There is no more difficult stage to be on then a Presidential Debate where ever word (for some) is cut open as if was a lab experiment. While Actors and musicians get plenty of do-overs and they study/ practice endless hours repeating the same lines that doesn’t occur when you’re in this situation. Where fresh spontaneous answers is expected time and again to questions you might not be fully prepared for. Most reporters have their teleprompters or notes right in front of them so they can sound as if they were geniuses although they are really fancy actors instead.
There is no doubt Marco Rubio was the one under the knife last night and the media was ready to slice him up but is that truly the best way to judge a candidate on one nights performance ? Most in the media will agree that he has excelled in so many previous occasions on the debate stage and had some brilliant moments last night as well? Shouldn’t we base instead on the overall package he/she has delivered throughout their career instead? The question is how many of us would believe that was just if we were put in a similar situation? I believe even “The Prosecutor” in New Jersey would not close all lanes to a great candidate who had one stumbling moment. For we all should be tested over-time not just in a moment’s glance.