October 11, 2012
And the Winner of Tonight’s Historic Debate is…
…Martha Raddatz. Remember, you read it here first.
Posted by Jerome Doolittle at October 11, 2012 10:43 PM
True that. The Obama-Romney debate would have had an entirely different flavor if Raddatz had been ramrodding the show.
Playing catchup ball, the Associated Press confirms my instant, trenchant analysis. (Ever notice how you can't spell analysis without anal?)
NEW YORK (AP) — ABC’s Martha Raddatz took a forceful approach to moderating Thursday’s vice presidential debate, winning many positive reviews from instant pundits on social media but some complaints from Republicans…
Twitter was alight with praise for Raddatz, including some suggestions that she run for vice president.
“Martha Raddatz is no joke,” tweeted CNN anchor Don Lemon. “Following up and in charge.”
Indeed, Martha did a wonderful job of forcing both debaters to answer questions. When confronted with such a questioner, the Romney/Ryan team falls on its face.
Which is why Jim Lehrer didn't do that.
I wonder if her experience as foreign correspondent might have made her more comfortable with the less deferential BBC style of interviewing. Parts of the debate sounded very much like a BBC interview, didn't they?
It's just unfortunate that Raddatz chose to go with the same topics covered during the first presidential debate and used Villager framing "everyone knows social security is going broke"). Her abortion question framing was particularly egregious. If she thought the question of the candidates' religion important, she could have asked, for instance, about the Catholic pushback against the Ryan "budget" or a general question regarding how their religion informs their policy choices, but her question instead upheld the idea that women's bodies are not their own.