Biden's Catastrophic Performance Doesn't Negate Flaws of CNN Debate

Joe Biden's presidential debate performance was a disaster.  Also contributing to the debacle was allowing the candidates, especially Donald Trump, to get away with outright lies. 

There's a false premise that the only alternative was for the CNN moderators to factcheck in real time. "I do not think it should be the role of moderators to fact-check," said former CNN executive Frank Sesno. "Then they become the story."

That misses the point. To be sure, the prime blame for not jumping on Trump lies rests with Biden. Still, sharper questions and selective follow-ups, not letting blatant factual errors hang out there, were in order. That wouldn't have been unique.

In the 1976 debate, when President Gerald Ford erroneously stated that Eastern Europe  was not under the domination of the Soviet Union, an incredulous Max Frankel of the New York Times challenged him.

That rarely occurred last Thursday from two well-regarded journalists, Dana Bash and Jake Tapper.  Perhaps they were hamstrung by rules.

This not a call for pervasive fact-checking. It wouldn't apply to some of Trump's wildest boasts such as: he produced the best economy in history, or that Russia never would have attacked Ukraine, and Hamas wouldn't have attacked Israel if he had been President. 

There were, however, more pointed possibilities. The late Tim Russert, a great television interviewer, not only meticulously researched and prepared questions for his Meet the Press show, he anticipated  answers and follow-ups.  The aim wasn't to score points but to elicit information and not just allow a rehash of talking points.

Trump was asked and pushed, for example, if he would accept the results of the November election no matter who won.  He gave almost verbatim the answer he has been giving, yes if it's a fair election -- which, of course, he would define.

The question really is: in 2020, you lost 60 court challenges to the Biden victory,the results were reaffirmed in recounts in several states you disputed, and leading Republicans like Vice President Mike Pence and Senate GOP  leader Mitch McConnell said Biden won; yet you still refuse to accept the outcome; why in a close election would it be different this time?

Likewise his evasion on abortion was predictable. I was hoping for something like this: "You favor the issue being decided by the states. You vote in Florida where there currently is a ban on abortions after six weeks; there is a referendum on the ballot that would enshrine Roe protections in state law replacing the six week ban. How will you vote ?" 

There could have been some short, specific follow-ups. Trump claimed he never had sex with a porn star, a central issue in his felony conviction.  "Why  did you authorize a $130,000 payment to her to remain silent prior to the 2016 election ?"

Or his claim that he handled Covid perfectly, his reaction to his top Covid adviser, Deborah Birx's assertion that his malfeasance cost 130,000 lives. Or that after he denied calling dead American soldiers "suckers and losers", blaming the charge on a third rate magazine, it was his chief of staff, four star Gen John Kelly who confirmed he made that insult when he was with him.

Trump's false charge that Nancy Pelosi rejected his offer to send  10,000 National Guard forces to  protect the Capitol against a violent mob on January 6 when that was contradicted by his own acting Defense Secretary?

Of course, Biden should have picked up on most of these points, but his incapacity  doesn't mean the moderators should sit back and ignore every lie.

Indeed, they also should have followed up on Biden's misstatement that there have been no combat casualties during his Presidency when thirteen American soldiers were killed during the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan. 

Again, none of this excuses Biden's political malpractice. But it should be instructive for how better to conduct any subsequent debate.