In re: Presidential Debates

[Wry Catcher]

A real debate should provide a series of questions, no more than five, provided to Trump and Biden weeks before the debates:
On Foreign Policy,
Domestic Policy,
Monetary Policy,
Health in America,
and Energy.

Five debates beginning in Sept. and spaced two weeks apart. The questions ought to be open to what Trump's and Biden's vision is for the United States going into the third decade of the 21st Century.

Opening Statements: 30 minutes each [on one of the five, every other week]
Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Response to Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Conclusions: Five minutes each.


Two hours on each of the five topics.

No interruption by either debater during the other's time, a penalty of five minutes if this rule is broken in the opening statement, and three minutes in the Rebuttal. All microphones be turned of during the statement of the other, and both will remain within the confines of their own dias.

 

[HumblePi]

A real debate should provide a series of questions, no more than five, provided to Trump and Biden weeks before the debates:
On Foreign Policy,
Domestic Policy,
Monetary Policy,
Health in America,
and Energy.

Five debates beginning in Sept. and spaced two weeks apart. The questions ought to be open to what Trump's and Biden's vision is for the United States going into the third decade of the 21st Century.

Opening Statements: 30 minutes each [on one of the five, every other week]
Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Response to Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Conclusions: Five minutes each.


Two hours on each of the five topics.

Even though in Feb he said he would debate the democratic candidate I have my doubts that he actually will.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Even though in Feb he said he would debate the democratic candidate I have my doubts that he actually will.

In that case VP Biden will have the stage all to himself, and his opponent can have a dog and pony show on Fox News.

 

[bubbabgone]

A real debate should provide a series of questions, no more than five, provided to Trump and Biden weeks before the debates:
On Foreign Policy,
Domestic Policy,
Monetary Policy,
Health in America,
and Energy.

Five debates beginning in Sept. and spaced two weeks apart. The questions ought to be open to what Trump's and Biden's vision is for the United States going into the third decade of the 21st Century.

Opening Statements: 30 minutes each [on one of the five, every other week]
Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Response to Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Conclusions: Five minutes each.


Two hours on each of the five topics.

No interruption by either debater during the other's time, a penalty of five minutes if this rule is broken in the opening statement, and three minutes in the Rebuttal. All microphones be turned of during the statement of the other, and both will remain within the confines of their own dias.

The idea of providing questions ahead of time is a non-starter and the rest of your suggestions are likewise an obvious attempt to prevent the exposure of Joe Biden's mental state to the viewers..

 

[Fiddytree]

First ground rule: NO AUDIENCE.
Second ground rule: make them as boring as humanely possible.
Third ground rule: make it so boring that the average person will be tempted to watch Real Housewives of ___ instead.
Fourth ground rule: proceed to tell the viewers at home that this will be the new normal, smiling widely, without shame.

 

[PoS]

In that case VP Biden will have the stage all to himself, and his opponent can have a dog and pony show on Fox News.

Joe Biden rambling himself into incoherence ought to be good for a few laughs. I'd watch it.

 

[chuckiechan]

The idea of providing questions ahead of time is a non-starter and the rest of your suggestions are likewise an obvious attempt to prevent the exposure of Joe Biden's mental state to the viewers..

In true cognitive decline that won’t matter. I doubt he has the stamina. IMO, unless Joe makes a good account of himself in the first debate, it’s elder abuse and it is mistreatment of a decent guy simply for party convenience.

 

[bubbabgone]

In true cognitive decline that won’t matter. I doubt he has the stamina. IMO, unless Joe makes a good account of himself in the first debate, it’s elder abuse and it is mistreatment of a decent guy simply for party convenience.

I'm not sure they'll let him get that far if an alternative can be planned beforehand.
And I don't think they will care if the gambit is obvious or executed sloppily.

 

[Sweden]

Even though in Feb he said he would debate the democratic candidate I have my doubts that he actually will.

By saying 'doubts' you accept that Trump may actually debate with the Democratic candidate. Please forgive me for saying that your post is therefore pointless.

 

[Logician Man]

Even though in Feb he said he would debate the democratic candidate I have my doubts that he actually will.

' Most transparent' Trump would never lie, or flip-flop, would he? :lamo

 

[captdon]

Even though in Feb he said he would debate the democratic candidate I have my doubts that he actually will.

Biden wouldn't dare debate Trump. He might forget to show up.

 

[PoS]

Biden wouldn't dare debate Trump. He might forget to show up.

If Joe becomes POTUS he will probably launch the nukes while trying to order out for pizza.

 

[Sweden]

Joe Biden rambling himself into incoherence ought to be good for a few laughs. I'd watch it.

I think it would be sad rather than funny. An English comedian you will never have heard of called Frankie Howard had a line "Don't mock the afflicted". Wise words even when spoken in jest.

 

[HumblePi]

Joe Biden rambling himself into incoherence ought to be good for a few laughs. I'd watch it.

 

[Mr Person]

If Joe becomes POTUS he will probably launch the nukes while trying to order out for pizza.

Trump’s comments, the officials said, came in response to a briefing slide he was shown that charted the steady reduction of U.S. nuclear weapons since the late 1960s. Trump indicated he wanted a bigger stockpile, not the bottom position on that downward-sloping curve. According to the officials present, Trump’s advisers, among them the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, were surprised. Officials briefly explained the legal and practical impediments to a nuclear buildup and how the current military posture is stronger than it was at the height of the build-up. In interviews, they told NBC News that no such expansion is planned. It was after this July 20 meeting that Tillerson reportedly offered his “moron” comment — something the State Department has pretty directly denied, even as Tillerson declined to do so personally.
.
.
.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: The Japanese, where we bombed them in '45, heard it. They're hearing a guy running for president of the United States talking of maybe using nuclear weapons. Nobody wants to hear that about an American president.

TRUMP: Then why are we making them? Why do we make them?
.
.
.
As president, Trump's comments about nukes have also resulted in some head-scratching. Back in August, Trump falsely claimed that the arsenal was “far stronger and more powerful than ever before” thanks to upgrades made on his watch. That came despite those upgrades having been virtually impossible in his short time in office and the fact that the U.S. has a fraction of the weapons it once did.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...clear-weapons-has-become-a-very-real-concern/

The article also notes Trump's threats to "totally destroy" North Korea. One might also note how he assassinated a foreign military official. Oh yes, and who can forget (not who can lie about, but who can forget) this gem:


They start forming off the coast of Africa, as they're moving across the Atlantic, we drop a bomb inside the eye of the hurricane and it disrupts it. Why can't we do that?," Trump reportedly asked aides during one hurricane briefing. The response to the idea was, uh, muted, according to Axios. "You could hear a gnat fart in that meeting," one source in the room told Axios. "People were astonished." Trump, for his part, denied the story -- using his customary third person
.
.
."It would take an hour-and-a-half to learn everything there is to learn about missiles," Trump said of his hypothetical negotiator role. "I think I know most of it anyway."

Sorry, Donald Trump, nuking a hurricane won't work - CNNPolitics




Yet again, you dishonestly attack Biden for things Trump is far more guilty of. Why do you keep doing that?

 

[HumblePi]

By saying 'doubts' you accept that Trump may actually debate with the Democratic candidate. Please forgive me for saying that your post is therefore pointless.

If he dares to, that's great. Trump is a yellow-bellied coward so I have my doubts his balls are big enough to debate a man that actually knows wtf he's talking about.

 

[Sweden]

If he dares to, that's great. Trump is a yellow-bellied coward so I have my doubts his balls are big enough to debate a man that actually knows wtf he's talking about.

I hesitate to correct a paid-up, card carrying, certified Trump expert in full on rant mode but surely that should be "orange bellied"?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The idea of providing questions ahead of time is a non-starter and the rest of your suggestions are likewise an obvious attempt to prevent the exposure of Joe Biden's mental state to the viewers..

That's your opinion, most debates have been fiascoes and end up not responding to the question asked, and some of those questions are loaded. Putting to someone who wants a job was something I did when interviewing Law Enforcement Officers. You begin by asking general questions and then drill down to see how well the candidate was in thinking on his or her feet.

But you bring up a good point, how to allow the moderator(s) to have time and drill down when after the opening statement. I suppose you are concerned that President Trump will go off the open book aspect of my idea, and begin to make his handlers sweat.

 

[Waddy]

A real debate should provide a series of questions, no more than five, provided to Trump and Biden weeks before the debates:
On Foreign Policy,
Domestic Policy,
Monetary Policy,
Health in America,
and Energy.

Five debates beginning in Sept. and spaced two weeks apart. The questions ought to be open to what Trump's and Biden's vision is for the United States going into the third decade of the 21st Century.

Opening Statements: 30 minutes each [on one of the five, every other week]
Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Response to Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Conclusions: Five minutes each.


Two hours on each of the five topics.

No interruption by either debater during the other's time, a penalty of five minutes if this rule is broken in the opening statement, and three minutes in the Rebuttal. All microphones be turned of during the statement of the other, and both will remain within the confines of their own dias.

Aren't the questions only provided to the Democrat candidate before the debates, like last time?

 

[bubbabgone]

That's your opinion, most debates have been fiascoes and end up not responding to the question asked, and some of those questions are loaded. Putting to someone who wants a job was something I did when interviewing Law Enforcement Officers. You begin by asking general questions and then drill down to see how well the candidate was in thinking on his or her feet.

So you'd rather not take that chance with Biden. Understandable but not very ethical. Shows extreme partisanship. You do often see partisanship with debate moderators. e.g. Candy Crowley

But you bring up a good point, how to allow the moderator(s) to have time and drill down when after the opening statement. I suppose you are concerned that President Trump will go off the open book aspect of my idea, and begin to make his handlers sweat.

And I suppose you're concerned that Trump's handlers wouldn't be the ones sweating in a Trump/Biden debate.
There's nothing open book about allowing a candidate to spend most of their time delivering prepared content written for them ahead of time because they were already given the questions.

 

[captdon]

So you'd rather not take that chance with Biden. Understandable but not very ethical. Shows extreme partisanship. You do often see partisanship with debate moderators. e.g. Candy Crowley


And I suppose you're concerned that Trump's handlers wouldn't be the ones sweating in a Trump/Biden debate.
There's nothing open book about allowing a candidate to spend most of their time delivering prepared content written for them ahead of time because they were already given the questions.

The Trump team would like to have Trump debate Mental Joe eveyday.

 

[Lovebug]

The Trump team would like to have Trump debate Mental Joe eveyday.

Is that why Trump is practicing every day?

 

[bubbabgone]

The Trump team would like to have Trump debate Mental Joe eveyday.

It'd be like me debating Aaron Judge on the proper power swing.

 

[PoS]

I think it would be sad rather than funny. An English comedian you will never have heard of called Frankie Howard had a line "Don't mock the afflicted". Wise words even when spoken in jest.

Sorry, but if he's stupid enough to put himself on the firing line then he can't blame anyone but himself.

 

[Moderate Right]

A real debate should provide a series of questions, no more than five, provided to Trump and Biden weeks before the debates:
On Foreign Policy,
Domestic Policy,
Monetary Policy,
Health in America,
and Energy.

Five debates beginning in Sept. and spaced two weeks apart. The questions ought to be open to what Trump's and Biden's vision is for the United States going into the third decade of the 21st Century.

Opening Statements: 30 minutes each [on one of the five, every other week]
Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Response to Rebuttals: 15 minutes each
Conclusions: Five minutes each.


Two hours on each of the five topics.

No interruption by either debater during the other's time, a penalty of five minutes if this rule is broken in the opening statement, and three minutes in the Rebuttal. All microphones be turned of during the statement of the other, and both will remain within the confines of their own dias.

I'm all for doing away with previous debate formats where you have biased media personalities trying to make a name for themselves by attacking one of the nominees while throwing softball questions at the one they want to win. Moderators should be proven to be impartial and we should make the format simpler with just one unbiased moderator instead of several moderators.