I am writing this article just after watching the last minutes of the second presidential debate. Before I go into this article I want to go ahead and preface that I am reviewing and expressing my opinions from a non-subjective viewpoint.

So this is a big topic that people flock to after the debate so they can cast blame when they feel that their favorite nominee didn’t do as well as they would have hoped. So as I watched this debate I decided to keep a tally of the number of times I felt that the moderators were favoring a presidential nominee. I divided my count into two categories. Overall favoring of a candidate and the amount of times they interrupted. Favoring a candidate was really classified as: if they let a candidate go over their time limit (by a factor of plus or minus 10 seconds) without saying anything, or hushing the crowd when they cheered or booed for a specific candidate. There really weren’t any more interactions by the moderators to say whether or not they were favoring a candidate. As I took my tally on the overall favoring of a candidate I discovered the numbers were…… exactly equal. WOW! SHOCKER RIGHT?!?! No, not really. I only did this for the CNN debate because that is when I thought of the idea, but overall CNN is the most middle of the road U.S. news corporation there is. They were against Trump a total of three times over the course of the debate, and against Clinton three to three and a half times. I say three and a half because the last point that would have been decided is really a toss-up that is in the opinion of the spectator and since I am viewing this from a neutral standpoint I felt it wasn’t my place to decide.

Now the overall interruptions were a little bit different. At first, I thought they were favoring Clinton when it came to the amount of times they interrupted Trump and not Hillary. My tally came out to be five Trump interruptions and two Clinton Interruptions. Now before someone in the comments starts writing about how CNN really is favoring Clinton over Trump I would like to remind them why the moderators interrupted. The only times the moderators would interrupt is if the candidate was getting off topic and/or avoiding the questions. If you do not believe me feel free to go back and watch the debate and tally yourself. It was NOT because the CNN moderators really want to see Clinton win. It is because Trump got off topic/avoided a question more than Clinton did. Now I will say this, there was one instance that they interrupted Trump when they shouldn’t have and I would like to make note of it because I am viewing this from a neutral stance. Despite that one interruption I still thought it was verily fair. This is my opinion, though, and it is up for you, the audience, to decide.

As I close this article I would like to say that when you watch these presidential debates make sure you are listening to everything the candidates are saying. You do not have to agree with what they say because they are a part of a certain political party. Make sure that you understand what exactly you are voting for. Do not feel that you have to side with a certain candidate because of their political party or because of what your friends and family think of them. It is YOUR decision and it is a serious one. You need to weigh both options equally and not dismiss candidates just because they are Republican or Democrat. Your decision should be based on their POLICY not their PARTY.

Yours in eternity,

Calvin Bowman