@Roussette
I'd be interested on anyone's take how Chris Wallace did?
He did end up arguing a fair bit with Trump, very unedifying.
We're near to a new thread if anyone's up to it, I'll keep an eye on it and happy to do it if no one else does 
My right wing relatives basically are bleating on about how he's biased. I have been outside of the US for so long I didn't actually recognise him - my parents don't watch Fox.
Honestly, if Republicans won't take a Fox News anchor as 'unbiased' I am not sure there is any hope. I guess they would find a Breitbart rep palatable.
In terms of how he did - yes, he did come across as weak from the clips I've seen. I agree with Andrew Neil, his questions were too long winded (he should have anticipated that Trump would never let him finish his sentence.) He had absolutely no control over the proceedings. They sparred. He came across to me more as an actor might than a serious journalist accustomed to moderating debates - however, maybe this part of what gets you this gig in the US (now.)
Here's the interesting thing to me about the questioning style in the US and accusations of bias. In Britain, politicians are accustomed to PM questions and being questioned by journalists with a robust style, no matter which political party they are in. Question Time, Newsnight - all a deep part of the cultural fabric here. Horrifyingly adversarial to a US audience, I venture.
Some of the questions, such as that around Trump's health care non-plan which could be considered negatively biased (I heard it) would be commonplace here. A politician here would have coped with the questioning style and cracked on with an answer or non-answer, but they would have cracked on.
Trump is just professionally offended now, knowing he's got no juice in the tank. He also sees it as a campaign tactic - his supporters are professionally offended and he is doing what he can to make sure this increases exponentially in the run up to the election.