on CBS News at 9 PM tonight. It should be interesting to watch, especially if you know that the moderator John Dickerson consulted privately with each candidate’s campaign team yesterday.

Politico buried the story under a boring headline:

With just three on stage, Democratic debate moderator plans to dive deep

This Saturday’s second Democratic debate will be a much smaller affair than the first. With only three candidates on stage, CBS News plans to delve deep into the issues with each candidate and have taken advantage of the smaller pool by doing some intense research.

Moderator John Dickerson and his team met with each of the campaigns for more than an hour to discuss the major issues at play in the race, sources on the campaigns said, describing the pre-interview as “informational in nature.” Dickerson is not giving candidates previews of his questions for the debate.

all of it here:
SURPRISE! Moderator of Tonight's Democrat Debate Met With Campaign Teams Yesterday - Progressives Today

 

[Auld Phart]

Wonder if they took notes, or used a tape recorder, so they could remember the questions they're authorized to ask?

 

[Arianrhod]

Hmm, let's see what's got Stephanie's tights in a twist this time. From the link she provided:

"Moderator John Dickerson and his team met with each of the campaigns for more than an hour to discuss the major issues at play in the race, sources on the campaigns said, describing the pre-interview as “informational in nature.” Dickerson is not giving candidates previews of his questions for the debate."

And this is controversial because -?

If the moderator had met with only one candidate's team (Note: it does not say "with the candidates," only with their teams), that would have been inequitable, and you can bet the other two candidates would have objected.

But given the tenor of the first debate (which y'all were so proud that you didn't watch), the goal of tonight's is to - wait for it - delve deeper into the issues!

OMG, what a controversial idea!

You people crack me up...

If you want to be OUTRAGED about something, it should be that Trump et al. didn't think of this themselves. You can bet the GOP candidates in '20 will learn from their mistakes...

 

[Eaglewings]

The last Dem forum was boring.
But will also add that the only one that didn't seem rehearsed in the last Right debate is Trump.

 

[Pogo]

Why would a moderator NOT consult with the participants? Doesn't everybody need to know what the format is, what the time allowance and rebuttal protocols will be?

I mean use yer frickin' head.

And whining that a debate is on a Saturday? Reallly? If it's not at 9:42 on a Wednesday morning it's "fixed" because that's what works for you and you have nothing like YouTube to time shift it.....

SMH

 

[Arianrhod]

The last Dem forum was boring.
But will also add that the only one that didn't seem rehearsed in the last Right debate is Trump.

Yeah, I know. Discussion of the issues can be less than entertaining, but some of those issues will have a direct or indirect impact on your life and your future, so it's wise to pay attention. If you don't want to listen, read the transcript afterwards.

If you want to be entertained, you've got Hulu and Netflix.

 

[jwoodie]

The last Dem forum was boring.
But will also add that the only one that didn't seem rehearsed in the last Right debate is Trump.

Yeah, I know. Discussion of the issues can be less than entertaining, but some of those issues will have a direct or indirect impact on your life and your future, so it's wise to pay attention. If you don't want to listen, read the transcript afterwards.

If you want to be entertained, you've got Hulu and Netflix.

[IGNORE]

 

[007]

get a load of this BS. NOT only are these Progressives only ALLOWING six debates. Now they are holding one on a Saturday when hardly anyone will care to watch. but the so called, moderators, are holding MEETINGS with the candidates. but there won't any bias I'm sure they will swear to it. How slimy is that party? vote them out in 2016

SNIP
In case you haven’t heard, there’s a Democratic Party debate on CBS News at 9 PM tonight. It should be interesting to watch, especially if you know that the moderator John Dickerson consulted privately with each candidate’s campaign team yesterday.

Politico buried the story under a boring headline:

With just three on stage, Democratic debate moderator plans to dive deep

This Saturday’s second Democratic debate will be a much smaller affair than the first. With only three candidates on stage, CBS News plans to delve deep into the issues with each candidate and have taken advantage of the smaller pool by doing some intense research.

Moderator John Dickerson and his team met with each of the campaigns for more than an hour to discuss the major issues at play in the race, sources on the campaigns said, describing the pre-interview as “informational in nature.” Dickerson is not giving candidates previews of his questions for the debate.

all of it here:
SURPRISE! Moderator of Tonight's Democrat Debate Met With Campaign Teams Yesterday - Progressives Today

Not only that, but met ONE ON ONE with EACH CANDIDATE.

But of course this is OK since it's the DEMS doing it. Had the moderators for a republican debate met ONE ON ONE with EACH CANDIDATE PRIOR to the debate, the progs would wetting their pants by the millions. The melt downs would be EPIC.

Just one example of the TWO FACED HYPOCRISY of the left.

 

[Arianrhod]

Had the moderators for a republican debate met ONE ON ONE with EACH CANDIDATE PRIOR to the debate, the progs would wetting their pants by the millions. The melt downs would be EPIC.

No.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Ground rules and topics are easily dealt with in a letter.

There is no legitimate reason for one on one talks with candidates teams unless your only purpose is to make them look good.. In other words, they told the moderator what questions they can ask and what areas are off limits.

This pretty much rules out any ambiguity that the show is not choreographed and set up.. No Biases here...

 

[Arianrhod]

There is no legitimate reason for one on one talks with candidates teams unless your only purpose is to make them look good.. In other words, they told the moderator what questions they can ask and what areas are off limits.

You were there? You took notes?

 

[Billy_Bob]

There is no legitimate reason for one on one talks with candidates teams unless your only purpose is to make them look good.. In other words, they told the moderator what questions they can ask and what areas are off limits.

You were there? You took notes?

I have moderated debates on may occasions.. What they have done is not only dishonest, it leads to major questions about the moderators biases and personal integrity..

But then I remember this is a DEMOCRAT debate (I mean show)!

 

[Arianrhod]

There is no legitimate reason for one on one talks with candidates teams unless your only purpose is to make them look good.. In other words, they told the moderator what questions they can ask and what areas are off limits.

You were there? You took notes?

I have moderated debates on may occasions.. What they have done is not only dishonest, it leads to major questions about the moderators biases and personal integrity.

Except they did not meet with the candidates, only with their teams. It says so right there in the OP. So your prognostication is based on erroneous information and/or a blinkered grudge.

Do continue, though. It's fun to watch.

 

[Pogo]

Ground rules and topics are easily dealt with in a letter.

There is no legitimate reason for one on one talks with candidates teams unless your only purpose is to make them look good.. In other words, they told the moderator what questions they can ask and what areas are off limits.

This pretty much rules out any ambiguity that the show is not choreographed and set up.. No Biases here...

Speculation fallacy dismissed.

 

[Billy_Bob]

There is no legitimate reason for one on one talks with candidates teams unless your only purpose is to make them look good.. In other words, they told the moderator what questions they can ask and what areas are off limits.

You were there? You took notes?

I have moderated debates on may occasions.. What they have done is not only dishonest, it leads to major questions about the moderators biases and personal integrity.

Except they did not meet with the candidates, only with their teams. It says so right there in the OP. So your prognostication is based on erroneous information and/or a blinkered grudge.

Do continue, though. It's fun to watch.

For what legitimate purpose?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Ground rules and topics are easily dealt with in a letter.

There is no legitimate reason for one on one talks with candidates teams unless your only purpose is to make them look good.. In other words, they told the moderator what questions they can ask and what areas are off limits.

This pretty much rules out any ambiguity that the show is not choreographed and set up.. No Biases here...

Speculation fallacy dismissed.

No speculation involved.. A moderator is to be IMPARTIAL. What they have done is remove that impartiality making this nothing more than a choreographed show.

Please remove head from ass... It helps in seeing reality.

 

[Pogo]

get a load of this BS. NOT only are these Progressives only ALLOWING six debates. Now they are holding one on a Saturday when hardly anyone will care to watch. but the so called, moderators, are holding MEETINGS with the candidates. but there won't any bias I'm sure they will swear to it. How slimy is that party? vote them out in 2016

SNIP
In case you haven’t heard, there’s a Democratic Party debate on CBS News at 9 PM tonight. It should be interesting to watch, especially if you know that the moderator John Dickerson consulted privately with each candidate’s campaign team yesterday.

Politico buried the story under a boring headline:

With just three on stage, Democratic debate moderator plans to dive deep

This Saturday’s second Democratic debate will be a much smaller affair than the first. With only three candidates on stage, CBS News plans to delve deep into the issues with each candidate and have taken advantage of the smaller pool by doing some intense research.

Moderator John Dickerson and his team met with each of the campaigns for more than an hour to discuss the major issues at play in the race, sources on the campaigns said, describing the pre-interview as “informational in nature.” Dickerson is not giving candidates previews of his questions for the debate.

all of it here:
SURPRISE! Moderator of Tonight's Democrat Debate Met With Campaign Teams Yesterday - Progressives Today

Not only that, but met ONE ON ONE with EACH CANDIDATE.

But of course this is OK since it's the DEMS doing it. Had the moderators for a republican debate met ONE ON ONE with EACH CANDIDATE PRIOR to the debate, the progs would wetting their pants by the millions. The melt downs would be EPIC.

Just one example of the TWO FACED HYPOCRISY of the left.

News flash for the news-deprived:

The Duopoly Party (variously called "Democratic" or "Republican" as needed) ALWAYS sets the table on what Presidential debates are going to talk about. That collusion has been going on since they jointly formed the bogus "Commission on Presidential Debates" to ensure the Duopoly gets what it's comfortable with, back in the 1980s.

This ain't new. The fix has been in for literally decades.

 

[Arianrhod]

There is no legitimate reason for one on one talks with candidates teams unless your only purpose is to make them look good.. In other words, they told the moderator what questions they can ask and what areas are off limits.

You were there? You took notes?

I have moderated debates on may occasions.. What they have done is not only dishonest, it leads to major questions about the moderators biases and personal integrity.

Except they did not meet with the candidates, only with their teams. It says so right there in the OP. So your prognostication is based on erroneous information and/or a blinkered grudge.

Do continue, though. It's fun to watch.

For what legitimate purpose?

I don't know specifically, because I wasn't there, but I'd guess it might be something along the line of what Pogo suggested in Post #5 - format, etc.

 

[Pogo]

Ground rules and topics are easily dealt with in a letter.

There is no legitimate reason for one on one talks with candidates teams unless your only purpose is to make them look good.. In other words, they told the moderator what questions they can ask and what areas are off limits.

This pretty much rules out any ambiguity that the show is not choreographed and set up.. No Biases here...

Speculation fallacy dismissed.

No speculation involved.. A moderator is to be IMPARTIAL. What they have done is remove that impartiality making this nothing more than a choreographed show.

Please remove head from ass... It helps in seeing reality.

The speculation is in bold. You were not there; you don't know what was discussed. Ergo ------ speculation.
Your fantasy above certainly IS NOT the only "legitimate reason". They likely could have been talking staging, lighting, timing, etc. Factors that are all crucial in this media-obsessed culture.

Case in point: the last (third?) Presidential debate in 1992. The Clinton team had arranged for a format with candidates on stools, no lectern, no desk -- where they could stand up and walk around with a wireless mic. They knew their candidate would shine in that format and that their opponents would not, and they got it in the final debate -- the one that sticks in the memory on election day, which was strategically powerful.

Consequently, what are the lasting memories of that debate? Bill Clinton walking up to people intoning "I feel your pain" and connecting -- and George Bush sitting in the back, looking at his watch to see how much more he'd have to endure.

So there's all kinds of reasons for a candidate's staff to be interested in things beyond what the questions will be.

 

[Arianrhod]

A little reminder:

10 Debate Requirements From the GOP Presidential Candidates

Would Billy_Bob have us believe that these demands were issued by telepathy?