Top 10 Secrets They Don`t Want You to Know About the Debates

Submitted by: buddy 12 years ago
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4052162

Those sneaky Republicrats!
There are 11 comments:
Male 679
"Wow, this is the dumbest list ever. some people will look for any reason to complain."

Perhaps people complain because presidential debates used to actually MEAN something instead of just being a forum for election advertising in a timespan of two minutes?

0
Reply
Female 790
Oh, we`ve been snookered. ;-)
0
Reply
Male 2,620
Yeah, some of these do make a lot of sense. But look, it`s from NPR.
0
Reply
Male 110
There`s certainly nothing sacred about the two party system. The two dominate now, but that could easily change. What founding document can you cite that says our government is set up based on a two party system?

I agree that some of these are a little silly, but some are valid. The both candidates are going to negotiate this to their advantage; from their perspective there`s no other reason to have them. I`m certainly not going to rely on the debates to make my decision, especially since getting information on the candidates via the Internet is so easy.

0
Reply
Male 15
Wow, this is the dumbest list ever. some people will look for any reason to complain. you are only making yourself look stupid. examples:
#6. the debate excludes third parties.- of course it does you fool, do you want to hear ralph nader talk about how much he loves trees or would you rather hear someone who actually has a chance of winning discuss real issues?
#4. the audience members must observe in silence.- are you kidding me? is this REALLY a major problem? how does it affect anything? you complain that the debates are too biased but yet you want audience members to be able to cheer like it`s a football game? not only would that waste time but it also shapes peoples opinions. the facts should be the deciding point, not the audience reactions
#3 the "extended discussion" can only go 30 seconds.- you complain that 30 seconds isn`t enough time to adress the issues... no poo, it`s cause they have ALREADY discussed them, hence EXTENDED? how long do you want the debat
0
Reply
Male 10,115
The debate wasn`t so bad, they got a lot of information out. I just wish we could have at least one debate that featured the top third party candidate.
0
Reply
Male 1,407
I totally agree that there should be candidate to candidate questions. Rebuttals are allowed in this format, I thought.
0
Reply
Female 346
I think having an actual debate would be far more interesting than this set-up. I think candidate to candidate questions and rebuttals would be quite interesting to listen to.

Just my opinion.

0
Reply
Male 1,407
A little over the top. True there are problems with the debate format, but overall the first debate went pretty well. The two-party system is essential for the way our government is set up, so I don`t really see what the problem is.
0
Reply
Female 30
Personally it kinda terrifies me that this is the state of debate nowadays. When the audience is not allowed to talk or ask questions and the debaters are not allowed a rebuttal or a question, it`s no longer a debate, it`s just two people taking turns at running their mouths off. Basically, it amounts to nothing more than a sophisticated form of public masturbation.
0
Reply
Male 10,115
Link: Top 10 Secrets They Don`t Want You to Know About the Debates [Rate Link] - Those sneaky Republicrats!

Good read.

0
Reply