Megyn Kelly Should Not Be Disqualified From The Presidential Debates…

The Hill’s Joe Concha has a story about the process of picking debate moderators got the upcoming Presidential debates (which may or may not happen still).

Fox News’s Megyn Kelly is one obvious possibility, and several people contacted by the The Hill raised her name. Others dismissed the chance she could be selected given her history with Trump, who skipped two primary debates that she hosted.

“I think she’s a solid moderator based on what we saw in the primaries. She’s tough, measured and prepared. But there’s just too much history with Trump,” one prominent media writer told The Hill. “She’ll end up being the story if he publicly objects to her being chosen, which he almost undoubtedly would. It may even lead to him boycotting the debate and that’s the last thing anybody wants.”

This is completely wrong headed thinking. Megyn Kelly should not be punished because of Donald Trump. Kelly has done nothing wrong since the start of the election. It was Trump who made this an issue because he didn’t like tough questions. Trump has made Kelly the issue not because she had it in for him or because her questioning was out of bounds. He made Kelly an issue out of ego.

If he objects, so what? Like debate dates and times, this stuff isn’t up for negotiation. It’s take it or leave it. Trump would have a choice, to show up or not show up. I’d lay serious money that even Trump wouldn’t balk because of the optical damage it would do to him with undecideds that Hillary Clinton, his opponent, would show up for a debate but he wouldn’t.

What? Are you afraid Trump might argue that this is rigged? He’s been throwing that meme out since the primaries. He’ll throw it out whenever he thinks it will work for him. You can’t let that be a factor in your decision making process. It’s not like this would be a walk in the park for Hillary Clinton either. She has avoided press conferences and tough interviews even more than Trump has. You think she wants to subject herself to close scrutiny after Benghazi, the Dept of State email fiasco, and the Clinton Foundation bruhaha?

Both candidates don’t want this. So why make special allowances for Trump to essentially dictate who gets to ask him questions?

The idea that candidates can guard against unfair questions through moderator cherry picking is ridiculous. You think Mike Dukakis had a problem with Bernard Shaw before that debate in ’88?

Unless the prospective moderator has some kind of fundamental disqualifying characteristic…and nothing Kelly has done this year would fall into that category…they should be considered for the role.

If the candidate goes bonkers…it’s on them. These people are running for the top job in the country. If they can’t set aside ego and personal issues to submit to a few questions from someone they’d prefer to not be around, how can they possibly handle dealing with foreign leaders and international incidents which may require a President to bite back hard?

Not that I think Kelly will be picked. The Debate Commission has a track record of going off the reservation when selecting moderators and Kelly is too obvious a choice. But if you aren’t going to pick her, do it for that reason. Don’t do it because you’re afraid of how Donald Trump may react. Who is running this show? You or him?

16 Responses to “Megyn Kelly Should Not Be Disqualified From The Presidential Debates…”

  1. You and I may think Megyn is a decent choice and don’t think she is too controversial or too toxic for this specific forum.

    Unfortunately, there seem to be many others (including those in powerful positions) out there who disagree with us.

    I’ll take a stab at predicting:
    Wallace, Holt and Raddatz — with Tapper on the bubble.

  2. […] Why Megyn Kelly should not be disqualified from POTUS […]

  3. therealroyalking Says:

    Even if it weren’t for that tawdry little skit Trumpf and O’Kelly performed and the fall-out therefrom, O’Kelly is too closely aligned with Republican party politics to be an objective moderator. In four years, let her moderate each and every Republican debate. I don’t care. But, no presidential debates, please.

  4. “Kelly is too closely aligned with Republican party politics to be an objective moderator.”

    That’s probably a more widely held POV than most people realize.

    If you had to pick only three from Kelly, Wallace, Holt, Raddatz, Tapper and Dickerson, realistically how many would have MK in their top 3?

    She does a decent job of playing the role of a good conservative soldier and offering up red meat to a Fox New audience on many nights. The downside is it likely cost her any real shot at moderating a presidential debate.

  5. imnotblue Says:

    “Kelly is too closely aligned with Republican party politics to be an objective moderator.”

    Absolute nonsense.

    The only people who believe that are the people who read Media Matters like it’s the Bible, and see all things FNC as the Devil. Royal fits that description to a T.

  6. To: imnotblue

    But you will concede that she is controversial with the overall public as opposed to your Fox News & Kelly File fans?

    Consider the following…none of which comes from Media Matters. Try to keep an open mind.

    Praised for:
    • Challenging Karl Rove during 2012 election coverage.
    • Taking on Trump at the August debate.
    • Defending Michelle Fields after Lewandowski lied about their encounter.
    • Applauded for criticizing Trump for his claims against Gonzalo P. Curiel’s credibility.

    Mocked for:
    • Saying, “For all you kids watching at home, Santa just is white…”
    • Kelly also stated that Jesus was a white man later in the segment.
    • Interviewing Trump on Fox broadcast was met with mixed reviews and harsh criticism.
    • Mocked by some Ailes supporters and criticized by some co-workers after reports surfaced that she herself was also subject to his treatment (sexual harassment).
    • For what many non-Fox News fans saw as biased coverage of the Freddy Gray case.

  7. Weak. Very weak. Trump is sooo scared…get over it, he’s gonna win no matter how much this may upset you.

  8. imnotblue Says:

    @Tom

    What’s your point? That some on the left attacked her for some have said? I think I already made that argument… and dismissed it.

    Do you have any evidence that the things you claim she was mocked for were widespread views help by the general public? Come on. Be serious.

  9. Kelly has her fans, but she also gets a lot of grief from both sides.
    A. Those on the left who think her history demonstrates a substantial spewing of red meat to your typical Tea Party type FNC viewer.
    B. Those of the right — either Trumpkins or Ailes sycophants — who take her on.

    If you with a long history as a Fox News fan don’t think she’s controversial — especially when compared to the other choices for debate moderator — so be it.

    I just choose to disagree.

  10. imnotblue Says:

    What’s the old saying about being “disliked” by those on the extreme left and right? You must be somewhere in the middle doing a good job?

    Hmm.

    By your definition, who isn’t controversial?

  11. If you are suggesting that Wallace, Holt, Raddatz, Tapper and Dickerson are similarly controversial to Ms. Kelly, the chasm is growing my friend.🙂

  12. Her qualifications may be great but the Debate Commission loathes controversy so Kelly will be an unlikely pick.

  13. Fritz3 appears out of the darkness with the voice of reason.
    Well played sir.

  14. imnotblue Says:

    “If you are suggesting that Wallace, Holt, Raddatz, Tapper and Dickerson are similarly controversial…”

    Shall I provide you with a list of Media Matters whining about each and every one of those people? And then a similar list from Newsbusters?

    What’s the difference?

  15. savefarris Says:

    No chance. We all know the moderators are going to be

    Gwen Ifil
    John Dickerson
    George Stephanopolis
    Rachel Maddow (Vice)

  16. Just for fun ‘savefarris’, my odds:

    Gwen Ifil 30-1
    John Dickerson 1-1
    George Stephanopolis 10-1
    Rachel Maddow (Vice) 20-1

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: