The third GOP debate did not disappoint. Packed with the unpredictable drama America has come to expect from Republicans, CNBC’s event generated plenty of headlines Thursday morning. Wednesday’s debate produced two separate storylines: the first is the latest rising star, young Florida Senator Marco Rubio. The second, the flagrant bias of mainstream media against the Republican party. First of all, Marco Rubio is shaping up to become a legitimate contender to the nomination; according to a national composite of polls by Real Clear Politics, Rubio is sitting in 3rd with 9.3% of votes, Carson and Trump are still dominating polls however, with 22% and 26.2% respectively. Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, is a phenomenally well spoken 21st century candidate using his youth and wit to climb up the rankings. With more liberal views than some of his fellow candidates, Rubio hopes to draw from the younger generation, whereas the majority of Republican rely on older demographics. Rubio nevertheless has an uphill battle if he wants to win. Trump is still ahead in nearly every poll, with Carson taking the few Donald is not. Trump’s continued success proves again and again he is serious about becoming president. Wednesday’s debate further proved this. Trump dialed back the volume and gave a truly presidential performance; he laughed with candidates and spoke in a more official, although still entirely Trump-esque, manner. Americans doubted Trump had the diplomacy and tact to be president, but Wednesday, Donald proved he can wear the presidential hat better than anyone.
Now, moving onto what is perhaps the biggest outcome of the debate, let’s talk about the glaring bias of CNBC. We accept it as fact that every news agency has some degree of bias, but CNBC’s outrageous attacks against candidates were downright insulting to the American political process. In fact, the candidates on stage banded together to ward off the childish jibes of the moderators. Ted Cruz gained some good grace with his party after a well spoken retort calling out the moderators on their prejudice against Republicans. In the days following the debate, conversation swelled around the internet that future debates cannot be liberal media free-for-alls such as CNBC’s. Candidates may in fact boycott debates if they feel the host is biased. Moreover, beyond the impact to the politicians, CNBC’s selfish grab to ingratiate itself to Democrats hurt the American people. Millions of Americans watch the debate to learn about politician’s views, to discover who they want to be president. If viewers must watch two hours of insults, what does the country gain? In short nothing. Demand more of the nation’s news sources. The media has a duty to its viewers, not politicians.