[ad_1]
More than 73 million Americans watched the first television debate between presidential candidates Donald Trump (74) and Joe Biden (77) on Tuesday night. The confrontation degenerated into total chaos: Biden, and especially Trump, kept talking. It is not known how often people swore at the same time in American living rooms. One thing is clear: Two out of three respondents said after the 90-minute political show in Cleveland that they were dissatisfied with the debate.
Chris Wallace (72) was the presenter amid the chaos. Subsequently, the Fox News journalist was heavily criticized on social media, from left to right. In an interview the day after the television debate, Wallace now took a stand and expressed disappointment. “I am disappointed in the country because it could have been a much more useful night,” he told the New York Times.
“I would never have dreamed that”
Wallace is highly regarded in America and respected by both political camps. He is considered the “last journalist” of the Fox News channel, friendly with Trump. “I am a professional,” he says in an interview. “But I’ve never been through something like this. I never would have dreamed that things would get out of hand like that. ”
The 72-year-old had to interrupt Trump 76 times and Biden 15 times Tuesday night. When the president of the United States attacks the Democrat’s family and does not allow him to speak for a few minutes, Wallace’s neck breaks. He berates Trump in front of an audience of millions: “I think the country would be better served if we allowed both people to speak with less interruption. I ask you, sir, to do so. “
When asked about this moment in the interview, Wallace says he felt “despair.” He thought, “If I don’t try to take control of the debate, and I don’t know if I ever did, then I’d be completely out of control.”
Wallace surprised by Trump’s strategy
Experts have identified Trump as the main culprit in the debacle disaster. And the conservative journalist also agrees with this conclusion. “I didn’t realize that this would be the president’s strategy, not just for the beginning of the debate, but for the entire debate,” he says. When asked directly by the New York Times reporter whether the failure of the debate was the president’s fault, Wallace responded bluntly, “It certainly didn’t help.
The presidential debate committee now wants to ensure more order in the upcoming duels. In a statement Wednesday, he said: The first debate had made it clear that more structure was needed for the remaining debates in order to ensure a more orderly discussion. The measures to be implemented for this will be announced soon. The nonpartisan commission has organized all debates on the presidential elections since 1988.
Turn off the mic? “The president could still interrupt”
In the interview, however, Wallace speaks out against proposals to allow moderators to turn off candidates’ microphones during upcoming debates. “In practice, the president could have continued to interrupt even if his microphone had been turned off,” he says. Such a step could also have consequences. “Too many people forget that these two candidates have the support of tens of millions of Americans.”
Wallace was asked at the end of the interview what his advice would be for the moderators of the next two debates. The journalist criticizes himself: “If one of the two candidates goes this way, I hope you understand what is happening here faster than I do.”
What do donkeys and elephants represent in American politics? And the October surprise? BLICK explains an ABC of important terms and facts for the November 3 US election.
