21 votes

CNN's Candy Crowley Challenges Rules Set by Commission on Presidential Debates

In a rare example of political unity, both the Romney and the Obama campaigns have expressed concern to the Commission on Presidential Debates about how the moderator of the Tuesday town hall has publicly described her role, TIME has learned.

While an early October memorandum of understanding between the Obama and Romney campaigns and the bipartisan commission sponsoring the debates suggests CNN‘s Candy Crowley would play a limited role in the Tuesday night session, Crowley, who is not a party to that agreement, has done a series of interviews on her network in which she has suggested she will assume a broader set of responsibilities. As Crowley put it last week, “Once the table is kind of set by the town hall questioner, there is then time for me to say, ‘Hey, wait a second, what about x, y, z?’”

In the view of both campaigns and the Commission, those and other recent comments by Crowley conflict with the language the two campaigns agreed to which delineates a more limited role for the moderator of the town hall debate. The questioning of the two candidates is supposed to be driven by the audience members themselves — likely voters selected by the Gallup Organization. Crowley’s assignment differs from those of the three other debate moderators, who in the more standard format are supposed to lead the questioning and follow up when appropriate. The town hall debate is planned for Tuesday at 9pm ET at Hofstra University in Hempstead, NY.

Read more:

http://thepage.time.com/2012/10/14/moderator-role-under-scru...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Sorry to resurrect this post ...

I heard today that this woman ended up throwing a lot more hardball questions at Romney than at Obama, especially over Libya. I hate to think that I had supported the idea of this woman being a moderator based on both Obama and Romney being against her inclusion, only to find out that she was going to either side with one or be anti the other.

"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." -- Thomas Paine

*shrug*

...fake debate with more talking by shill moderator versus fake debate with less talking by shill moderator. Who cares?

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

I'm not sure I if I'm supposed to be upset by this.

One the one hand, we already know that both Romney and Obama are gonna fill the entire time with non-answers that simply demand follow-up questioning.

But, if the follow-ups are nothing more than crap about Big Bird, are we missing anything without them?

Plus, Candy Crowley is rotten, anyways.

Can't stand that fat cow. She

Can't stand that fat cow. She doesn't belong on television. I remember back in 2011 her bullying Ron Paul and the entire interview was focused on what he thought of Mitt Romney.

dumb comments..

since when has msm anchor been good at 'in-depth' questioning? have you missed 5 years of paul campaigning and the deplorable interviews on both cnn and fox? liberty newbies..

nice

Can you just be nice to people? What is gained by calling people names like newbie? And don't give us the, "I'm sorry, didn't mean to be offensive, just so sick of the MSM, can't even stand the suggestion that they might be real news agencies!" We all know that, but you can still be nice. Geez loueeZ!

"In-depth" might not have

"In-depth" might not have been the best choice of words. What I meant to convey was that, after a citizen participant asks a question and the candidates respond, evidently the moderator is not going to be allowed to follow-up with any questions requesting clarification on any part of the answers. This indicates to me that the campaigns are attempting to avoid being pinned down on anything, which is just sad.

Yes, I'm well aware of the miserable state of the MSM.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

What comments?

There are only three comments, including your own. Who are you talking about?

So in essence, both campaigns

So in essence, both campaigns want to avoid their candidate facing any in depth questioning. They simply want their candidate to be able to memorize 2 minute replies to standard questions, and of course if any non standard question were to slip in the candidates will simply spit out their memorized replies to a similar standard question.

This is the state of presidential campaign debate in our country in 2012.

The US empire has clearly jumped the shark.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

Exactly!

I don't like her much and despise who she works for, but in this case, I hope she prevails.

One day, I'm gonna' change my name to Dale Lee Paul