Thread: Debate Format.

Is anyone else annoyed with the format that debates are run? I didn't get to watch the most recent debate and am now watching it on youtube. I can't stand how they give certain people more time and more opportunities. There is no logical sense to how they run it. What is wrong with this format.

General questions (in other words questions that are specifically tailored to a candidate).

There are 8 candidates. You have a general question. You start from the left and go to the right and give each candidate, in turn, 1 minute to answer the question. No rebuttals. The next general question would start wit the second candidate and it would then go to each additional candidate in turn, ending with candidate #1. So it looks like this.

General questions about X:

Candidates get 1 minute started left with candidate #1 then #2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.

Next general question Y:

Candidates get 1 minute starting with candidate #2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 1.

Ect.

This puts everyone in the position to be the initial contributor and also be in a position to rebut other candidates.

Finally, you could give each candidate 1 question that's directed specifically towards them.

I'm sick of media favorites.

It's not a debate. It's a series of individual questions that are completely unrelated which only one person gets to address. That's the funny part.

Whats wrong with it is the debate is run by the media. And thus its a interview or press conference, and not a debate. Not to mention, the candidates should not be attacking each other, so why do they even have debates. They should be town hall type meetings, where regular people ask questions. BUT, this is the fault of the party.

It's on purpose...the media pick our president for us every time...they tell us who to vote for and the gullible sheep follow their lead. They manipulate a particular image of "so and so is the frontrunner", "the top tier are", "here's a poll, who do you support [but we didn't mention we left out a guy polling in third place, instead we will put in the 4th place person], "such and such is unelectable and crazy". It's all a bunch of bullshit. You know a politician is telling you the truth and is RIGHT when the media aggressively (not just accidentally) ignore and ridicule said person. The media is basically the fulfillment of the Progressive attempt and dream to create damn near a perfect propaganda machine. The media are just as tied in with the government and other large corporations as defense contractors, etc, etc. It's just propaganda and they always succeed in selecting our President for us. Wednesday's debate was simply an attempt to paint one person in particular as crazy and heartless, while attempting to prop up and give support to the "top tier" who they have selected for us.

Originally Posted by ericams2786

The media are just as tied in with the government and other large corporations as defense contractors, etc, etc.

Actually this debate was on MSNBC which is owned by General Electric, a major goverment contractor.

It's too many people to do anything really useful. I actually think a Jeopardy show where the subject are US government, the Constitution, History, Current Events, and Economics would be more enlightening.

Originally Posted by hairballxavier

Actually this debate was on MSNBC which is owned by General Electric, a major goverment contractor.

Exactly, most of our media are owned by just a few powerful companies, pretty much just like every other industry in America...just a few powerful companies that lobby and write the bills with all the regulations in them. It's a wonderful example of what Mussolini attempted to perfect...

Mussolini required companies to serve the interests of the state as a condition of remaining under private ownership.

Interestingly enough, that's exactly what liberals see the purpose of corporations to be: to serve "the public", another way of saying, the ends of the state.

Originally Posted by adaher

Mussolini required companies to serve the interests of the state as a condition of remaining under private ownership.

Interestingly enough, that's exactly what liberals see the purpose of corporations to be: to serve "the public", another way of saying, the ends of the state.

Well actually to take this a step further, if you look at many of the major Progressives in America during the 1920's and 30's (folks like Herbert Croly, William Jennings Bryan, the "Muckrakers", John Dewey, etc. etc. Look at any major Progressive during that time, then look at what they themselves wrote in newspapers, magazines, books, etc. You will see clearly that they loved Mussolini initially (before the war). Hell, many of them spoke of the "wonderful little experiment in Russia" and many of them even praised Hitler early on (before the Holocaust and the War of course). In fact, Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf that he wrote to the president of the American Eugenics Society to ask for a copy of his Case for Sterilization, a book he called his "Bible" (in fact Hitler and his minions learned quite a bit from American Progressives, once again as evidenced by writings of Hitler (particularly in Mein Kampf). My point is, the Progressives had a dream of an Organic state in which all of the peoples' energy was directed and used for the good of the State. Initially war itself was the unifying principle, the fear and conduit for nationalist fervor that would achieve their all-encompassing state. The use of media and propaganda was another (look at Wilsonian era propaganda). I think sincerely (and I'm trying to say this without sounding like a conspiracy theorist), but I believe we live in the modern version of an almost perfect fascist state - one that is hidden from sight and fine-tuned by decades of media brainwashing, one that masquerades as a free society, but is actually very controlled.