LOL, I wasn't trying to suggest that they were neutral. Those three IMO, have a natural inclination to call someone out when they are obviously dodging. They are not weak and timid and usually help to direct the flow of conversation a bit better. They are also articulate and concise so they get the point across quickly and let the candidates respond. I've seen several primary debates including these individuals and quality of the debate was higher. If I had my choice of the three it would be Anderson Cooper. I'f I could add one to the list it would be Bret Baier, and in fact now that I think about it, he might be tied with A.C. if I ranked them on their debate moderating ability.
But you see these liberal moderators try to influence the debates with question phrasing and coaching of THEIR candidate if he gets in trouble. Lehrer tried to help Obama on several occasions with some leading comments and actually giving Obama more time to speak in spite of Romney's insistence to let him answer. Let's see them give people like Chris Wallace or even Bret equal time to moderate the debates.
Romney took care of himself just fine with Lehrer. The viewers can tell when the moderator is being one sided.
Maybe, maybe not. There are many ways to inject hidden bias. Choice of subjects is one. We had a debate that was supposed to be on the economy , and it focused mainly on Romney's tax plan. What about some questions on GDP growth, employment, etc? A lot of times, liberal moderators will pose questions with hidden assumptions, eg calling gay marriage "marriage equality" or calling racial quotas"diversity." I will say in general I think the best debates occur when the moderator keeeps a low profile like Lehrer did. The candidates are running for President of the United States, not Student Council, and it is inappropriate for some idiot journalist to try to dictate to them or come up with off the wall questions.