What do you think: Should Jon Stewart moderate a 2016 Presidential Debate?

I know I posted about this at another thread, but thinking about it, I believe there’s a good potential discussion here.
Gotta admit the question is an interesting one. :coolsmile:
What are the pros and cons of Jon Stewart moderating one of the 2016 Presidential Debates?

https://www.change.org/p/we-want-jon-stewart-to-moderate-a-2016-presidential-debate?utm_source=action_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=372900&alert_id=abVtjzkktZ_hDGOiCev7UCUQbp5pIW0C+cwRoMjQaFI2HsGIzMd/OQ= Petitioning Commission on Presidential Debates We want Jon Stewart to moderate a 2016 presidential debate. M. Waters | Stanhope, NJ Over the last 16 years, Jon Stewart has played an influential and iconic role in covering US politics and media. We believe he should continue that tradition as a moderator at one of the 2016 Presidential Debates. Jon Stewart is more than qualified to tackle the moderating job. Mr. Stewart has interviewed 15 heads of state, 22 members of the United States Cabinet, 32 members of the United States Senate, 7 members of the United States House of Representatives, and scores of other political leaders from this country and around the world while establishing himself as the most trusted person in (satirical) news. In addition to his vast experience working with political figures, Jon Stewart is accomplished in presidential election coverage. His work on The Daily Show received the prestigious Peabody Award for its coverage of the 2000 and 2004 presidential races. Another important attribute of a moderator is trust. Many in the US believe Jon Stewart shares their worldview and values. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll reported that 52.1% of respondents agree that Mr. Stewart "generally shares [their] view of the world" on "some or most issues". Choosing Jon Stewart would be a popular choice among voters. …"

It would be fun, but I don’t think he’d want to. Those debates hold very little room for doing what Stewart does very well in interviews: making sure politicians answer the posed question.

It would be fun, but I don't think he'd want to. Those debates hold very little room for doing what Stewart does very well in interviews: making sure politicians answer the posed question.
I doubt Stewart would be chosen. They don't put comedians in that position. They try to get a journalist for it, who at least comes across as unbiased. He is a comedian with a bias. i love his schtick, but he's not a journalist and I doubt he claims to be one. Lois
It would be fun, but I don't think he'd want to. Those debates hold very little room for doing what Stewart does very well in interviews: making sure politicians answer the posed question.
I doubt Steart would be chosen. They don't put comedians in that position. They try to get a journalist for it, who at least comes across as unbiased. He is a comedian with a bias. i love his schtick, but he's not a journalist and I doubt he claims to be one. Lois Yeah, that's why they have FAUX News leading the candidates debate :lol: What is it they say about the 'candidates' debate. Laugh about it, shout about it When you've got to choose Every way you look at this you lose. ________________________________________________________________________ sooo, we've spent the past decades devolving our politics into a comedy - why not have a serious comedian try his hand at holding their feet to the fire? lordie knows the "journalists" haven't been doing squat to educate America lately. _________________________________________________________________________ 200K, OK, chump change. If nothing else it'll be fun to see how many Write-In votes he gets.
#WeWantJon: Over 200,000 Strong! Mariel Waters Stanhope, NJ Aug 22, 2015 — Unbelievable! Since this morning, we went from 100,000 to more than 200,000 signatures -- and counting! (We're really, really sorry, Jon!)

OK, okay, it’s not like anyone is into listening to serious journalists these days either. So what the hay

It would be fun, but I don't think he'd want to. Those debates hold very little room for doing what Stewart does very well in interviews: making sure politicians answer the posed question.
I doubt Steart would be chosen. They don't put comedians in that position. They try to get a journalist for it, who at least comes across as unbiased. He is a comedian with a bias. i love his schtick, but he's not a journalist and I doubt he claims to be one. Lois Yeah, that's why they have FAUX News leading the candidates debate :lol: What is it they say about the 'candidates' debate. Laugh about it, shout about it When you've got to choose Every way you look at this you lose. ________________________________________________________________________ sooo, we've spent the past decades devolving our politics into a comedy - why not have a serious comedian try his hand at holding their feet to the fire? lordie knows the "journalists" haven't been doing squat to educate America lately. _________________________________________________________________________ 200K, OK, chump change. If nothing else it'll be fun to see how many Write-In votes he gets.
#WeWantJon: Over 200,000 Strong! Mariel Waters Stanhope, NJ Aug 22, 2015 — Unbelievable! Since this morning, we went from 100,000 to more than 200,000 signatures -- and counting! (We're really, really sorry, Jon!)
Jon Stewart doing the debate would be fine with me, but it's not going to happen. I doubt that Faux News will be involved in the actual presidential debate among nominees, either. I assume that's the debate we're talking about here, are we not? If it's another Republican debate, of course they'll choose right-wing-biased Faux News. But both sides have to agree on the moderator for the real Presidential debate. I can't imagine the Dems agreeing to Faux News, any more than I can imagine Repubs agreeing to Jon Stewart. Lois