Unfortunately, with today's media, if Trump remains upright and somewhat cognizant of his surroundings, they'll applaud it as a huge win whereas, with Hillary, no matter how intelligent, well-spoken and factual she is, no matter how overtly qualified she is, they'll find something to criticize and relentlessly attack her with.
Tonight is just another opportunity for the media to remind us how different the standards are regardless how dire the consequences for the country.
Don't believe me? Check out the first Bush v. Gore debate in 2000.
—————————————————————————————— If this article really lists what voters should look out for at tonight's debate, the state of our union is actually sad enough to warrant a Trump Presidency.
This reads like preparation notes for a middle school popularity contest, not the leader of the free world. Can Trump, a pathological liar and unrepentant con artist, manage to not be sexist or condescending? And can he go unscripted for 90 minutes without making a total fool of himself? Really? That is where the bar is set? And him successfully pulling off these entry-level feats will make him a legitimate contender for the Presidency?
This is just the latest example of how our media is failing us by making a false equivalency between these two candidates. I am reminded of the VP debate in 2008 where the bar was set so unfathomably low for Sarah Palin that when she finished the debate without saying one remotely intelligent thing, but managed to not faint or vomit on herself, the media declared it a tie. Unreal.
Let us hope that Lester Holt is not so concerned with being "fair" to two so disparately qualified candidates so that he may hold them both to the standards of the office they seek, not the pitifully low ones Trump has set.
Were she simply to do an adequate job tonight, and at no point cry, faint, run out of the building or vomit… you should consider the debate a tie. NataliePortman 发表于 9/26/2016 4:29:03 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/26/us/politics/presidential-debate.html?_r=0
Unfortunately, with today's media, if Trump remains upright and somewhat cognizant of his surroundings, they'll applaud it as a huge win whereas, with Hillary, no matter how intelligent, well-spoken and factual she is, no matter how overtly qualified she is, they'll find something to criticize and relentlessly attack her with.
Tonight is just another opportunity for the media to remind us how different the standards are regardless how dire the consequences for the country.
Don't believe me? Check out the first Bush v. Gore debate in 2000.
——————————————————————————————
If this article really lists what voters should look out for at tonight's debate, the state of our union is actually sad enough to warrant a Trump Presidency.
This reads like preparation notes for a middle school popularity contest, not the leader of the free world. Can Trump, a pathological liar and unrepentant con artist, manage to not be sexist or condescending? And can he go unscripted for 90 minutes without making a total fool of himself? Really? That is where the bar is set? And him successfully pulling off these entry-level feats will make him a legitimate contender for the Presidency?
This is just the latest example of how our media is failing us by making a false equivalency between these two candidates. I am reminded of the VP debate in 2008 where the bar was set so unfathomably low for Sarah Palin that when she finished the debate without saying one remotely intelligent thing, but managed to not faint or vomit on herself, the media declared it a tie. Unreal.
Let us hope that Lester Holt is not so concerned with being "fair" to two so disparately qualified candidates so that he may hold them both to the standards of the office they seek, not the pitifully low ones Trump has set.
说起vomit，请看这个：