Yeah, yeah. You can stop snickering now. That's a slang word that was used to describe a misstep, not someone named 'Willie' standing at attention.
Truth to tell, I'm not quite sure what happened yesterday. Good intentions and all of that but, more than anything, I had a desk piled with papers - my avalanche - and a lunch date. Both took all my attention to the detriment of this. Then, when I got home, the debate was on and I watched that, then the analysis.
Lunch was nice. I enjoyed it and had a chance to talk one-on-one with one of the department heads. That's never the most comfortable situation because, no matter who you are or how confident, if you're an underling you can't help but watch your step. It's not the most relaxing situation. Particularly if it's the head of HR. However, it was nice and we spoke about all sorts of things, including my job and what I'm doing, which was expected and helpful. It gave me a chance to set a stake in the ground and run a line in different directions so she knows where my interests lie.
Now, to step backward and set it up properly, this was a thank you lunch. Last week there was a webinar that went sideways for about ten minutes before I got it back on track and saved the bacon. It wasn't a case of me being great (although I do like to think that I am), it's just familiarity with the program and its quirks and the other person not having the experience.
So, I got a lunch out of it. Which was nice, but not necessary since, in my view, I was just doing my job (even though it did partially take my attention away from other things on which I had planned to work). I learned some things from it, too, so double bonus.
Then, on the way home last night, I turned the radio to the Republican presidential debate in which, I think, the candidates rocked compared to Hilliary, Bernie and the other corpses the DNC dug up for theirs (it was so unmemorable that I can't even remember who was there aside from the two).
Last night, the questions asked by the moderators were the most unprofessional, least helpful or informative questions I have ever heard posed at a debate. Even the lead off question, which is one I've run across in job interviews, is a negative and it set the tone for the entire evening.
"What is your greatest weakness?" It's valid. If you're interviewing someone. Depending on the answer, it can show a certain level of self-awareness, but it's also a negative and it can so easily be gamed. However, asking that question as the opener at a presidential debate? Really?
"Is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign?" That was the very next question. What kind of a question is that? It's disrespectful, denigrating, and absolutely non-substantive. It's pure and simple baiting. But, Trump, to whom it was posed, wasn't stumped by it. He said what I think a lot of people were thinking: "it's not a very nicely asked question, the way you say that." And it wasn't.
There were others like those. Overall, the tone and impression left was that the candidates are almost all strong, capable contenders, able to think on their feet and not get caught by petty traps, while the moderators came across as nasty, little-minded people with an agenda and zero professionalism.
I listened to an hour of it on the radio because I was driving, and the moderators seemed to have no control over the event. John Harwood was the worst of the group. Rude, biased, vicious like a junkyard dog - an ugly little man in character as shown on television last night.
One "alleged" question was posed to John Kasich: "That is, you had some very strong words to say yesterday about what's happening in your party and what you're hearing from the two gentlemen we've just heard from. Would you repeat it?"
So... let me get this straight. This vicious little man wants a presidential candidate to repeat something someone else said about him or about his plans. What schoolyard does this idiot spend his time in? That's the kind of stuff ten-year olds do, not adult professionals. Pure and simple, that is baiting and I am delighted Kasich and none of the other people on that stage last night fell for such paltry tactics.
Quintanilla was another one. What a nasty personality there, too. Snideness on the part of a moderator has no place in a debate setting. These people are supposed to be neutral - unbiased - yet the bias showed through again and again all night long.
On the subject of taxes, Quintanilla asked Fiorina about taxes and the tax code. The exchange, copied from the Washington Post transcript, went:
Quintanilla: "You want to bring 70,000 pages to three?"
Fiorina: "That's right, three pages."
Quintanilla: "Is that using really small type?" - That, right there, is snide and demeaning. What was the point of that question?
Fiorina: "You know why three?"
Quintanilla: "Is that using really small type?" Again, what is the point of this?
However! Fiorina came back and blew the moron out of the water: "No. You know why three. Because only if it's about three pages are you leveling the playing field between the big, the powerful, the wealthy and the well-connected who can hire the armies of lawyers and accountants and, yes, lobbyists, to help them navigate their way through 73,000 pages."
That phrase, 'leveling the playing field', is a favorite of the liberal left. We're always supposed to level the playing field, handing out participation "trophies" instead of badges for winners. And she not only answered the question well, explaining her reasoning in a snapshot everyone can understand and assimilate, she didn't get tripped up by the snarkiness of the question as it was posed.
And so it went - nasty question and ugly poses by the moderators. It was, or it should be considered, an embarrassment for CNBC and clearly shows the attitude the media has toward anyone with a modicum of red in their blood.
Harwood: "...the fact that you're at the fifth lectern tonight shows how far your stock has fallen in this race..."
In all, Senator Cruz summed up what I and many others were seeing, beautifully: "You know, let me say something at the outset. The
questions that have been asked so far in this debate illustrate why the
American people don't trust the media.
"This is not a cage match. And, you look at the
questions -- "Donald Trump, are you a comic-book villain?" "Ben
Carson, can you do math?" "John Kasich, will you insult two people
over here?" "Marco Rubio, why don't you resign?" "Jeb Bush,
why have your numbers fallen?"
"How about talking about the substantive issues the people
care about?"
Beautiful!
And none of the people on that stage fell into the traps set by the 'moderators'. They said what they wanted to say, made the points they wanted to make and effectively marginalized the moderators' bias when it started standing higher than the intellects of the people sitting behind the moderator's table.
All-in-all it was a livelier, more engaging, funnier and better two hours than I expected. Comparing this match to the Democrat debate a few weeks ago? The Democrat love-fest was a sleep aid by comparison.
As for last night, I don't think anyone's mind was changed. I don't think anyone who has a favorite was swayed from their candidate to another.
It's early days, yet, and that will come later as people start paying closer attention. What was shown, though, is that these people who are running for the office of president are smart, mentally agile - they avoided the traps set with ease (which also speaks to the weakness of CNBC's staff since no one came up with anything that was a true 'gotcha' - which is what the network was looking for) - and capable.
I still think Jeb Bush looks like he's suffering from a terminal case of constipation, and John Kasich looks desperate - the expressions on his face coupled with his body language convey that. Trump was Trump, Carson was Carson but Christie was brilliant at times, even though I really don't like his 'strange bedfellow' approach to things political.
Based on what I saw, I'm interested to see how the next few weeks play out. The RNC obviously has their candidate picked - and it's not any of the "outsiders" - but I think they might be ready to switch horses, midstream or not, because Bush and Kasich just ain't cutting it. It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out in the coming weeks.
Stay tuned!
Now - back to life and living. Have a lovely day!
Best~
Philippa
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PhilippaStories
No comments:
Post a Comment