I didn't see this to the level that the article suggests. There are places where I agree that Wallace demonstrated bias against Trump. The idea that he continues to use the very fine people line absent the context demonstrating it to be a completely false thread is indeed shocking. In that, he definitely gave an unnecessary gift to Biden partisans. His treatment of critical race theory was equally biased, not acknowledging the very real inherent problems in teaching white people that they are racist by birth with no way to redeem this quality. For those two things, I agree that Wallace was way off base.

But in general, most of the times that Wallace cut Trump off, it was because Trump does not feel obliged to stay within any boundaries during a debate. Listening to him is like listening to the annoying uncle at the Thanksgiving table who refuses to listen to anything anyone says beyond 10 seconds if he disagrees with them. Trump has no desire to listen to a complete argument against anything he says. He gets a few seconds into it and proceeds to interrupt, simply to prevent any further development of whatever the idea is he doesn't approve of. This is a tactic that prevents actual debate, and it is very difficult for any moderator to deal with. Wallace reminded Trump several times that he had agreed to allow Biden two minutes uninterrupted at the beginning of each section, but that is very difficult for Trump to do. Also, all politicians prefer to turn conversation to their own talking points rather than stay on line, but Trump is particularly bad about this. The debate was a shitshow because the topics were never followed. One or the other of them (but more often Trump, as I saw it) would simply start flinging extraneous random attacks against the character of the other, having nothing to do with the question at hand. Who the moderator was makes no difference to that. Trump was going to behave that way no matter who was behind the table.

Trump's advantage is that he has some very accurate mud to fling at Biden. Biden is trying to pretend that very simple, very direct truths are not true. But Hunter Biden's corruption is so well documented that trying to pretend it's "all fine" cannot play well.

I don't think any minds were changed last night. Biden was successful in that none of his mental lapses were as bad as the audience was expecting (either with glee or dread), although it's still shocking that in more than half of his utterances, his brain clearly has to work very hard to override mis-speech and confusing words or numbers. But even so, he did better than many of us were expecting. Trump was successful in that Biden was forced into obviously false and pretty pathetic "That's just a lie! 's" on many occasions when he has no better argument to counter the fact that what Trump was saying was most certainly not a lie.

This didn't change the game at all. And Wallace was not the uber-villain the right would like to think. His questions on calling out the riots and on packing the court forced Biden into obvious positions he would rather not have had to face.

I still don't see a leader to improve the country's position post-election. Just different flavors of continued degradation.