Judging the debate: a point by point analysis

[Final-Fan]

Norris2k said:

Sure, but again I don't think the question or the topic is wrong in itself. It's a legit question, and in fact, frankly, Trump deserves it.

But it's clearly a tough, hard question, and not having a single  equivalent question for Clinton is really a fundamental problem but not the most disturbing problem. It's not  just "5 toughs question for Trump and none for Clinton", it's him creating this false narrative about Trump being the only one having a liability, a bad jugdement regarding wars, regarding Irak, because Hillary get a free pass for her support and vote for Irak war, support for war for Syria, Libya, and ISIS rise. And really, I'm not trying to convince you Clinton is worst or whatever, I'm strictly speaking about how massive the bias was in this debate.

I think you do have a point, but "5 to 0" is a significant exaggeration in my opinion.  The way I see it, there are only three hard questions I am certain the moderator went into the debate intending to aim specifically at Trump:  tax returns, the birth certificate, and the comment about Clinton's "look".  Even in the case of the question about Iraq, I'm not sure whether that would have been brought up if Trump hadn't brought it up in the first place.  (To be fair, it could safely have been anticipated he would do that.)  I also believe he probably would have asked Clinton about the emails but Trump beat him to the punch.  3 to 1 is still one-sided but not as bad as your claim.  And I hope you will admit that Trump has presented a very large target with the birtherism and refusing to release his tax returns; both completely self-inflicted wounds. 

I do think he could have thought up a question to aim at Clinton that would be the counterpoint of the "look" question.