I thought some candidates got more time to respond, and even more questions

[bigtree]

To me, it looked like Clinton and Obama got the most questions, respectively, and the moderator kept giving them more time to respond, as well as rebuttals, while the others waited for their question. There were also important questions which some candidates weren't given any opportunity to answer. It went from everyone getting the same question to a curious focus on the three with targeted questions that deserved to be answered by the others.

In short, lousy format, which I though favored Clinton, Obama, then Edwards in the attention and queries they got from the questions and the questioners.

[Nite Owl]

1. I agree the format was awful

it was unfair and the questions about way too 'gotcha' types. There is so much at stake and so many issues to educate the public about what the candidates plan to do Brian Williams wasted a good opportunity. I didn't expect a lot but they had to work at him being such an a** of a moderator.

[krkaufman]

2. Agreed. Lousy format and imbalanced questioning.

I've gotta agree with former Sen. Gravel that he received fewer questions.

What I'd love to see... Give a candidate a few minutes to make their case for the Presidency, stating their qualifications, vision and goals, and then let the other candidates ask them one question each.

Guarantees equal time, and allows the candidates to drive the differentiation.


p.s. Also agree that this format is critically flawed in that it doesn't provide and apples-to-apples comparision. Each candidate was not asked the same question, so some end up with softballs while others faced trivial gotcha questions. Miserable format that didn't help at all in differentiating the candidates.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Yep some got more time than others

it was not your imagination