I think ABC did an outstanding job. And it should be the model for all future debates. In Trump's post-truth era, immediate fact checking is the only antidote to the further spreading of lies. Should they have fact checked Harris? Maybe. But ABC was on the lookout for the most egregious lies -- and those only come from Trump.
Agreed… I feel the problem with leaving the fact-checking solely to the candidates is that, in the case of a perpetual liar like Trump, the opposing candidates could spend so much time fact-checking their opponent’s outright lies that they run out of time needed to talk about their own policy positions. Someone like Trump could deliberately use that as a tactic to suppress their opponent’s ability to present their own message.
Disappointed in your take. The few fact checks on trump were perfunctory and related to egregious and inflaming lies. They seemed perfectly done. The Harris items you cite seem like minor mischaracterizations that would have benefited only slightly from a fact-check (eg, tariffs act like a sales tax, but they wouldn't apply to fully-US-sourced items)
Agree with what you're saying here. I wish that Kamala had expounded on what she meant by Trump Tax and let the people know that this is the tariff. Trump presents confusing stuff as it is and it needs to be broken down in simple terms - these tariffs he's adding aren't going against the country, they are going against you the consumer when the companies hike up the price of goods.
For issues that are clear, yes they should fact check. The four issues you pulled out were clearly lies by Trump and it was good ABC immediately called him out for lies lies lies. He lied about another 30 times that they left alone. Otherwise they would have been calling him a lier all night long.
I was just debating this with friends last night! My opinion is that moderating should be like reffing a NFL/NBA game. In the NFL, you could call Pass Interference or Holding on literally every play, but the league has made the decision to only call the most egregous. On the FBI crime stats, that was probably one that the moderators should have let go. How much crime actually is happening can be interpretted many different ways. As for the others:
1. You absolutely cannot let Trump say that it is legal to kill infants after they are born.
2. You absolutely cannot allow him to say that the election was stolen when this has been proven over and over again. This suppresses the vote and is election interference.
3. I live 15 miles from Springfield, Ohio. As someone who lives here, i dont want my community slandered by unverified conspiracies on the internet. This could have many negative, long-term consequences for SW OH. And btw, the Haitian immigrants in Springfield are political refugees who are legally here, and has nothing to do with the nominal topic that Teump was asked about: illegal immigration.
Let me add what I believe is going on with the lies: Hitler and Goebbels used The Big Lie to promote Nazi propaganda, for example stigmatizing “others” as “enemies of the state.” What do we think Trump is doing? We must call it out at every opportunity.
Chris, you sound like a Trump apologist. The lies are category differences. And the moderators did not interrupt Trump. They simply made it clear to their audience that the four things they fact checked were egregious lies.
In the first debate the moderators did their audience a great disservice by not interjecting in real time to correct some egregious lies that Trump told.
I completely agree with Jonathan Last at the Bulwark that the purpose of real journalism is to help their audiences understand reality. Fact checking the most egregious lies a politician says is integral to that purpose.
Fully understand Chris' point, but disagree. The point of the media and a debate is not to let just anyone say anything. In that case, just give them airtime and let them say and do what they want. I want context. I do think there is a line between shaping and lying. I think what will make a great journalist vs a poor one is how well they walk that line.
I disagree vehemently with your LeBron analogy. If he commits the fouls, he should be called for them. If he is great, he doesn't need extra advantages. This "great ones get advantages" concept is horrible in all sports.
Dangerous lies (immigrants are stealing pets and eating them! Infanticide is a Democratic policy! The 2020 election was rigged and stolen) need to be fact-checked in real time. These are the kinds of lies that make partisan followers take “action” ( let’s lynch some Haitians! Let’s shoot some “abortion doctors”! Let’s invade the United States Capitol to stop the election certification!) There are dangerous lies and stretches or shaping of the truth…there’s a difference…and the moderators made a righteous call on these Trump abominations.
You have to put the twisting of the "fact" or "lie" in context of which it was said and the magnitude of the "lie" told. For example, getting a percentage or dollar amount slightly wrong is a mistake, not a "lie". Saying that doctors are euthanizing new born babies ( a number of times on many occasions) is an abject LIE.
Absolutely agree! It seems that very few people seem to know the difference these days between a lie and an error. If debates aren't argued based on FACTS, then what's the point? May as well just unmute those mikes and let them yell incoherently at each other for 90 minutes.
There is no quid pro quo when it comes to Trump. When you've lied over 30,000 times during your last presidency, including lying about the very democracy (election) you swore to uphold, you've earned the right to be questioned every time you open your mouth.
Trump’s sickness is America’s new pandemic.
"Shouldn't the values we teach our children be those we see in our president?"
You do realize, don't you, that you can't actually debate someone who lies all the time. One side tells a lie and the other side tries to refute it, only to be told another. It becomes a one-sided monologue. A moderator needs to moderate, which in a case like Trump means being the authority in the room. Trump's opponent does not have that standing. A slippery slope? Of course, but better than what you otherwise get. (See Trump/Biden debate.)
I believe networks have an obligation to do whatever it takes to ensure that its airtime is not used to disseminate outright lies. Media tolerance of lying by politicians is the original sin in US politics that has led inexorably to the mess we are in today. ABC did a good job here, but I’m not sure they went far.enough.
I think you are wrong. Trump lies all the time. In fact that’s how he operates and it has been effective. You point out that she lied about a National Sales Tax. She was not lying- his tariffs are in effect a tax on us. He doesn’t even know how they work.
If anything ABC gave him more time than Harris and should have muted his mic when he began to debate the fact checker. According to CNN he lied over 35 times. Seems like they gave him a great many passes.
Agreed. While her sales tax stmt isn't correct, it does put the impacts of tariffs into plain and simple language. Hardly on par with 2020 election denials.
Conservatives rename progressive and/or Democratic actions all the time without being accused of lying. The inheritance tax was a death tax, the Green New Deal is the Green New Scam, etc. But Kamala is "lying" allegedly when she renames the tariff a national sales tax, although effectively it would be. And these howls about "lying" are coming from people who consider it a "lie" that Trump said there were fine people on both sides in Charlottesville. Not an even standard.
You chose the Federalist for the number of Harris lies, but CNN for Trumps. Why not the CNN for both? Could it be that they only had Harris at 1 with Trump at 33?
I didn't even notice that. The Federalist is a right-wing organization that, for example, helped provide the list of the Trump justices who destroyed Roe v. Wade.
I cannot imagine using them as a source for an objective list of errors by both candidates.
Chris benefits, like most media, from more Trump. Therefore, he has a vested interest in keeping the race close and "sane washing" Trump. (And yes, I realize Chris does call out the crazy stuff Trump says on a very regular basis.)
But the example that Lyn gives above, that Chris uses CNN to count Trump's lies but the Federalist to count Harris' is absurd and serves to normalize Trump. The Federalist is not a serious journalistic enterprise. It is propaganda.
Lyn is correct that correct that Chris should have used CNN to compare both. But if he had, he would not have been able to come to his (already predetermined) conclusion.
Chris did not cite The Federalist as a source for Harris lies. He cited the Federalist as what conservative media is spinning as alleged lies by Harris. Chris literally put "lies" in quotes and used the word "allegedly."
Well, while I generally agree with Chris’ argument, I’m happy moderator David stepped up on the pet-eaters-of-Springfield-OH (Simpsons episode right there) because seemingly Kamala wasn’t aware of it. And who could blame her? Sure, candidates should be prepared, but I don’t fault har for not having an answer to every wacky conspiracy theory out there
I totally disagree. When debating TFG who lies constantly, a debater would be left with nothing to say but correcting his lies. That is how he has pummeled all of his repub opponents. They are so busy correcting his lies, they never tell their policies. Harris did not fall for that and Won! High School Debaters are not allowed to use false information. The same should be true for a presidential debate. The moderators did a fantastic job. They did not correct all of his lies, they only corrected conspiracy theories while 67 million people were watching—which should be the responsibility of any journalist for his/her audience. How is the FBI supposed to report the crimes that were not reported? The crime rate is down 26% under Biden/Harris and was at an all time high during TFG’s reign—probably because he was encouraging violence.
I think ABC did an outstanding job. And it should be the model for all future debates. In Trump's post-truth era, immediate fact checking is the only antidote to the further spreading of lies. Should they have fact checked Harris? Maybe. But ABC was on the lookout for the most egregious lies -- and those only come from Trump.
Agree with Randy. When Trump says outrageous things like he did on abortion and on the pet eating, he needs to be called out.
Agreed… I feel the problem with leaving the fact-checking solely to the candidates is that, in the case of a perpetual liar like Trump, the opposing candidates could spend so much time fact-checking their opponent’s outright lies that they run out of time needed to talk about their own policy positions. Someone like Trump could deliberately use that as a tactic to suppress their opponent’s ability to present their own message.
Disappointed in your take. The few fact checks on trump were perfunctory and related to egregious and inflaming lies. They seemed perfectly done. The Harris items you cite seem like minor mischaracterizations that would have benefited only slightly from a fact-check (eg, tariffs act like a sales tax, but they wouldn't apply to fully-US-sourced items)
Well stated!!@
Agree with what you're saying here. I wish that Kamala had expounded on what she meant by Trump Tax and let the people know that this is the tariff. Trump presents confusing stuff as it is and it needs to be broken down in simple terms - these tariffs he's adding aren't going against the country, they are going against you the consumer when the companies hike up the price of goods.
For issues that are clear, yes they should fact check. The four issues you pulled out were clearly lies by Trump and it was good ABC immediately called him out for lies lies lies. He lied about another 30 times that they left alone. Otherwise they would have been calling him a lier all night long.
I was just debating this with friends last night! My opinion is that moderating should be like reffing a NFL/NBA game. In the NFL, you could call Pass Interference or Holding on literally every play, but the league has made the decision to only call the most egregous. On the FBI crime stats, that was probably one that the moderators should have let go. How much crime actually is happening can be interpretted many different ways. As for the others:
1. You absolutely cannot let Trump say that it is legal to kill infants after they are born.
2. You absolutely cannot allow him to say that the election was stolen when this has been proven over and over again. This suppresses the vote and is election interference.
3. I live 15 miles from Springfield, Ohio. As someone who lives here, i dont want my community slandered by unverified conspiracies on the internet. This could have many negative, long-term consequences for SW OH. And btw, the Haitian immigrants in Springfield are political refugees who are legally here, and has nothing to do with the nominal topic that Teump was asked about: illegal immigration.
That's a good analogy with NFL penalties.
https://www.daytondailynews.com/news/springfield-city-hall-evacuated-due-to-unspecified-threat/LEJGCXXHZRHT3HH3HYHABRZGT4/
Probably related to Trump's lies spewed on Tuesday night and propogated by other right wing sources.
Trump is unique - a consistent fire hose of lies. Fact checking is more than warranted.
Let me add what I believe is going on with the lies: Hitler and Goebbels used The Big Lie to promote Nazi propaganda, for example stigmatizing “others” as “enemies of the state.” What do we think Trump is doing? We must call it out at every opportunity.
Totally correct. Trump is very much employing Goebbels Big Lie technique, and he knows he's doing that.
Chris, you sound like a Trump apologist. The lies are category differences. And the moderators did not interrupt Trump. They simply made it clear to their audience that the four things they fact checked were egregious lies.
In the first debate the moderators did their audience a great disservice by not interjecting in real time to correct some egregious lies that Trump told.
I completely agree with Jonathan Last at the Bulwark that the purpose of real journalism is to help their audiences understand reality. Fact checking the most egregious lies a politician says is integral to that purpose.
Chris is very definitely not a Trump apologist.
Fully understand Chris' point, but disagree. The point of the media and a debate is not to let just anyone say anything. In that case, just give them airtime and let them say and do what they want. I want context. I do think there is a line between shaping and lying. I think what will make a great journalist vs a poor one is how well they walk that line.
I disagree vehemently with your LeBron analogy. If he commits the fouls, he should be called for them. If he is great, he doesn't need extra advantages. This "great ones get advantages" concept is horrible in all sports.
Dangerous lies (immigrants are stealing pets and eating them! Infanticide is a Democratic policy! The 2020 election was rigged and stolen) need to be fact-checked in real time. These are the kinds of lies that make partisan followers take “action” ( let’s lynch some Haitians! Let’s shoot some “abortion doctors”! Let’s invade the United States Capitol to stop the election certification!) There are dangerous lies and stretches or shaping of the truth…there’s a difference…and the moderators made a righteous call on these Trump abominations.
I agree 100%!
You have to put the twisting of the "fact" or "lie" in context of which it was said and the magnitude of the "lie" told. For example, getting a percentage or dollar amount slightly wrong is a mistake, not a "lie". Saying that doctors are euthanizing new born babies ( a number of times on many occasions) is an abject LIE.
Absolutely agree! It seems that very few people seem to know the difference these days between a lie and an error. If debates aren't argued based on FACTS, then what's the point? May as well just unmute those mikes and let them yell incoherently at each other for 90 minutes.
There is no quid pro quo when it comes to Trump. When you've lied over 30,000 times during your last presidency, including lying about the very democracy (election) you swore to uphold, you've earned the right to be questioned every time you open your mouth.
Trump’s sickness is America’s new pandemic.
"Shouldn't the values we teach our children be those we see in our president?"
Enough!
Great line: "Trump’s sickness is America’s new pandemic." Importantly clarifies that this is a sickness which is contagious and dangerous.
You do realize, don't you, that you can't actually debate someone who lies all the time. One side tells a lie and the other side tries to refute it, only to be told another. It becomes a one-sided monologue. A moderator needs to moderate, which in a case like Trump means being the authority in the room. Trump's opponent does not have that standing. A slippery slope? Of course, but better than what you otherwise get. (See Trump/Biden debate.)
Thanks for this perspective.
I believe networks have an obligation to do whatever it takes to ensure that its airtime is not used to disseminate outright lies. Media tolerance of lying by politicians is the original sin in US politics that has led inexorably to the mess we are in today. ABC did a good job here, but I’m not sure they went far.enough.
I think you are wrong. Trump lies all the time. In fact that’s how he operates and it has been effective. You point out that she lied about a National Sales Tax. She was not lying- his tariffs are in effect a tax on us. He doesn’t even know how they work.
If anything ABC gave him more time than Harris and should have muted his mic when he began to debate the fact checker. According to CNN he lied over 35 times. Seems like they gave him a great many passes.
Agreed. While her sales tax stmt isn't correct, it does put the impacts of tariffs into plain and simple language. Hardly on par with 2020 election denials.
Yes, they did.
Conservatives rename progressive and/or Democratic actions all the time without being accused of lying. The inheritance tax was a death tax, the Green New Deal is the Green New Scam, etc. But Kamala is "lying" allegedly when she renames the tariff a national sales tax, although effectively it would be. And these howls about "lying" are coming from people who consider it a "lie" that Trump said there were fine people on both sides in Charlottesville. Not an even standard.
You chose the Federalist for the number of Harris lies, but CNN for Trumps. Why not the CNN for both? Could it be that they only had Harris at 1 with Trump at 33?
I didn't even notice that. The Federalist is a right-wing organization that, for example, helped provide the list of the Trump justices who destroyed Roe v. Wade.
I cannot imagine using them as a source for an objective list of errors by both candidates.
Because Chis is a Trump apologist?
Oops, I guess you are accusing Chris.
Chris benefits, like most media, from more Trump. Therefore, he has a vested interest in keeping the race close and "sane washing" Trump. (And yes, I realize Chris does call out the crazy stuff Trump says on a very regular basis.)
But the example that Lyn gives above, that Chris uses CNN to count Trump's lies but the Federalist to count Harris' is absurd and serves to normalize Trump. The Federalist is not a serious journalistic enterprise. It is propaganda.
Lyn is correct that correct that Chris should have used CNN to compare both. But if he had, he would not have been able to come to his (already predetermined) conclusion.
He's a both sides, just better at couching (not the JD type) it so it doesn't appear so.
Chris did not cite The Federalist as a source for Harris lies. He cited the Federalist as what conservative media is spinning as alleged lies by Harris. Chris literally put "lies" in quotes and used the word "allegedly."
Well, while I generally agree with Chris’ argument, I’m happy moderator David stepped up on the pet-eaters-of-Springfield-OH (Simpsons episode right there) because seemingly Kamala wasn’t aware of it. And who could blame her? Sure, candidates should be prepared, but I don’t fault har for not having an answer to every wacky conspiracy theory out there
Nor do I think it she should have to give up a portion of 1 or 2 minute response time to fact check Trump.
I totally disagree. When debating TFG who lies constantly, a debater would be left with nothing to say but correcting his lies. That is how he has pummeled all of his repub opponents. They are so busy correcting his lies, they never tell their policies. Harris did not fall for that and Won! High School Debaters are not allowed to use false information. The same should be true for a presidential debate. The moderators did a fantastic job. They did not correct all of his lies, they only corrected conspiracy theories while 67 million people were watching—which should be the responsibility of any journalist for his/her audience. How is the FBI supposed to report the crimes that were not reported? The crime rate is down 26% under Biden/Harris and was at an all time high during TFG’s reign—probably because he was encouraging violence.
Thank you.