My understanding is that moderators are to provide questions to encourage debate and not interject their own commentary. Yet CNN debate moderator, Abby Phillip, had this line of questioning / opining at the recent Democratic debate, where she basically called Bernie Sanders a liar:
“So Senator Sanders, I do want to be clear here,” Phillip followed up, “you’re saying that you never told Senator Warren that a woman could not win the election?” “That is correct,” Sanders confirmed. But despite that denial, Phillip immediately turned around and framed her follow-up question to Warren as if the claim was not disputed. “Senator Warren, what did you think when Senator Sanders told you a woman could not win the election?” Phillip asked.
This is not the first time CNN has biased Democrat debates against Bernie Sanders. In 2016, CNN commentator, Donna Brazile, gave debate questions to the Clinton campaign before the debate:
Even Elizabeth Warren agreed that the Democratic Presidential process was rigged against Bernie:
We have to hold this party accountable . . .
Do you agree with the notion that [the primary election process] was rigged? Yes
–Elizabeth Warren, Nov. 2016
Given its history, why is CNN still acting as a moderator for the Democratic debates?
Does the recent obvious bias by the CNN correspondent confirm that the 2020 process is still rigged?
Because the DNC and CNN work hand in hand. The DNC want’s to know for sure that their candidates will have friendly questioners. Which is why the DNC does not allow Fox to moderate.
Why do we still have debates for months? Let’s have a two month election season. Why do we have elections on a weekday? Why don’t we have a national holiday to vote?
It’s not just CNN. We just don’t know how to conduct debates. But to continue to riff, why do our congressmen speak to empty audiences on C-SPAN? Our representative government is broken and it is not the fault of either party. While I side with liberals on many (all?) issues, I do not care for how our government operates. The concept of engagement, or civil debate, is lost but needs to exist. We need that for our children. We are setting a poor example.
It doesn’t sound very smart to me with the current system that a person in the EC can vote for a candidate that didn’t win the popular vote in that state. In fact, it seems to me to be downright stupid and certainly can’t be construed to be representative of the will of the people who cast their vote in the presidential election.