It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was Lester Holt Unfair To Donald Trump During Debate?

page: 11
34
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Problem is that Holt had prepared 3 segments worth of questions - with each segment timed at 30 minutes, and 4 minutes of responses to each question - gives him the opportunity to ask somewhere on the order of 7 questions each segment, or a total of 21 questions each.

I would imagine that issues such as Benghazi, the Email Scandal, the Trump Organization Conflict of interest, the Clinton Foundation were actually on his list of questions - all ordered in priority during each segment.

But because Trump decided to go off the rails, we only got to see 3 questions from Holt per segment, and not get to any of the other questions. Did you see a pattern. General question, more specific question, candidate specific questions, but all this irrelevant because the debate was poorly moderated. Holt should have had the ability to shut off mics after the 2 minutes were up and prevented the candidates from speaking or interrupting the other....




posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 12:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
It was absolutely biased against Trump. His tax returns, his "birtherism", his supposed racism, how Hillary doesn't have a presidential look—he had to defend against it all, while no questions were raised about the rigged DNCs, potential conflict of interests with the Clinton foundation, the emails, the lies about Hilary's health.

The debate was framed to favor Clinton.

Crazy he had to defend his own statements in a presidential debate, huh? What's the world coming to?



I swear people selectively read to just confirm their bias.

I have said at least three times on this thread that I had no problem with Holt asking these questions. My issue is that he did not ask Hillary any of these questions.

How about...

Crazy that SHE didn't have to defend her own statements in a presidential debate, huh?


What statements? Was she not called out by Donald for using the term "super-predator" and also asked about her emails? Or how about everyone in Hillary's camp taking the 5th over the emails?


I thought this thread was about rather or not Holt was fair. I have went through the whole debate transcript and showed how he attacked Trump over and over again and never HIllary.

There is a video posted that shows just what Holt said in the debate and it shows incredible bias.

Did holt grill her on lying about emails like he did about Trumps tax returns? Did he mention the supe predator thing? No that was Trump.

Holt acted as an attack dog for Hillary, and asked her no tough questions. This is in black and white yet you refuse to see it.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: MongolianPaellaFish

According to your source:


"I'm no warmonger. But the fact is, if we decide a strike against Iraq is necessary, it is madness not to carry the mission to its conclusion. When we don't, we have the worst of all worlds: Iraq remains a threat, and now has more incentive than ever to attack us." (Trump's 2000 book, The America We Deserve)

"Yeah, I guess so; I wish the first time it was done correctly." (Interview with Howard Stern, 2002)

"Either you attack or you don't attack." (Interview with Neil Cavuto, 2003)

"Well, he has either got to do something or not do something, perhaps, because perhaps shouldn't be doing it yet and perhaps we should be waiting for the United Nations, you know. He's under a lot of pressure. He's—I think he's doing a very good job." (Same interview)

"I think Wall Street's waiting to see what happens but even before the fact they're obviously taking it a little bit for granted and it looks like a tremendous success from a military standpoint and I think this is really nothing compared to what you're gonna see after the war is over." (Fox News, one day into the 2003 invasion)

"Look at the war in Iraq and the mess that we're in. I would never have handled it that way. Does anybody really believe that Iraq is going to be a wonderful democracy where people are going to run down to the voting box and gently put in their ballot and the winner is happily going to step up to lead the county? C'mon. Two minutes after we leave, there's going to be a revolution, and the meanest, toughest, smartest, most vicious guy will take over. And he'll have weapons of mass destruction, which Saddam didn't have." (Esquire, 2004)

"How do they get out? You know how they get out? They get out. That's how they get out. Declare victory and leave. Because I'll tell you, this country is just going to get further bogged down. They're in a civil war over there, Wolf. There's nothing that we're going to be able to do with a civil war. They are in a major civil war." (CNN, 2007)


This just gave me even more faith in Trump, apparently he knows how # ends. I still don't see him claiming he supports the war in Iraq.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: kamebard
Problem is that Holt had prepared 3 segments worth of questions - with each segment timed at 30 minutes, and 4 minutes of responses to each question - gives him the opportunity to ask somewhere on the order of 7 questions each segment, or a total of 21 questions each.

I would imagine that issues such as Benghazi, the Email Scandal, the Trump Organization Conflict of interest, the Clinton Foundation were actually on his list of questions - all ordered in priority during each segment.

But because Trump decided to go off the rails, we only got to see 3 questions from Holt per segment, and not get to any of the other questions. Did you see a pattern. General question, more specific question, candidate specific questions, but all this irrelevant because the debate was poorly moderated. Holt should have had the ability to shut off mics after the 2 minutes were up and prevented the candidates from speaking or interrupting the other....


Yep that must be it. He was about to ask Hillary tough questions but ran out of time.

So he asks Trump about tax returns. First tough question.

Then he asks about birther stuff. Secodn attack question to Trump.

At this point, wouldn't he say we are behind time, I better ask Hillary a tough question now.

Nope, he asks Trump about his Iraq war stance, because that is such an important issue. Still no attacks on Hillary, despite the fact that he was going to get to them.

And so with time running out does he think, "geez, I have asked Trump three tough questions and "fact checked him throughout the debate, I better ask Hillary at least one."

Nope! He feels its important to ask Trump about his comments on Hillary looking presidential, implying he is sexist.

But you are right. If he had 5 more minutes, he would have grilled Hillary!



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
It was absolutely biased against Trump. His tax returns, his "birtherism", his supposed racism, how Hillary doesn't have a presidential look—he had to defend against it all, while no questions were raised about the rigged DNCs, potential conflict of interests with the Clinton foundation, the emails, the lies about Hilary's health.

The debate was framed to favor Clinton.

Crazy he had to defend his own statements in a presidential debate, huh? What's the world coming to?



I swear people selectively read to just confirm their bias.

I have said at least three times on this thread that I had no problem with Holt asking these questions. My issue is that he did not ask Hillary any of these questions.

How about...

Crazy that SHE didn't have to defend her own statements in a presidential debate, huh?


What statements? Was she not called out by Donald for using the term "super-predator" and also asked about her emails? Or how about everyone in Hillary's camp taking the 5th over the emails?


I thought this thread was about rather or not Holt was fair. I have went through the whole debate transcript and showed how he attacked Trump over and over again and never HIllary.

There is a video posted that shows just what Holt said in the debate and it shows incredible bias.

Did holt grill her on lying about emails like he did about Trumps tax returns? Did he mention the supe predator thing? No that was Trump.

Holt acted as an attack dog for Hillary, and asked her no tough questions. This is in black and white yet you refuse to see it.

What I saw was Trump not giving Holt any space to ask any questions. Amazing what might have transpired if Donald didn't blurt out the negatives about Hillary and instead waited for the moderator to ask her. All Hillary did was sit back and let Trump dig his own hole, much like she's done up to this point. Trump shaped the debate himself by how he acted. We'll see if he learns from this in the next couple rounds

edit on 27-9-2016 by underwerks because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-9-2016 by underwerks because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: MongolianPaellaFish

He was not in office when he said or did not say he supported the war. He has been pretty adamant since the "stern'" interview he is against it. But in the end....who cares about this right now?

All they did last night during the debate was bring up the same talking point issues that mean nothing this election. National Security, economy and Healthcare...those are the issues that needed to be discussed.

Support for the Iraq war means nothing today.
The birther questions...means nothing today. Obama is not running and asking for a birth cert is not racist it is required unlike tax returns.




And racism. You forgot racism. Hillary wants to speak to white people about their racism because of the Charlotte shooting where the black cop killed the black guy and the black police chief didn't give the news that BLM wanted.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Lol, what a shill!

Hold interrupted Trump 41 times.

He asked 15 direct Questions of Trump.

He interrupted HRC 7 times.

He asked her 2 direct questions.

and he especially did it when Trump was starting to get comfortable.
a reply to: tothetenthpower



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:04 PM
link   


"Again and again, Holt asked Trump tough questions that were straight from the Clinton campaign's talking points, and which were obvious setups for Clinton to attack [and for fact-checkers to pounce on whatever Trump asserted in his own defense]," he said.

Besides Benghazi and the Clinton Foundation, Pollak noted how Holt did not ask the Democrat about her emails — and set up Trump as "sexist" by prefacing his question about whether Clinton had "a presidential look" with the words that she was "the first woman" to be a major party presidential nominee.


link



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Doesn't sound enthusiastic about it.

But yes, let's focus on this and ignore that Hillary fully supported it.


You're right. Trump should have admitted his position and said, "Yes, my layman's opinion was that an Iraqi invasion might be good, but I wasn't in government. My opinion didn't count. But at least I didn't VOTE for it in Congress, like you did. Your opinion COUNTED."

He missed many such opportunities. That's no one's fault but his.




I have no doubt that he'll be taking notes and watching this debate over and over to prepare for the next debate and practice his what and what not to do's.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Nope. I've stopped paying attention to politics as closely as I was before. It's done WONDERS for my happiness too.


LOL, you're in every single thread involving Hillary and posting in her defense. You've been posting this entire thread, then you claim you didn't even watch the debate. The lack of self-awareness is real.

EVERY thread? Man I could have sworn I haven't been online in the last few days and even when on I've barely been posting. I guess I wasn't really playing all those video games and I was actually talking to you on all those Hillary threads. I'm glad you are on top of these things. Watching my actions and all so intently.
edit on 27-9-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: LSU0408

Taking notes is allowed. Coming with prepared notes is not.

I never saw her take notes though, so that's why I brought it up. Maybe others did and I just missed it.


Oh, well how would the moderator know if she had prepared notes or not? She for sure was writing stuff down.


Ok, well I missed that. Can you recall what Trump was saying while she was writing so I can check that out?



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ManFromEurope

Transparency is another issue that Hillary outshines Trump on, but that doesn't stop tons of people saying that Hillary is more secretive than Trump anyways.


How is using Bleachbit on a server, smashing cell phones with hammers, and deleting 33,000 emails transparent? It isn't. Unless you mean her bs story is so thin you can see right through it...

I could of sworn I said that Trump is LESS transparent than Hilary, not that Hilary was completely transparent. Try reading my post next time and maybe respond with an actual comparison instead of just a point in a vacuum?
edit on 27-9-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
It was absolutely biased against Trump. His tax returns, his "birtherism", his supposed racism, how Hillary doesn't have a presidential look—he had to defend against it all, while no questions were raised about the rigged DNCs, potential conflict of interests with the Clinton foundation, the emails, the lies about Hilary's health.

The debate was framed to favor Clinton.

Crazy he had to defend his own statements in a presidential debate, huh? What's the world coming to?


Yet Hilary didn't have to defend any of hers, for instance the numerous lies about her emails. Crazy, huh?

Were we watching the same debate? He specifically asked her about her emails. She answered simply and concise. Smart way of going about it instead of rambling incoherently like Donald. But maybe that's just me


Um, she said she made a mistake and regrets it. That was the end of it. Do you even know what "concise" means?

concise - giving a lot of information clearly and in a few words; brief but comprehensive.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: eisegesis
Lester was rudely interrupted numerous times after he attempted to shorten Trump's responses. If Donald had allowed his bombastic self to be moderated correctly instead of forcing exasperated responses into our ears, his better articulated points would have stood out more. Anyone who thinks that Lester just let him speak is wrong.


Are you counting Trump being interrupted as the same times he wasn't supposed to be speaking in the first place? That would be trying to get the debate back on track.

TIME counted 84 times in which either Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Holt or the audience cut off the current speaker.

Trump, the Republican nominee, was responsible for 55 of those 84 interruptions, while Clinton contributed 11.

INTERRUPTIONS
CLINTON: 11 TRUMP: 55 HOLT: 10 APPLAUSE OR CROSSTALK: 8

time


edit on 27-9-2016 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: kamebard
Problem is that Holt had prepared 3 segments worth of questions - with each segment timed at 30 minutes, and 4 minutes of responses to each question - gives him the opportunity to ask somewhere on the order of 7 questions each segment, or a total of 21 questions each.

I would imagine that issues such as Benghazi, the Email Scandal, the Trump Organization Conflict of interest, the Clinton Foundation were actually on his list of questions - all ordered in priority during each segment.

But because Trump decided to go off the rails, we only got to see 3 questions from Holt per segment, and not get to any of the other questions. Did you see a pattern. General question, more specific question, candidate specific questions, but all this irrelevant because the debate was poorly moderated. Holt should have had the ability to shut off mics after the 2 minutes were up and prevented the candidates from speaking or interrupting the other....


That would explain why he let the arguing go on, and why at the end he said he didn't figure he'd get to all the questions.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   
i got tired of them asking to see his tax return everybody i know fudges on their tax returns from time to time so to me looking at someones tax return is worthless data but i would love vto see every one the clinton foundation received monies from and how many of them were tied to china and saudi arabia.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
It was absolutely biased against Trump. His tax returns, his "birtherism", his supposed racism, how Hillary doesn't have a presidential look—he had to defend against it all, while no questions were raised about the rigged DNCs, potential conflict of interests with the Clinton foundation, the emails, the lies about Hilary's health.

The debate was framed to favor Clinton.

Crazy he had to defend his own statements in a presidential debate, huh? What's the world coming to?


Yet Hilary didn't have to defend any of hers, for instance the numerous lies about her emails. Crazy, huh?

Were we watching the same debate? He specifically asked her about her emails. She answered simply and concise. Smart way of going about it instead of rambling incoherently like Donald. But maybe that's just me


Um, she said she made a mistake and regrets it. That was the end of it. Do you even know what "concise" means?

concise - giving a lot of information clearly and in a few words; brief but comprehensive.

Yes, obviously. She summed it up in one short statement. What were you expecting her to say? Or better, how were you expecting her to say it? You think a woman who has been through multiple FBI investigations and hearings is going to get a case of diarrhea mouth on live TV and go on a Trumpet style rant?



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I agree that he biased many of the questions against Trump - however, my point still stands that given the rules of the debates he should have had the opportunity to ask 21 unique questions, instead we were only given 9 out of the possible 21 questions.

Were the questions that were asked Biased more against Trump? Yes
Could he have done a better job at moderating? Definitely
Did Trump give him the opportunity to actually ask his prepared questions? No

Holt is a long time Republican, and the analysis pre-debate was that he was going to be equally terse with each candidate. Because Trump started running over Holt, I think part of the bias came from Holt's being upset by Trump's blatant disregard for the rules of decorum in the debate - hence he decided to get back at Trump by throwing more monkey turds in his general direction.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: LSU0408

Taking notes is allowed. Coming with prepared notes is not.

I never saw her take notes though, so that's why I brought it up. Maybe others did and I just missed it.


Oh, well how would the moderator know if she had prepared notes or not? She for sure was writing stuff down.


Ok, well I missed that. Can you recall what Trump was saying while she was writing so I can check that out?


No, unfortunately not. She didn't do it every time he spoke, but often enough. Take a look at the first question he was answering, I believe I saw her jotting her first notes at that point. I didn't pay much attention to the note writing because I didn't know there were any rules regarding it. I thought it was normal.



posted on Sep, 27 2016 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Trump, the Republican nominee, was responsible for 55 of those 84 interruptions, while Clinton contributed 11.


Further to my point that part of the Bias Holt exhibited in the debates was due to Trump stepping all over the debate rather than keeping his comments in check.




top topics



 
34
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join