It's amazing how bias works. If your candidate is asked to explain certain negative occurrences that had dominated the news in recent weeks, then the moderators are biased against your candidate. If the same thing happens to the candidate you don't like, then the moderators are "finally being fair." The last comment defined "Hillary treatment" as "tough questions on policy." Sorry, but nobody, not even Obama supporters can say that she has a problem with tough policy questions. On the contrary, she welcomes them and seems to thrive on them. The "Hillary Treatment" that I see in the media is no so much the questions she is asked outright, but the commentary after the fact, the third-party characterizations of her as desperate, shrill, dishonest...all conjecture and opinion...some of which sticks and serves to "explain" a certain look, turn of phrase, or behavior in the most negative way. With all the urging for her to quit, I'm surprised she's still standing. Some may call that desperate. I call it gutsy, committed, and strong. But then, I'm biased.