Michelle [1]makes a great point, this monring:
How dare the ABC moderators ask questions about topics that are, you know, topical?
How dare they ask questions that-gasp!-conservatives [2] are asking.
How dare they explore questions of character, truthfulness, and judgment?
Don’t you know you’re supposed to do the Schoolmarm [3] thing or the Suck-Up thing [4] or the Bogus Plant thing [5]?
Don’t you know you’re supposed to just let the candidates bloviate about Compassion [6] or Global Warming [7] or Diversity [8]or some other MSM-designated Important Issue?
Indeed. In looking over the ratings numbers for the debate, I note one strange thing; Usually, you get some tune-outs as people fall asleep or life intrudes. The number of tune-outs during this debate was strangely low… far lower a percentage than I would have figured on. In short, those who came, stayed to watch until the last dog was hung. If what the debate offered wasn’t what the people wanted to talk about, they’d have left, or so I would think. They didn’t.
So, in spite of what the leftards are saying about what Americans REALLY want to talk about, I’d say offhand, the people watching approved of the subject matter covered. They liked the format and the questions asked.
The disconnect between what he left side of the sphere thinks they should have discussed, and the reaction to what WAS discussed, is telling, I think… and it indicates a McGovern type bloodbath for the Democrats come November. Which, come to think on it, may be why they’re screaming so, just now. They know what’s coming. You see, those people who stayed to watch, are the ones the Democrats are going to need to connect to between now and November. Personally, I don’t hold out much in the way of chance it’s going to happen.