The CNN Debate......

[Ishmael]

sucks.

Not the potential candidates, they are what they are. And therein lies the problem.

CNN has structured the debate in a very one sided way. They have made an effort all night to try to pit one candidate against another. In one on one debates, even structured team debates, stand-up to that format, 10 people on the stage is not workable with that format.

Throughout the night the structure gave the podium to a few at the expense of the rest.

Kasich, Walker, Fiorina, Huckabee, and to an extent Carson were given short shrift.

Ask a question, let all answer the same question. The field is going to thin out regardless of the media, watching the media pick the favorites and those they want to do away with is tacky, and a dis-service the the citizen.

Ishmael

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Bernie Sanders won the GOP CNN Debate......

 

[Ishmael]

Yeah, and Nashua beat Swaps.

Ishmael

 

[FGB]

I am interested in seeing how the stock market does tomorrow.

As to my choice for POTUS...No decision yet.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Bernie Sanders won the GOP CNN Debate......

He lost the economic debate.... Years ago.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

I would have thought the fox debate would have given CNN the balls to ask tougher questions.

Guess not.

But yep, could hardly watch it.

I like Carson more and more but it's irrelevant as he wont make the cut.

 

[Ishmael]

I would have thought the fox debate would have given CNN the balls to ask tougher questions.

Guess not.

But yep, could hardly watch it.

I like Carson more and more but it's irrelevant as he wont make the cut.

I didn't find him offensive, but whether he makes the cut or not is almost a moot point. Look at their Nielsen's, who cares?

Ishmael

 

[alphaduc]

I thought the reporters were more interested in creating a "Jerry Springer" type show than a Presidential Debate.

 

[doctor_insanus]

Bernie Sanders won the GOP CNN Debate......

Indeed.

He lost the economic debate.... Years ago.

Indeed?

 

[juttjaw]

stupid is as stupid does... if Forrest Gump taught us anything it was that.

it doesn't matter.. life is like a box of chocolates.. you never know what you're going to get.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

I gave my two year old a tangerine before bed. I made sure to give her the bag so she would see she was taking the last one. This avoided the typical "more more more" debate I isualy have to deal with.

She now understands economics more than Bernie does.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Indeed.



Indeed?

Precisely.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

I gave my two year old a tangerine before bed. I made sure to give her the bag so she would see she was taking the last one. This avoided the typical "more more more" debate I isualy have to deal with.

She now understands economics more than Bernie does.

Maybe you should have told her to invade Iran and borrow money from China to fight the war?

Bernie Sanders roasts GOP debate on Twitter: Can they talk about anything besides wanting to go to war?

 

[Ishmael]

I gave my two year old a tangerine before bed. I made sure to give her the bag so she would see she was taking the last one. This avoided the typical "more more more" debate I isualy have to deal with.

She now understands economics more than Bernie does.

ROFLMAO

Ishmael

 

[Mello_SixtyNine]

The debates have never been fairly run. The perceived frontrunner by the media gets the most time to talk (usually by a ridiculous margin like 2-4 times as much).

In a perfect world, the 24-hour news networks should not be able to run any debates. They should be shown on PBS & allow any network news stations to simulcast it.

There should be four moderators, one moderator should be chosen from each of the big three networks (CNN, FOX, MSNBC) & there should be one moderator from an independent source like Reason Magazine for example.

If there are 11 or more candidates, the debate should be split over two nights with the candidates randomly picked so half are on the first night, & the other half on the second. Their podium order should also be randomly selected.

Each round of questioning should start with a candidate at one of the end of the stage and then work there way across to the other end (NO HOPPING AROUND). The candidate will have 60 seconds to answer the question. All of the other candidates microphones will be turned off in order to prevent one of them from forcing their way into someone else's question (one of the ways to unfairly give a candidate more time).

After the last candidate at the other end of the stage has had his/her turn, each candidate will get an additional 30 seconds to expand on their original answer, or they could use that 30 seconds to respond to something another candidate said about him/her. Again, only one candidate's microphone will be on at a time.

That will guarantee that all of the candidates get approximately the same amount of talk time.


Unfortunately, the reality of that ever happening is less than zero.

 

[phrodeau]

The debates have never been fairly run. The perceived frontrunner by the media gets the most time to talk (usually by a ridiculous margin like 2-4 times as much).

In a perfect world, the 24-hour news networks should not be able to run any debates. They should be shown on PBS & allow any network news stations to simulcast it.

There should be four moderators, one moderator should be chosen from each of the big three networks (CNN, FOX, MSNBC) & there should be one moderator from an independent source like Reason Magazine for example.

If there are 11 or more candidates, the debate should be split over two nights with the candidates randomly picked so half are on the first night, & the other half on the second. Their podium order should also be randomly selected.

Each round of questioning should start with a candidate at one of the end of the stage and then work there way across to the other end (NO HOPPING AROUND). The candidate will have 60 seconds to answer the question. All of the other candidates microphones will be turned off in order to prevent one of them from forcing their way into someone else's question (one of the ways to unfairly give a candidate more time).

After the last candidate at the other end of the stage has had his/her turn, each candidate will get an additional 30 seconds to expand on their original answer, or they could use that 30 seconds to respond to something another candidate said about him/her. Again, only one candidate's microphone will be on at a time.

That will guarantee that all of the candidates get approximately the same amount of talk time.


Unfortunately, the reality of that ever happening is less than zero.

It'll never work. Nobody would play by those rules. I can't count the number of times I've seen a candidate continue talking right on through the red light. And if you mute the mics it will then become a contest for the loudest mouth.

 

[Ishmael]

The debates have never been fairly run. The perceived frontrunner by the media gets the most time to talk (usually by a ridiculous margin like 2-4 times as much).

In a perfect world, the 24-hour news networks should not be able to run any debates. They should be shown on PBS & allow any network news stations to simulcast it.

There should be four moderators, one moderator should be chosen from each of the big three networks (CNN, FOX, MSNBC) & there should be one moderator from an independent source like Reason Magazine for example.

If there are 11 or more candidates, the debate should be split over two nights with the candidates randomly picked so half are on the first night, & the other half on the second. Their podium order should also be randomly selected.

Each round of questioning should start with a candidate at one of the end of the stage and then work there way across to the other end (NO HOPPING AROUND). The candidate will have 60 seconds to answer the question. All of the other candidates microphones will be turned off in order to prevent one of them from forcing their way into someone else's question (one of the ways to unfairly give a candidate more time).

After the last candidate at the other end of the stage has had his/her turn, each candidate will get an additional 30 seconds to expand on their original answer, or they could use that 30 seconds to respond to something another candidate said about him/her. Again, only one candidate's microphone will be on at a time.

That will guarantee that all of the candidates get approximately the same amount of talk time.


Unfortunately, the reality of that ever happening is less than zero.

First of all, these are RNC debates, not national. Not one person on the stage is on any ballot. The same holds true for any democrat debates that may occur. The party gets the payoffs, follow the money.

You're ideas are not without merit, but how are you going to get all the parties to agree to the terms?

Ishmael

 

[Conager]

It'll never work. Nobody would play by those rules. I can't count the number of times I've seen a candidate continue talking right on through the red light. And if you mute the mics it will then become a contest for the loudest mouth.

You aren't wrong about that at all. Kind of what Americans look for in a President, it seems.

We put a lot of value in ability to deliver a zinger. As if they write those themselves, let alone think of them on the spot.

 

[Mr_Jon_Thon]

I am interested in seeing how the stock market does tomorrow.

As to my choice for POTUS...No decision yet.

I'd say slightly weaker until the Fed announces whether it's going to shit or get off the pot. Then wherever the algorithms push it.

 

[Aglaopheme]

First of all, these are RNC debates, not national. Not one person on the stage is on any ballot. The same holds true for any democrat debates that may occur. The party gets the payoffs, follow the money.

You're ideas are not without merit, but how are you going to get all the parties to agree to the terms?

Ishmael

I'm curious as to how you think the party gets money from the debates. Can you explain your thought process to me? I know that a lot of candidates are in it to raise money and or do self promotion. Trump for example has started the stump speech book pimp in a major way.

 

[Mello_SixtyNine]

It'll never work. Nobody would play by those rules. I can't count the number of times I've seen a candidate continue talking right on through the red light. And if you mute the mics it will then become a contest for the loudest mouth.

That's easy. at the end of their 60 seconds or 30 second rebuttal, their microphone gets muted as well. The idea of yelling without a microphone is just stupid. Nobody except for the audience will be able to hear it.

On a different note, the party does not make money on the debates. The news channel hosting the debate does through advertising revenue.

Also, I don't think it would be difficult to get nearly all of the candidates to agree to a debate where they actually receive equal time. The only one that would balk would be the perceived frontrunner.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I didn't watch.



I've already made up my mind on all of them.

 

[Lancecastor]

I think Trump needs to stop mugging for the camera.

And someone should slap the chauvinistic language out of him.

Otherwise he won't make the Judges Cut to Radio City Music Hall.

 

[Que]

I think Trump needs to stop mugging for the camera.

And someone should slap the chauvinistic language out of him.

Otherwise he won't make the Judges Cut to Radio City Music Hall.

Yep, That's why there's going to be a Democrat in the White House again. He's already said more than enough that is going to inflame women to the polls. All it's going to take is a few Facebook memes and a few tweets and the women will vote in hysterical droves.

 

[Lancecastor]

Jeb Bush is the tallest candidate, so he will probably win the nomination.

His last name will be an albatross with swing voters, however.

A Bush Clinton election race is too wierd for many.

Hence the wildcard candidate potential.