Academic

ROGER SIMON: Kamala Harris Loses Debate by Smirking. What was then the purpose of debating? Actu?

By Ed Driscoll

ROGER SIMON: Kamala Harris Loses Debate by Smirking.

What was then the purpose of debating?

Actually, as I watched the vice-presidential debate, I came to the conclusion?very little.

But perhaps that is because I am so biased against Kamala Harris?who has seemed to me a total phony since I lived in California, an empty vessel, not even really a liberal or a progressive, but an opportunist interested in the main chance who would vote conservative if she represented Mississippi?that I am not in the slightest a neutral observer.

But I wonder if there are any neutral observers, certainly not in the media.

Once again the moderator?Susan Page of US Today?was biased, though not as much as Chris Wallace, which would be difficult. Indeed, the host of Fox News Sunday carried that attitude forward into Wednesday night?s post-debate spin, predictably looking to say something bad about Mike Pence who, all-in-all. had a good night.

Basically, Pence?s was a workman-like performance, while Kamala smirked at his responses unappealingly for the camera, close-up, in split screen. (Don?t debate prep coaches warn about this? It certainly makes the candidate the kind of person you?d want to run from at a cocktail party.)

I wasn?t surprised that pollster Frank Luntz?s focus group declared Pence the winner because of this smirking.

You know Pence killed it, when the House of Stephanopoulos has to resort to this cliché:

Or perhaps the talking points went out on the topic:

Full post as published by Instapundit.com on October 08, 2020 (boomark / email).