The Fox News debate moderators didn’t ask tough questions, they asked stupid questions. They stoked a tenor of unseriousness that provided no insight or depth into the existential issues facing the country. These are debates in the same sense as WWE is wrestling. As political theater, it’s fun. As political reality, it’s pathetic.
If you’re goal is to take down Donald Trump, you’re not going to succeed by limiting his answers to a minute long. You’re not going to succeed by asking him questions about himself, his favorite topic. You’re not going to shame him with political correctness. To demonstrate his suitability for office, or lack thereof, you have to give him the floor on an issue that he knows nothing about. Let him talk in circles and contradict himself. Then let a relatively competent candidate with a grasp of the issues show how it’s done.
Trump is a blowhard alpha stud. He was custom-made to handle stupid questions from feminist reactionaries with attitude problems like Megyn Kelly. This is a trend now. Remember, on her own show Kelly screeched at Lou Dobbs for wanting to discuss the displaced male in modern America, and she femsplained to Mike Huckabee that American women cuss, drink, smoke, and have premarital sex. Look how horribly that’s worked out for decaying lower and middle America (Huckabee’s point all along). Yay, freedom!
“How will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton who is likely to be the Democratic nominee that you are part of the war on women?” Kelly asked. There are lots of options. There is no “war on women,” for starters. Women live longer, have lower rates of incarceration, are awarded more college degrees, are celebrated for every “glass ceiling” achievement, win most custody battles, receive child support from the state and from the children’s fathers, and abort their children for personal fulfillment. The NFL, a 100 percent male league, bends over backwards for women. Again, there is no war on women. If I’m Trump, I’d say: “Why didn’t she bring it up at the fundraisers I held for her?” or “Ask the thousands of women whose paychecks I sign,” or “Seeing as how I was recently pro-choice, I can handle the charge better than my staunchly pro-life colleagues.”
Trump nailed his response, and he made Kelly’s foolish question look foolish, and that’s all anybody remembers from the debate. Trump is still hanging around, sucking all the oxygen from the other candidates’ press coverage, and the only one with less credibility is Fox News.
Kelly further embarrassed herself by asking a loaded question to Scott Walker about abortion: “Would you really let a mother die rather than have an abortion?” That’s not a tough question, it’s a stupid question. It takes a candidate’s obvious strength based on natural reality and tries to turn it upside-down. Thinking people don’t harp on the less than 1 percent of pregnancies that result from rape or incest. Liberals do that, so they can wedge open the exception door to every suboptimal pregnancy under the sun. Because they’re beholden to a Marxist, zero-sum formula of empowerment. They can’t imagine less “freedom”—as in less freedom to abuse their freedom—as being a positive.