Interesting How Debate "Moderators" Are Always Biased Towards the Left

 

ABC News, David Muir and Lindsey Davis

Debate moderators, with good reason, are often accused of being Democrat operatives, meaning that they have a bias towards the Democratic Party and their candidates which influences debates in their favor. This accusation is not without merit, as many debate moderators have been found to have ties to the Democratic Party or have expressed political views that lean towards the left. However, it is important to understand the role of debate moderators and how their bias, if present, impacts the debates they “moderate.”

It is crucial to recognize that debate moderators are responsible for facilitating a “fair, impartial and balanced” discussion between the candidates. They are tasked with asking questions that are relevant and challenging for both sides, while also ensuring that each candidate has an equal opportunity to speak and present their views. However, if a moderator has a bias towards one party (mainly Democrat), they may intentionally skew the debate in favor of that party by asking more difficult questions to the opposing candidate, cutting them off more frequently and “fact checking” only their favored candidate(s).

Moreover, debate moderators are typically chosen by the debate commission, which is often “bipartisan” (red flag) and aims to select moderators who they allege are fair and impartial. However, in recent years, there have been instances where moderators have been accused of showing bias towards the Democrat Party. For example, during the 2020 presidential debates, some moderators were criticized, for interrupting and challenging President Trump more than his opponent, Joe Biden. Americans watched this blatant interference.

In addition, the selection process for debate moderators is not always transparent, which can lead to concerns about their impartiality. If moderators have a history of supporting the Democrat Party or have made public statements that indicate a bias, it is natural for viewers to question their ability to moderate the debate fairly. This has eroded trust in the debate process and leads to favoritism.

Furthermore, the influence of debate moderators cannot be underestimated. They have the power to shape the narrative of the debate by choosing which topics to focus on and how to frame the questions. If a moderator is biased towards one party, they may choose questions that are more favorable to that party or give them more time to respond, while limiting the opportunities for the opposing candidate to make their case.

Debate moderators, like all individuals, have their own beliefs and opinions that can unconsciously influence their decisions. It is important for moderators to be aware of their biases and strive to maintain neutrality in their role, even if they have personal preferences. Of course, we have yet to see any biased moderator recuse themselves.

Moreover, biased debate moderators serve as a political tactic to discredit the opposing party, namely President Trump in many cases, or undermine the credibility of the debate process. By painting debate moderators as Democrat operatives, some individuals may seek to delegitimize the debates themselves and cast doubt on the fairness of the electoral system. The 2016 and 2020 elections are perfect examples, not to mention the most recent debate on September 10, 2024 between Harris and Trump.

During the debate between former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris, it was clear that ABC commentators David Muir and Linsey Davis exhibited bias in their questioning and commentary. This bias was evident in the way they framed their questions, their reactions to the candidates' responses, and their overall demeanor throughout the debate.

One instance of bias in Muir and Davis' questioning was their focus on controversial or polarizing topics that painted Trump in a negative light. They asked loaded questions about his past remarks and actions, while giving Harris more favorable questions that allowed her to highlight her policy proposals and accomplishments. This unequal treatment of the candidates created a skewed perspective for viewers. Additionally, they noticeably grimaced or sighed when Trump spoke, while nodding approvingly and smiling when Harris answered questions.

Furthermore, Muir and Davis' overall demeanor throughout the debate suggested a bias towards one candidate over the other. They seemed more at ease and engaged when interacting with Harris, while appearing tense and dismissive when speaking with Trump. This disparity in their treatment of the candidates reflects a lack of impartiality and undermines the credibility of their reporting. 

What ABC News, Muir and Davis did last night is join the chorus of Democrats and their surrogates perpetrating election interference.