In the final Presidential debate last night, moderator Chris Wallace asked Donald Trump if he would “absolutely accept” the results of the election once the votes were counted. This question, of course, coming on the heels of Trump making claims throughout the campaign that the process was rigged against him.
Let me first say that aside from being
forced to tag along with the Clinton campaign throughout the
election, moderating a debate between these two candidates has to be
one of the least desirable opportunities in media. The moderators of
the previous debates, in my opinion and the opinion of many people I
have spoken to, did a less-than-stellar job. Primarily, because they
were all so biased against Trump. But also because they allowed their
emotions show, and at times verbally attacked him on his answer to
certain questions.
Although I believe Wallace did an
excellent job of moderating the debate and remaining unbiased, I was
a little surprised when he asked Trump if he would concede to Clinton
if the results showed that he had lost the election. This of course,
explained in justification of the fact that we have a tradition of a
“peaceful transition of power”, so the country can come together
after sometimes-heated and painful elections.
I understand why Wallace asked the
question; it was justified, and he knew this would be today's
headline in the papers and on the news. He had to ask a question that
would provoke a memorable and uncomfortable response from one of the
candidates. Listening to talk radio as I drove home from Houston
today, I heard several people discuss the pointed question and
speculate on various reasons as-to why Clinton didn't get an equally
difficult question. Opinions ranged from it being accidental, to it
being a conspiracy theory against Trump, secretly led by Fox News.
But I believe Wallace knew exactly what
he was doing. After numerous claims of bias in the previous debates,
it went without saying that the manner in which he moderated this
debate would be heavily scrutinized. And since he came from Fox News,
who is overwhelmingly conservative, the Democrats would be looking
for anything they could point to, so they could claim he was biased
against Clinton.
If that claim of bias was made with any
sort of legitimacy, it would taint the credibility not just of the
debate, but also of Wallace himself as a journalist. In a skillful
move to maintain the integrity of the
evening, Wallace asked the
pointed question only to Trump, knowing there was no correct answer.
Knowing Clinton's supporters and the media would latch on to it and
run it as if it was the story of the year. When in fact, although
Trump could have answered it more eloquently, at the end of the day,
the thought that any candidate might question the results of an
election is nothing earth-shattering.
Although Clinton described his response
as “terrifying”, I believe Trump has every right and
justification to question the results of this election. The media has
shown extreme bias in favor of Clinton at every turn. They don't even
try to hide it. I have never in my lifetime seen an election in which
the media was so involved in influencing voters for or against a
single candidate.
In my opinion, the majority of media
correspondents out there, after this election, no longer should have
the right to call themselves journalists. Journalists investigate and
dig to find the truth; then they report it, regardless of which
candidate might be helped or harmed. But I have seen none of that
here. When the most honest and unbiased reporting of the entire
campaign comes from hackers and bloggers, there is something
incredibly amiss with news media.
While I think even Clinton's
supporters, if they were being honest, would admit the media has been
pretty biased against Trump, there is nothing that can be done about
it. Although unfair and unprofessional of them, the media can report
the news any way they want. And people who consume that news have the
choice to either do their own research and fact checking, or take it
at face value, trusting their news outlet of choice to be completely
accurate. Luckily for the liberal media, a large portion of our
country has been steadily dumbed down to the point that they are only
a few IQ points away from real life Idiocracy.
Even though nothing can truly be done
about unfair media in this election, Trump was absolutely right when
he said the media “poisons the minds of the voters.” What does
need to be addressed however, and should be a legitimate concern of
everyone, is the extent to which Clinton, her staff and the DNC went
to fix this election. The evidence uncovered both by the Wikileaks hacked emails, and the undercover
investigation by James O'Keefe and Project Veritas
is undeniable.
Our country should be in an uproar over
what we have learned about Clinton. People should be rioting in the
streets over the cavalier responses we received from the government
over our cries for justice; both for Benghazi and the FBI
investigation into Clinton's mishandling of classified documents on
her private email server. We shouldn't even have to ask the
government to look into the Clinton Foundation and the political
favors that were seemingly exchanged for large donations. But
instead, all anyone can focus on is the misdeeds of Trump.
So what if Clinton legitimately
committed crimes and caused American deaths! Trump said the word
“pussy” in a private conversation with another man! Trump was
suddenly accused by a bunch of female Clinton supporters of making
inappropriate sexual advances on them 30 years ago with no evidence
whatsoever! And worst of all, Trump MIGHT have used the current tax
laws to avoid paying taxes!
If Trump Wins, it will be an absolute
miracle. Not because of his lack of support. In order for him to win,
there will have to be such an overwhelming number of votes for him,
that it more than covers all the fraudulent votes that everyone knows
will be cast for Clinton. Based on the huge numbers at Trump's
rallies, compared to the low turnout for Clinton, it could happen.
But it's highly unlikely.
I don't care for Trump as a person, but
I can't stand Clinton. I am beyond disturbed to even think that
someone as corrupt as her has gotten so close to becoming our
President, and I'm scared to death of the damage she could do to our
country. There has been so much propaganda spread by Clinton's
campaign and the media against Trump, that he has been made out to be
much worse than he really is; this will be difficult, if not
impossible to overcome. He's no saint. But unlike Hillary, I'm
relatively certain he hasn't been responsible for any mysterious
deaths. Trump is a gamble, for sure. But I know what we get with four
years of Clinton, and I know I don't want that.
To quote a woman I heard on the Rick Roberts show this afternoon, “we
don't need him to be our savior; we already have one of those. We
just need him to get this train back on the track.”
No comments:
Post a Comment