With Trump opting out of the debate, what is the big story here? Should it center on Trump or Megyn Kelly?
We have already seen a flood of stories centering on Trump being a no-show — ranging from praise of a cagey move down to mocking him as a coward. Fans will compare him to Reagan — going past the media, and directly to the public — critics will compare him to Obama, in dealing only with friendly media.
But he is not the only player in this drama. The other party is Megyn Kelly. The key complaint Trump had about her cited conflict of interest and bias. Is he right or wrong there?
Remember National Review? The Republican National Committee “disinvited” them from the debates. Do you remember why? Right. Because they took a side and could no longer be trusted as impartial.
And Megyn Kelly? How are we supposed to view her? She’s slated to be a moderator. But has she not done the same thing as the National Review? What about the fact that her guests mainly support Cruz over Trump? The latest being Michael Moore? Is she news? Or is she opinion?
Did she not say, in her interview with Dana Loesch, Brent Bozell and Katie Pavlich, “A lot of Trump supporters are saying these people are establishment. They don’t get it. We just want someone who is a great leader and is a staunch conservative and I don’t have to question their authenticity.” — “We want?” “I don’t have to..?” This is not the language of impartiality.
Megyn Kelly bragged after the August debate, “The candidates are in the arena and so am I” — So are you? Really?
Could someone kindly explain to me which office is she running for, exactly? She can REPORT the news, or she can BE the news, but she has to choose between those options.
Which Megyn Kelly will we see at the debate in Trump’s absence? Will she be boldly “take-no-prisoners” and risk giving Trump a boost? Will she lob softballs with Trump absence, and prove that she was clearly too biased to be moderator in the first place? Innuendo about Trump’s courage or not, it’s hard to see how she wins or Trump loses in this one — especially if Trump later accepts the one on one debate with Cruz that was proposed as an alternative.
Does this not substantiate the very thing she tried to blast Cruz about, why liberals should not be moderating GOP Primaries? Was her journalist judgement just proven wrong there, too?
How will she play this scenario? Since Trump shares her liberal views on same sex marriage, and Cruz does not, will that topic come up? Will she press Cruz on the New York values question? (Which she takes Trump’s side on?) The citizenship question (which I think is dumb) — will that come up again?
Will she press other leading conservatives for answers to hard questions? The longshots that might slip into second if Ted made a major misstep, what of them? Call them out for flip flops, hurting the chances of Rubio, or others? Or give them a pass?
The question I’m asking of her as a “trusted news source” who is “fair and balanced” (trademark!) is pretty basic: now that she’s waded into the realm of opinion, can she even BE impartial anymore?
The answer mattered because losing that important skill will mean she has become just another member of the drive-by media: opinion masquerading as news.
A generalized belief that she has become exactly that would certainly explain the petition of 57,000 signatures (and counting) asking to dump Megyn Kelly from the Fox Debate.
Just take a look at this video and try to tell us she isn’t biased: