Foxhunting author John Harris Anderson suggests:

For the next debate (if there is one), I suggest they choose a huntsman as the moderator and fit the candidates with shock collars. When one of them babbles, skirts, dwells, runs heel, or riots on the wrong scent…ZAP!

Thomas Neese (on the wrong side) replies:

You’ll need rat shot for Trump

————————

Actually, though the use of shock collars for training bird dogs is routine these days, I’ve never actually seen them used on fox hounds. However, it is perfectly true that obstreperous hounds who go off on deer and don’t listen do, from time to time, get peppered (at a long distance) with .22 rat shot (what we up North call: .22 bird shot).

Andrea Widburg, writing at American Thinker, republished at Zero Hedge:

The short version of the debate is that Biden did well if one ignored that almost every other statement he made was a lie or fantasy; Trump dominated him, almost too aggressively; and Chris Wallace may have been the worst and most obviously biased moderator since Candy Crowley. Most significantly, though, Biden and Trump each made a critical point. Biden’s was a tacit admission that, if he is elected president, he will preside over the end of the filibuster, allowing Democrats to pack the courts and add two new Democrat-majority states. Trump’s point was that he’s holding damning evidence about the Democrats’ coup attempt.

RTWT

President Trump crushed his opponent Chris Wallace head to head in the debate. There was also another fellow wandering around muttering to himself.

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) September 30, 2020

President Trump to Chris Wallace: "First of all, I guess I’m debating you, not him. But that's okay. I'm not surprised." pic.twitter.com/MgZZtkWJlT

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) September 30, 2020

Do you think Bill made this face before or after Donald said Hillary would be in jail?

HuffPo:

Donald Trump on Sunday threatened to appoint a special prosecutor to go after Hillary Clinton for her use of a personal email account while she was secretary of state.

“I didn’t think I’d say this but I’m going to say it, and I hate to say it, but if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation because there has never been so many lies, so much deception, there has never been anything like it and we’re going to have a special prosecutor,” Trump said during the presidential debate, referring to her emails.

Clinton responded by inviting viewers to fact-check what Trump was saying on her campaign website.

“We have literally Trump, you can fact check him in real time. Last time, at the first debate, we had millions of people fact-checking. So I expect we’ll have millions more fact-checking because, you know, it is, it’s just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country,” she said.

“Because you would be in jail,” Trump said to Clinton.

The great lines keep on coming this presidential election, don’t they?

The liberal MSM is gloating this morning:

Politico: Raddatz, Cooper crack the whip

Forbes: Donald Trump Schooled By Moderators Martha Raddatz And Anderson Cooper At Second Debate

The NYT was particulary smug: Martha Raddatz and Anderson Cooper Steered Debate With Sharp Questions:

They dug for revelations, extracting news nuggets — a rarity on a debate night — like Donald J. Trump’s admission that he had used a nearly billion-dollar loss to avoid paying federal income taxes for years.

They pressed for specifics, interrupting the candidates to demand concrete strategies for handling conflict in Syria and reforming the nation’s health care system.

And they posed blunt, provocative questions at a forum that typically feels more like public broadcasting than cable news: Had Mr. Trump ever sexually assaulted a woman? Did Hillary Clinton really believe that her use of a private email server was not “extremely careless”?

The duo overseeing Sunday’s presidential debate, Anderson Cooper of CNN and Martha Raddatz of ABC News, seemed to cast off the hand-wringing pressures on this year’s crop of moderators — Is fact-checking mandatory? Are interruptions O.K.? — and put themselves directly in the mix of a high-stakes encounter.

The immediate response was praise from many journalists and some grumbling from partisans.

————————————

Hey, Trumpkins! If Donald Trump is sooo smart and competent, not like all those low-energy democrat punching-bags in the normal GOP, and Trump is going to able to change all the rules, stop the US from being cheated, and negotiate much, much better, beautiful, yuge! smarter deals… So, how come, why is it that last night we found Donald Trump in a debate moderated by (hostile liberal butterfly) Anderson Cooper and (democrat establishment attack dog) Martha Raddatz, who both shamelessly interrupted him, kept him from successfully driving home any of his major points, curtailed his time, and who together behaved with lightly concealed democrat partisanship?

Shouldn’t a so much smarter guy be able to avoid being pushed around and manipulated this way? Wouldn’t a smarter great negotiator be able to secure for himself a balanced and fair set of debate moderators?