Chris Wallace Won't Call Candidates On Their Lies During Last Presidential Debate

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by steve knight, Sep 5, 2016.

  1. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #1
    so what is his job then?
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chris-wallace-presidential-debate_us_57ccc67ce4b0a22de0967652
     
  2. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
  3. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #3
  4. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #4
    As a journalist, it actually is his job to get to the truth. I guess he plans to do that days later after the fact on his Sunday morning show in order to gin up ratings. But that's a disservice to viewers of the debate. If either candidate says something totally outrageous and blatantly false, he should push back and question that a little.
     
  5. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #5
    well it is fox so they don't know what the truth actually is.
     
  6. rdowns, Sep 5, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2016

    rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #6
    TV news sucks. Their model is to have a Clinton or Trump surrogate come on, spout just about any nonsense they want with little to no push back because we can't mess with our access to the campaigns. A horrible disservice to the viewing public.
     
  7. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #7
    He's a moderator in this capacity, not a journalist. Moderators typically only redirect debates that go off the rails of the topic. It is technically up to the opponent to refute what the other person says otherwise it would be an interview, not a debate.

    Moderators should enforce equal time, staying on topic, and ensuring candidates answer counters.

    ie. if Clinton says she never lied about her email servers I expect Trump to know the times and places she lied, not the moderator.
     
  8. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #8
    Why is everybody surprised? None of the moderators fact checked the blizzard of misleading statistics and statements that Romney and Obama spouted in 2012.
     
  9. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #9
    To be fair, I have seen a LOT of pushback lately. From people I have never heard pushing. Like Poppy Harlow over the weekend who was abruptly cutting off surrogates with a "That's not true" when they started saying outlandish things. And Steve Kornacki....wow! This mild mannered guy on MSNBC sure has morphed into something completely different. He's become a hard hitting journalists along the way. And Joy Reid has been having some of her best moments ever lately. That "taco on every corner" guy comes to mind. :D

    So I think there is lots of pushback now. But there should have been all along. Instead they let things stand in the interest of "fairness" or as just another point of view. Or yes....access.
     
  10. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #10
    In a televised debate, I'm not really sure its the job of the moderator to fact-check the candidates. I think the point of the debate format is to see how each candidate pushes back against untruths and exaggerations from their opponent. The moderator's role is to ask the questions, and (hopefully) keep the discussion relatively civil, prevent interruptions, etc.

    Now in a one-on-one interview? That's different. If the person being interviewed says something the journalist knows to be untrue, then the journalist has the duty to call them on it.
     
  11. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #11
  12. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #12
    Actually this is her job when interviewing, Clinton hasn't provided sufficient answers for why she lied about sending and receiving classified information through her homebrew server, so she should prod for a better answer.

    In a debate this would not be acceptable though.
     
  13. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #13
    What would be a sufficient answer for you? Examples?
     
  14. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #14
    Well before we get to answers she has to first admit that she lied to the public to purposely mislead. Her line right now is still that she told the truth (during an FBI interview).
     
  15. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #15
    Okay. I don't see either candidate admitting to their lies before the election. But let's say she did that. Beyond that what would a sufficient answer look like?
     
  16. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #16
    Are you going to demand that Donald Trump confess that he lied to prospective students of Trump University about the sort of education they were going to get? Are you going to insist he admit to lying about self-funding his campaign?

    I'm not a big fan of the tu quoque argument, but at some point, you have to ask what is to be gained by hounding one candidate on the topic; while studiously ignoring their opponent's infinitely more egregious untruthfulness.
     
  17. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #17
    Looking for a truthful rationale, like dodging FOIA requests. Her "convenience" of one device excuse has already been debunked.
    --- Post Merged, Sep 5, 2016 ---
    Has that case been settled and if so was Trump found to have mislead students with his statements? As far as my knowledge goes on the issue this is still pending litigation.
     
  18. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #18
    Such a double standard. The guy with pending litigation can't be guilty because there is pending litigation! Meanwhile let's condemn the other person on something without any litigation at all. :rolleyes:

    Well here's the facts in the case, he was kicked out of Texas and did a quid pro quo thing to avoid trouble in Florida. Those things are done and over...not "pending".
     
  19. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #19
    We have Hillary on record stating that she did not send or reeceive confidential data via her homebrew email server and a subsequent CRIMINAL investigation by the FBI found this to be false and was delivered into the public record.

    There has been no such public conclusion to Trump's pending CIVIL ligitgation.

    Please provide your source for quid pro quo dealing and the subsequent case where he was charged with this federal crime of bribing a government official.

    Thanks.
     
  20. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #20
    No, she's welcome to ask specific questions to elicit more information. It is not her place to editorialize - "better" (or worse) is a subjective judgment/opinion - and put her finger on the scale. Demanding a better answer by definition states the opinion that the current answer (and those giving it) are demeritorious. It's barely a step removed from asking 'when did you stop beating your wife?'.
     
  21. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #21
    He wasn't charged, just like Hillary wasn't. I know you have convicted her in your court of public opinion, but legally, she has not been charged with anything, let alone convicted. In Trump's case, he has been kicked out of Texas, has a court case in New York and the Florida thing just caused him to pay an IRS penalty.

    Edit: oh and of course there was that little discrimination issue in the early days of his real estate career that was settled in NY. So it's time to admit that both of these candidates have skeletons in their closet. It will be interesting to see if anything else pops out in October!
     
  22. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #22
    He also wasn't the subject of a federal criminal investigation that released summaries to the public showcasing that she lied to the public.

    So again, we will need documents released from a public investigation of Trump University before we can say for sure that he lied. Those claims have not be substantiated. In Hillary's case they have been by the FBI criminal investigation of her wrongdoing.
     
  23. MadeTheSwitch, Sep 5, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2016

    MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #23
    You might need that, I don't. Why? Because there is video saying of Trump saying that he would hand pick all the instructors for the course but he didn't do that. Additionally, there's a reason his little "university" was kicked out of Texas.

    Even the name was a scam. In New York you cannot call something a "university" if it's not one. He was told repeatedly to not do that but kept doing it anyway. http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/trump-university-its-worse-than-you-think

    Don the con just doing what he's good at....fooling people.

    http://mediamatters.org/video/2016/...ide-trump-university-fraud-allegations/210635
     
  24. 1458279 Suspended

    1458279

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Location:
    California
    #24
    While we're digging into Trump University, let's dig into Bill Clinton's university. He made millions with his scam for profit education setup in poor nations.
     
  25. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #25
    Sounds like a business that didn't meet customer satisfaction in some cases, or perhaps the students are trying to get a payoff after attending the school knowing that it is connected with a billionaire. Can't say for sure at this point as a ruling hasn't been brought in the case yet.
     

Share This Page