I find it borderline disgusting that a debate set up for the public to see, hear and get to know their candidates for county commissioner was “moderated” in the fashion that it was done (“Four candidates for county commission present views,” Aug. 30).
The purpose of a debate is to ask fair questions about the issues of the community and to let the voters decide who is the best fit to represent them. What you don’t do is address rumor questions to the candidates where three of those questions are close-ended questions and one question is a direct attack at a candidate’s past.
Also, you don’t state that there have been nine random questions selected to be asked and then have your candidate of personal choice with note cards on how to answer those specific questions! That in itself is not random.
This slap in the face to the public shows the direct lack of respect to the individual voter, suggesting that they cannot make an informed choice on their own at the polls; that they must be led, fed and lied to in order to manipulate their vote!
I propose that all debates going forward be moderated by an actual independent moderator, not someone so blatantly biased that the stink of it somehow masks that of the venue.
I’d like to see the venue changed, a list of possible questions agreed upon by candidates and a member of The Journal conducting the debate.
Be impartial and let the chips fall where they may.