How Jake Tapper and Dana Bash Can Prove Their Critics Wrong at Tonight’s Debate

(AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

CNN’s Jake Tapper and Dana Bash have the rewarding yet unenviable task of moderating tonight’s debate between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump.

It’s the highest-stakes political event of the year to date and could prove be the most effectual of the entire 2024 election cycle, and unsurprisingly, the pair has endured a fair amount of criticism already, especially from Trump’s camp.

On Wednesday, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) shared a fake quote of Tapper suggesting that he would “remain completely unbiased in the debate between President Biden and Donald Adolf Hitler Trump,” in a joke aimed at the CNN anchor’s past comparisons between Trump’s rhetoric and Hitler’s, which have been widely circulated on the right in recent days.

Bash, meanwhile has been criticized for her ex-husband’s involvement in a letter attempting to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop story back in 2020. “How in the world is she not conflicted out?” asked OutKick’s Clay Travis earlier this week.

The truth is that like anyone else, Tapper and Bash have opinions. And it’s obvious to anyone with any familiarity with their work that neither has a high one of Trump; that’s a self-evident truth.

That shouldn’t necessarily be disqualifying. Donald Trump, after all, gives people a lot of reasons to dislike him. But it is Tapper and Bash’s duty to put their personal feelings aside and host a fair forum on Thursday. Here’s how they can do that and prove their critics wrong.

KEEP IT SUBSTANTIVE

Donald Trump is not a boy scout, yet he’s still outperforming Biden in the polls. Ergo, voters must not know about his character flaws. Ergo, it’s Tapper and Bash’s job to remedy this, right?

Wrong. Trump has been a ubiquitous figure in American life for decades and spent the last of those in the political arena. He was elected president a month after the infamous Access Hollywood tape dropped. He’s on track to win the election despite throwing a months-long tantrum that culminated in the January 6 Capitol riot last time around. Americans are well aware of his character defects.

Tapper and Bash have every right to ask Trump about his behavior in the wake of — and continued denial — of the results of the 2020 election. In fact, they almost certainly should do that. But if the moderators want to do right by the American people, they should spend the vast majority of the evening asking Trump and Biden about the issues most important to them — inflation, immigration, abortion, etc. — not overseeing an airing of grievances against Trump in the form of questions.

DON’T FACT-CHECK

If someone tells a whopper on a scale that simply cannot be ignored, that’s one thing. Generally speaking, though, the moderators would do well to leave the fact-checking to others rather than trying to confirm or deny every utterance of the two candidates.

The art of the fact-check is already a controversial one. All too often, “fact-checks” are thinly disguised partisan arguments that take certain assumptions for granted while disregarding contrary context. These issues rear their head even when journalists are granted excess time and resources to complete them.

Trying to quickly sort through complicated subjects to make a definitive ruling in real-time is not and should not be Tapper and Bash’s role on stage.

ASK EQUALLY ANTAGONISTIC QUESTIONS

The tone of a question does a lot to shape the kind of answer it elicits. One of the most pernicious ways a moderator can put their thumb on the scale of a debate is by asking one candidate an antagonistic question and the other a more friendly version of it

Think: “Mr. Trump, many women fear that you will strip them of their rights and make them second-class citizens if you move back into the White House, how do you respond? Mr. Biden, tell us about what you will do for women if you win reelection.”

Whether Tapper and Bash want to ask tough questions that cut to the core of both candidates’ vulnerabilities or opt for a more probing, open-ended approach in their lines of inquiry, they must be sure that they are approaching both candidates the same way.

ALLOW FOR SOME CLASH

CNN has implemented rules that will make it much more difficult for Trump to interrupt and cajole Biden while he’s speaking than it was four years ago; only one candidate will have their microphone on at a time.

This may cut down on the chaos, but it also could make for a less interesting and informative event. Much can be learned from the kinds of questions that the candidates might direct at each other.

Heading off any direct confrontation between the two rivals would do more to obscure the choice voters are faced with than to bring it into focus. Trump is an incorrigible, domineering debater who should not be allowed to hijack the entire event, but organic exchanges between the two are what voters are looking for, not something to be snuffed out.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.