2) She suggested that it would be difficult for moderators to distinguish between “big facts” and “little facts.”
-
-
- その他の返信を表示
-
3) She then gave the example of how difficult it would be to fact check the unemployment rate. When in fact, that’s not difficult at all.
- その他の返信を表示
-
4) I suspect she’s getting at the valid issue of ensuring the fact-checker doesn’t screw up, and thus throw the debate to one party.
- その他の返信を表示
-
5) But the media fact checks every day. The NYT, for example, just wrote a story about 31 “whoppers” Trump told over the past week.
- その他の返信を表示
-
6) And certain facts, like whether Trump was for the war in Iraq before it started, are incontrovertible.
- その他の返信を表示
-
7) The thing is, unlike a high school or college debate, there is no “judge” to rule who wins and who loses. That’s a problem.
- その他の返信を表示
-
8) Donald Trump could lie throughout the entire debate, and an uninformed public could believe he “won” the debate.
- その他の返信を表示
-
9) And while of course Hillary will claim that Trump is lying, but why should anyone believe her?
- さらに表示
-
-
@aravosis People are saying she's related to Matt Lauer. -
-
@aravosis What's a big fact what's a little fact? What's a debate? What's a president? What's reality? What's the meaning of life? ARRRRRGH -
@aravosis Wow...just wow. So the moderator does what again? Oh yea, softball pitcher. -
@aravosis Common core was made for these people -
@aravosis@RiskyLiberal So, she's saying there is no right/wrong? We'll give up on 'facts' & go with opinions? Who is this knucklehead? -
@aravosis No. More. Debates. -
@aravosis I think moderator fact checking would be biased. I think it's unavoidable. -
@aravosis@RiskyLiberal LOL! Encyclopedia Britannica? Lord help! -
@aravosis Stunning proof that CHARACTER truly IS DESTINY.
読み込みに時間がかかっているようです。
Twitterの処理能力の限界を超えているか、一時的な不具合が発生しています。もう一度試すか、Twitterステータス(英語)をご確認ください。