Staff Reports
Mark Penn, the former pollster for Bill Clinton, has taken to the airwaves to slam ABC News hosts Linsey Davis and David Muir for their lackluster moderation during the recent presidential debate. In what can only be described as a glaring double standard, the hosts were accused of turning a blind eye to Vice President Kamala Harris’s numerous blunders while playing fact-checking vigilante against former President Donald Trump.
During the debate, which was aimed at providing voters with a fair assessment of both candidates, it seems the ABC duo decided to treat Trump like a piñata, swinging their fact-checking bats with abandon. Penn argued that such bias not only misled viewers but also skewed an essential democratic process. He lamented the missed opportunity for Harris to be challenged on her own misstatements. He suggested that this imbalance left Trump scrambling to defend himself instead of hitting back at the vice president’s questionable claims.
Frmr. Clinton Advisor Mark Penn: ABC ‘Reps Put Finger On Scale’ In Debate, Put In Jeopardy Institutions Of Debate pic.twitter.com/kcUBj4QZyY
— Alexandra Datig | Front Page Index 🇺🇸 (@alexdatig) September 13, 2024
Harris did not make things easy for herself. Throughout the debate, she stumbled over her position on key issues, including abortion and Project 2025. However, while Trump found himself subjected to relentless scrutiny, Davis and Muir opted for a hands-off approach when it came to challenging Harris’s questionable statements. It would seem the hosts might have left their debate moderation responsibilities at the door in favor of a one-sided narrative to protect their chosen candidate.
Notably, since President Biden announced his re-election bid was coming to an end, Harris has all but disappeared from the public eye. The only significant media appearance she made was a dual interview with CNN, alongside Minnesota’s Democratic Governor Tim Walz, which hardly provided her the platform to clarify her stances. Her campaign website has also been criticized for looking like a carbon copy of Biden’s pitches, raising eyebrows about her commitment to independent thought.
It appears Harris has also been quietly shifting away from her previous far-left positions without much fanfare, thanks to whispers from her campaign aides. This backtracking has not gone unnoticed and can be seen as a last-ditch effort to rebrand herself for an electorate that is increasingly wary of radicalism. As a new election cycle approaches, voters may want to ask what the Harris of 2023 represents, especially considering the blatant bias exhibited in her recent debates. The real question remains: can she stand on her own without the protective padding offered by friendly moderators?
