Staff Reports
The recent debate featuring Donald Trump and Kamala Harris was not just a clash of political titans; it was a masterclass in how to stage a show for one side while pushing the other into the background. With the moderators acting more like best friends of the Vice President, it was clear that the deck was stacked, and someone was pulling the strings behind the curtain.
While Trump was known for his fiery and often entertaining debate style, he found himself stumbling against a barrage of misleading questions and relentless interruptions. The faux earnestness of moderator David Muir could make anyone long for the days of stammering through awkward small talk. One could almost imagine him in a high school drama club, rehearsing his serious news anchor persona while the rest of America watched in exasperation. Yet, every time Trump tried to rise to the occasion, the moderators were there to cut him off. The “fact checks” flew thick and fast, but they seemed solely aimed at the former president, while Harris got a free pass to weave her fabric of fiction.
THERE YOU HAVE IT: ABC News debate "moderator" Linsey Davis boasts on air about literally being Kamala Harris' sorority sister. WTF.pic.twitter.com/msQdryA4N1
— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) September 12, 2024
The irony of the situation was not lost on the audience as it became apparent that one of the moderators, Linsey Davis, shared a sorority connection with Kamala. How convenient! The debate’s focus on questions about the economy quickly shifted into a hodgepodge of topics, often with Harris sidestepping actual answers that could clarify the disastrous policies associated with her and Biden’s administration. Left unscathed, she was free to pepper in her verbal antics while Trump was left scrambling to defend himself against absurd allegations and untruths.
To top it all off, the head of ABC News, Dana Walden, has a longstanding friendship with Harris, raising further questions about the integrity of the event. For a network that prides itself on presenting the facts, it certainly seemed to be more about cozy connections than fair reporting. Viewers could only chuckle at how Harris, who likely had her Instagram followers on speed dial to come to her aid, found herself unchallenged when she tossed around falsehoods about Trump. Policies on gun control, economic stability, and even late-term abortions were dissected, but predictably, the only one receiving scrutiny was the man who dared to rock the boat.
Those watching from the comfort of their living rooms surely felt a sense of déjà vu, recalling other moments when the “old boys’ club” narrative had been flipped on its head. Instead of defending common sense and conservative values, it appeared as if the “new girls’ network” was committed to unyielding protection of their own. The absurdity became apparent when a staple question about the economy went unanswered—despite it being portrayed as the “number one issue” by Muir. Missing from the discourse was Harris’s acknowledgment of her role in the current economic decline.
While everyone rubbed their eyes in disbelief at the orchestrated spectacle, many acknowledged that Trump did indeed have a few memorable moments. Some quipped that his off-the-cuff remarks were too good for such a contrived setting. However, the takeaway was clear: when it comes to high-stakes political debates, the left’s side of the aisle seems to be backed by partisan cheerleaders masquerading as journalists who’d rather hold their ancient traditions than answer the hard questions of American voters.
With all of this playing out in front of a national audience, one can only hope that come November; the American electorate doesn’t forget the kite that was flown that night. In a world where honesty and integrity should reign supreme, the perception will linger long after the dust settles. There’s zero chance the doors of this debate were opened for a fair and balanced exchange, and now more than ever, the conservative audience is clamoring for real answers from those in power.
