The scary thing is, had Trump actually said something like that, the Purrygate affair might well have turned around and worked for him instead of against him:
I’m human; I screwed up; I know it’s not acceptable; I’ve taken concrete, visible steps to make sure I adjust; and I pledge to the American people and the world that I will adjust. None of us are perfect, and we deserve leaders who not only admit that, but strive to improve themselves as people while they strive to improve the lives of ordinary people.
A Redemption Story straight out of a Hollywood movie. The media would eat it up and his numbers would at least stop dropping.
Having Hillary say something like that, though, would get spun in the same vein as Trump’s real-world “promise” to respect the election results “if I win”: self-serving and conditional. Would she support and cooperate with an independent inquiry if she weren’t President? Too many people, even among those who plan to vote for her, don’t believe she would; after all, what’s the upside for the Clintons?
Yes, as Taylor Carr pointed out, the current Presidential “debate” format sucks with a near-perfect vacuum. But how much of the problem is the quality of the format, and how much is the quality of the candidates?