Whatever you want to say about the general election debates so far, one thing is certain: The remaining two should have Susan Page as moderator. And if the commission can’t do that, then the future moderators should study what she did and replicate it to a T.
I hope Chris Wallace is at this very moment doing a slow-motion play-by-play of Page’s expert handling of the event so that if he were given the opportunity to moderate another presidential debate, he won’t moan for 48 hours about how disrespected he was.
Page did exactly what a moderator should do. She was authoritative and gave it her best shot at asking provocative questions, keeping time, and moving the discussion. Most remarkable was her flexibility with the rules.
Yes, of course, there are ground rules that stipulate how a debate should go. Each side gets an allotted amount to speak, there are supposed to be no interruptions, and the topic at hand is supposed to be the focus of every answer.
But the reality is that, like politics, debates are necessarily messy. It’s two people competing for power. Why wouldn’t it be? Viewers can understand that, and while they may not hearing two individuals talk over one another for a brief period of time, it’s far better than to have a third person, a nonfactor as far as the election goes, chiming in like Wallace at the first debate to say, “Guys. Guys. Guys. Guys. Listen. Listen. Listen. Please. Please. Please. Guys.”
Page on occasion had to corral Harris and Pence in an attempt to get them back on topic. But she could also tell when one of them was going over time but about to make a point worth hearing.
Points worth hearing are what these events are about. Without a contrast between the candidates, there is no purpose in doing this.
Page was excellent. I hope the moderators for the next two debates were watching and taking notes.
