Amazing how the Right is ignoring this.

[phrodeau]

The RNC voted unanimously to no longer participate in any debates sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates.

I guess that their questions were just too hard.

 

[Akinkymind]

For once I think I am actually pleased, relieved even, by something the RNC has taken a stand on. I mean seriously, presidential debates in both the primaries and the general elections were on an unsustainable course for years. The train wreck of 2020 makes it hard to conceive of any actual debates taking place in the future. We weren’t far from just having arm wrestling or dick measuring contests instead.

Maybe now we can go back to “Kinder, gentler nation”?

 

[KeithD]

The translation is that the RNC realizes that Republicans can't win policy debates in public in front of a majority of voters. They have to continue to work behind the scenes with fat cat tax dodgers.

 

[BluesDriver66]

A corrupt organization designed to serve the interests of the two major corporate political parties exclusively was not corrupt enough for them? The only reason that organization exists is because the League of Women Voters refused to participate in the scheme to defraud American voters.




NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
October 3, 1988


LEAGUE REFUSES TO "HELP PERPETRATE A FRAUD"


WITHDRAWS SUPPORT FROM FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE


WASHINGTON, DC —"The League of Women Voters is withdrawing its sponsorship of the presidential debate scheduled for mid-October because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter," League President Nancy M. Neuman said today.

"It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and honest answers to tough questions," Neuman said. "The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."

Most objectionable to the League, Neuman said, were conditions in the agreement that gave the campaigns unprecedented control over the proceedings. Neuman called "outrageous" the campaigns' demands that they control the selection of questioners, the composition of the audience, hall access for the press and other issues.


"The campaigns' agreement is a closed-door masterpiece," Neuman said. "Never in the history of the League of Women Voters have two candidates' organizations come to us with such stringent, unyielding and self-serving demands."

Neuman said she and the League regretted that the American people have had no real opportunities to judge the presidential nominees outside of campaign-controlled environments.

https://www.lwv.org/newsroom/press-releases/league-refuses-help-perpetrate-fraud

 

[Wrong Element]

The main thing that's going on here is that Trump. in his nonstop effort to blame everyone but himself for his loss, is mad at the debate commission because of course he is (even though he was almost certainly Covid-positive at the first debate and the organizers gave him a pass on taking the test). So the whole RNC has to play along, because that's how cults operate.

I'm not saying this because I'm upset we might not have any more debates. They're close to useless.

 

[butters]

"All presidential primary candidates shall also agree in writing to appear in only sanctioned Primary and General Election debates," the amendment said. "Any presidential primary candidate who does not agree in writing or who participates in any debate that is not a Sanctioned Debate shall not be eligible to participate in any further Sanctioned Debates."

Mike McCurry, a former co-chair of the CPD and press secretary in the Clinton White House, said the RNC's motion "is not a surprise" and that the choice of whether to participate in a debate still lies with the candidate.

"I'm sure it's driven by whatever the Trump agenda is, but at the end of the day, when we get to 2024, the presidential candidates will participate in the debates if they see it's important and the American people expect them to do it," he said. "It doesn't matter whether the RNC is there or the DNC is there. My guess is that most candidates for president will say, 'I've got to be in the presidential debates because that's where a lot of people pay attention."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...pc=U531&cvid=aa94bdbfe61b4f29883d08a6f6209d58

 

[The_Trouvere]

Previous debates assumed presidential behavior from the debaters. Trump disappointed that assumption. Future debates, especially if Trump runs again in 2024, will need to be more disciplined. Each debater should be given a specified amount of time to answer each question. when the time is up, the debater's microphone will be turned off. That will prevent Trump from speaking out of turn and interrupting his opponent. If a debater makes a statement that is not true, his or her microphone should be turned off. It will be explained that the statement is not true. This will keep Trump from lying.

 

[Rotadom]

If President Biden is as senile as the GOP says, why are they so scared to debate him?

 

[YDB95]

If President Biden is as senile as the GOP says, why are they so scared to debate him?

Excellent question. Of course, they all know he's not senile. But to be fair, it really isn't the Republicans at large pushing this, it's Trump.

 

[pecksniff]

Excellent question. Of course, they all know he's not senile. But to be fair, it really isn't the Republicans at large pushing this, it's Trump.

He wants to avoid debates? But he loves the spotlight.

 

[YDB95]

He wants to avoid debates? But he loves the spotlight.

He loves having the spotlight to himself.

 

[pecksniff]

Would the RNC be open to presidential debates if they were given back to the League of Women Voters to run?

 

[phrodeau]

Would the RNC be open to presidential debates if they were given back to the League of Women Voters to run?

Let women run the debates? Not likely.

 

[pecksniff]

Let women run the debates? Not likely.

Well, they used to.

 

[BrateOruel18]

Previous debates assumed presidential behavior from the debaters. Trump disappointed that assumption. Future debates, especially if Trump runs again in 2024, will need to be more disciplined. Each debater should be given a specified amount of time to answer each question. when the time is up, the debater's microphone will be turned off. That will prevent Trump from speaking out of turn and interrupting his opponent. If a debater makes a statement that is not true, his or her microphone should be turned off. It will be explained that the statement is not true. This will keep Trump from lying. In the meantime, I started studying design and here https://create.vista.com/colors/color-names/maroon/ I found a lot of useful information and all sorts of tutorials, so go for it, there is something to do

It looks like the elections in Ukraine and the debates between Poroshenko and Zelensky, there they answered in time, Poroshenko often did not have time. By the way, thanks for sharing, very informative.

 

[JohnnySavage]

A corrupt organization designed to serve the interests of the two major corporate political parties exclusively was not corrupt enough for them?

This. The Commission's main purpose was to shut out any third-party candidates and promote the nonsensical two-party system

 

[Rotadom]

So the GOP's brilliant idea is to find their own biased commission.

 

[ll74]

Speaking of topics like this, when will they be replacing Feinstein?

 

[Akinkymind]

Previous debates assumed presidential behavior from the debaters. Trump disappointed that assumption. Future debates, especially if Trump runs again in 2024, will need to be more disciplined. Each debater should be given a specified amount of time to answer each question. when the time is up, the debater's microphone will be turned off. That will prevent Trump from speaking out of turn and interrupting his opponent. If a debater makes a statement that is not true, his or her microphone should be turned off. It will be explained that the statement is not true. This will keep Trump from lying.

If they did that there would be very little time where the microphone was live…might as well just not give him any microphone at all? Why even bother with the charade at this point; it’s not like we’ve had any meaningful or informative presidential debates in a while, and they took such an embarrassing turn for the worse in 2020. It’s a frightening concept to imagine that our election results might actually be impacted by swing voters who are swayed one way or another by these circus shows

 

[The_Trouvere]

If they did that there would be very little time where the microphone was live…might as well just not give him any microphone at all? Why even bother with the charade at this point; it’s not like we’ve had any meaningful or informative presidential debates in a while, and they took such an embarrassing turn for the worse in 2020. It’s a frightening concept to imagine that our election results might actually be impacted by swing voters who are swayed one way or another by these circus shows

You seem to want presidential elections to be won by the candidate who can attract the largest number of ideologues who are impervious to facts that challenge their misconceptions.

 

[Akinkymind]

You seem to want presidential elections to be won by the candidate who can attract the largest number of ideologues who are impervious to facts that challenge their misconceptions.

Hardly! Im not sure how you could interpret my comments that way. I’m pointing out that we’ve been heading in exactly that direction with our so called debates, and it’s pretty disturbing! I would love to see some actual meaningful debate, but as you yourself pointed out; that went out the window.

 

[The_Trouvere]

Hardly! Im not sure how you could interpret my comments that way. I’m pointing out that we’ve been heading in exactly that direction with our so called debates, and it’s pretty disturbing! I would love to see some actual meaningful debate, but as you yourself pointed out; that went out the window.

Debates are important. They can and should be improved.

 

[Akinkymind]

Debates are important. They can and should be improved.

Yeah, I agree, but I am not holding my breath either. I think you might be misreading my observations on the current state of debates as some kind of actual endorsement of the status quo, or that I literally approve of the RNC’s decision to back out because of how “unfair” they were in 2020. I thought the sarcasm would be self evident there. On the other hand, I did quite literally mean what I said about cutting of trumps microphone whenever he lies: might as well not even bother plugging it in in the first place since the lies start the moment he opens his mouth and starts spewing.

 

[ll74]

Debates are important. They can and should be improved.

The term debate, as people typically mean it, is nearly impossible online.

 

[icanhelp1]

Debates are important. They can and should be improved.

Debates don't mean a rats ass. Biden won because Mark ZUCKERBERG pumped in 400 million of his own smackaroos into democrat non-profits ( snicker ) that doled out cash to 2500 counties in 49 states. And Senator Whitehouse has the balls to complain about dark money. What democrats accuse republican of doing are in reality doing it themselves. Again, debates are basically irrelevant. Google can persuade more people than any scripted debates.