I don't understand all of the complaining about Lehrer. He let the candidates talk. As far as I'm concerned, that's a good thing - as a debate viewer, I'm always frustrated by moderators who insist on strict adherence to the arbitrary time limits that have been set beforehand.
He actually provided the best debate moderation I've seen; I was very surprised. That Obama was too spineless to seize the opportunity the way Romney did can only speak for him and his campaign.
Lehrer was terrible. His questions weren't even close to focused and he got run over by the candidates while trying to enforce time limits. It was a very weak moderating performance.
Why should he enforce arbitrary time limits? Ideally, the only function a moderator should provide is to ensure that both get a chance to speak and that they actually debate rather than spout soundbytes.
Because by not enforcing time limits, the debate left little time for the last of the six topics - governing. They ran out of time.
The rules are the rules. Time limits aren't arbitrary. They are a necessary part of any debate, forcing candidates to be more concise than they otherwise would be and leaving time for other topics.
Poll
