2016 Postmortem

NBachers

(17,136 posts)

64. That, AgadorSparicus, sums it all up tidily. And I'm joining you soon as I dash this off . . .

Reply to AgadorSparticus (Reply #46)

Thu Oct 20, 2016, 12:12 AM

Oct 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

119 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I know it is unpopular, but Chris Wallace did a good job [View all] BlueStreak Oct 2016 OP

Much better than I expected Snake Plissken Oct 2016 #1

He really did surprise me and I have to agree with the OP. arthritisR_US Oct 2016 #10

I agree, he did fine...nt Wounded Bear Oct 2016 #2

I agree. Agschmid Oct 2016 #4

He did. elleng Oct 2016 #5

I agree Txbluedog Oct 2016 #6

Not liberal N proud Oct 2016 #7

he wasn't edhopper Oct 2016 #8

He allowed Trump to run rampant over the whole debate Siwsan Oct 2016 #9

Which probably helped Hillary democrattotheend Oct 2016 #16

I guess I'm just sick and tired of the bullying behavior being tolerated Siwsan Oct 2016 #26

I don't "guess" -- I KNOW. And I'm pretty sure you do too, but you're just being polite. MADem Oct 2016 #111

Absolutely. BlueStreak Oct 2016 #27

I agree... chillfactor Oct 2016 #37

absolutely, then he'd warn tRump and then let it happen 0rganism Oct 2016 #78

Agreed Peaches999 Oct 2016 #103

Agree SharonClark Oct 2016 #55

I agree. Overall, it was substantive and orderly Renew Deal Oct 2016 #11

In the end, what people will remember about this debate is Wallace asking Trump if he would StevieM Oct 2016 #12

Yep! he must have looked so petulant in need of a pacifer Cha Oct 2016 #49

It was a Bernard Shaw moment, that--but Bernard is nowhere to be found anymore. MADem Oct 2016 #112

He called Trump out on specific questions, but let him run on, interrupt, end each part. uppityperson Oct 2016 #13

He did fine. phleshdef Oct 2016 #14

He did his job for the gop and Trump couldnt Johonny Oct 2016 #15

You might be right. NCTraveler Oct 2016 #58

+1,000,000! nt MADem Oct 2016 #113

He got on my nerves occasionally but I though he was good overall. n/t BlueStater Oct 2016 #17

Agreed Glamrock Oct 2016 #18

I had no issue with him Dem2 Oct 2016 #20

The best of any moderator....hands off...but questions beachbumbob Oct 2016 #21

Yeah I agree but it was subtle WatchWhatISay Oct 2016 #66

I loved canetoad Oct 2016 #22

His questions were straight from r.w. talking points. Plus he let trump ramble incoherently and ... femmocrat Oct 2016 #23

Agree SharonClark Oct 2016 #56

That's what I saw too. bettyellen Oct 2016 #99

That's not unpopular with me....he is probably their most respected journalist and I Cakes488 Oct 2016 #24

That wasn't journalism on display. That was a right wing hack asking questions crafted by MADem Oct 2016 #114

I don't know, he framed the election as a referendum on the SCOTUS. ecstatic Oct 2016 #25

Well vadermike Oct 2016 #39

agree... chillfactor Oct 2016 #28

I 100% agree. Very fair. n/t ScienceIsGood Oct 2016 #29

I was surprised at his control. spiderpig Oct 2016 #30

I disagree Proud Liberal Dem Oct 2016 #31

I completely agree, Mme. Defarge Oct 2016 #32

I didn't think Wallace was as saltpoint Oct 2016 #33

I agree and I was pessimistic about his impartiality kimbutgar Oct 2016 #34

I disagree. He let Trump always get the last little bit in even when there was no time. AgadorSparticus Oct 2016 #35

Yea but kacekwl Oct 2016 #41

Well, gosh darnit....you do have a point there....I need a drink... AgadorSparticus Oct 2016 #46

That, AgadorSparicus, sums it all up tidily. And I'm joining you soon as I dash this off . . . NBachers Oct 2016 #64

I think we all need a drink after that. Cheers! AgadorSparticus Oct 2016 #72

He also called on Hillary FIRST for the opening AND closing question. MADem Oct 2016 #86

Wallace backed up Trump's open borders slander against Hillary. raging moderate Oct 2016 #106

And then, when she demanded he view the comment in context, the fucker tried to cut her off. MADem Oct 2016 #108

I'll eat crow budkin Oct 2016 #36

He was only "good" if you think it's ok to cut off the woman candidate, let the male candidate MADem Oct 2016 #109

He directed all of the complicated policy questions to Hillary first so she could describe the facts truthisfreedom Oct 2016 #38

Have to say I was kacekwl Oct 2016 #40

I thought was decent... Adrahil Oct 2016 #42

He did mcar Oct 2016 #43

Agreed. highplainsdem Oct 2016 #44

Yes, I grudgingly agree. book_worm Oct 2016 #45

Agreed n/t archiemo Oct 2016 #47

That was mainly because Trump was calmer. joshcryer Oct 2016 #48

Yeah notice how he listened to Wallace underpants Oct 2016 #53

For 20 minutes. After that, it was the same old Trump, and by the end BlueStreak Oct 2016 #67

Wallace did, to his credit, admonish the crowd more than the others. joshcryer Oct 2016 #92

I agree. He was balanced and smartly provocative Bucky Oct 2016 #50

Well said, my dear Bucky! Smartly provocative IS correct. n/t CaliforniaPeggy Oct 2016 #63

Wallace peggysue2 Oct 2016 #51

Pretty good. underpants Oct 2016 #52

He was ok. wildeyed Oct 2016 #54

I agree. Nt NCTraveler Oct 2016 #57

Agreed...I was able to relax early Awsi Dooger Oct 2016 #59

I agree with you 100%. BigDemVoter Oct 2016 #60

Wallace did better than I expected Gothmog Oct 2016 #61

He wasn't horrible but he has the wordiest way of asking questions. Gidney N Cloyd Oct 2016 #62

1. Chris was better than I expected 2. I was wrong about him 3. Time for another sip NBachers Oct 2016 #65

It actually kind of sounded like a debate. Ellen Forradalom Oct 2016 #68

I give him credit for pushing on the rigged election bit. yellowcanine Oct 2016 #69

I agree with you. lovemydog Oct 2016 #70

He did a good job. Questions were fair, handled the crowd well and kept the candidates in check qdouble Oct 2016 #71

I was surprised burrowowl Oct 2016 #73

Lobbing softballs at Trump, not speaking up when Conald interrupted her MADem Oct 2016 #74

I think some men overlook the interrupting because they spooky3 Oct 2016 #80

Wallace was AFRAID of Trump-he had a fearful timbre in his voice. MADem Oct 2016 #83

As to your key point (sorry for the 2 replies, but I think this matters), MADem Oct 2016 #120

There was at least one instance where Hillary was given a new topic to speak on stopbush Oct 2016 #87

He interrupted 35 times, she responded with ten interruptions. MADem Oct 2016 #119

+1 Starry Messenger Oct 2016 #94

Best debate, Wallace lived up to the family name. radius777 Oct 2016 #75

Wallace stunk--he was afraid of Trump and let him get away with MADem Oct 2016 #84

Yep, he did fine. My husband also said so of his own accord. LeftRant Oct 2016 #76

Yes, but the topics! LisaM Oct 2016 #77

Much better than I feared. But too much debt hysteria nt geek tragedy Oct 2016 #79

I caught pieces of it and from what I saw. he did a good job. underthematrix Oct 2016 #81

He was fair. I was pleasantly surprised. Then again... kysrsoze Oct 2016 #82

He wasn't a complete hack exboyfil Oct 2016 #85

On second glance, he was more than fine. He did an extremely good job. phleshdef Oct 2016 #88

I didn't see the debate and I don't like what I've seen of Chris Wallace DFW Oct 2016 #89

Having just seen the replay here in Europe, yes, Chris Wallace did a fine job, he kept the debate OnDoutside Oct 2016 #90

Wallace did a good job. n/t DemonGoddess Oct 2016 #91

I have to say he was excellent and I'm not ashamed to say it! I was so very Upthevibe Oct 2016 #93

I was mildly impressed right from the first question, which was substantive. Orsino Oct 2016 #95

I was surprised about his performance. avebury Oct 2016 #96

Agree that Wallace did a good, non-Foxish job. Hortensis Oct 2016 #97

We forget that Ailes is no longer in charge of Fox. ChairmanAgnostic Oct 2016 #98

Umhm, that this performance would affect his reputation Hortensis Oct 2016 #100

Well, I don't think Wallace wil be in any history books, unless they are self-published BlueStreak Oct 2016 #104

Lol. In this case, he successfully avoided having his name Hortensis Oct 2016 #107

Murdoch is, and Murdoch has Ailes on retainer. He's still providing input --just from a distance. MADem Oct 2016 #115

Disagree. He brought up every single RW talking point/myth as if they were something that HRC had FSogol Oct 2016 #101

In spite of the fact that he blatantly promoted RWNJ conspiracies... MrScorpio Oct 2016 #102

He used assumptions and RW talkking points to frame questions. He was awful and biased. Coyotl Oct 2016 #105

I am fucking SHOCKED at the number of people who think that performance by Chris Wallace was any MADem Oct 2016 #110

He created the atmosphere of a real debate, even if he slanted the questions BlueStreak Oct 2016 #116

"Even if he slanted..." ??? WTF??? Why are you giving him a pass? MADem Oct 2016 #118

Proof that two people seeing the same event "see" ChairmanAgnostic Oct 2016 #117

Please--this has NOTHING to do with Murdoch. Don't obfuscate like that. It's WRONG. MADem Oct 2016 #121