New Rules for debates

[Wry Catcher]

Last night was a waste of time for those of us interested in hearing the participants take on issues. How do you feel about these rule changes:

• Only one microphone is on at any time
• The microphone of the speaker will be shut off when the time set by the moderator is reached
• Rebuttals will be provided equal time (2 minutes for each, the initial question, and the rebuttal)

 

[bendog]

Too late. I think Kaine was choreographed because Trump's hilarious interruptions of Hillary actually help her case that he's mentally unsound. Team Clinton sends a message they hope Donald will get even with.

 

[TNHarley]

Not bad. Of course, if people could just respect the moderator, we wouldn't have a problem.
Hell Kaine basically told the moderator to hold on last night. How rude!

 

[OldLady]

Last night was a waste of time for those of us interested in hearing the participants take on issues. How do you feel about these rule changes:

• Only one microphone is on at any time
• The microphone of the speaker will be shut off when the time set by the moderator is reached
• Rebuttals will be provided equal time (2 minutes for each, the initial question, and the rebuttal)

Only one mic at a time sounds good, but we should ask G.T. if that is feasible.
A warning light (these were used in some of the primary debates) would give the speakers fair warning to wrap up and mic shouldn't be cut off until speaker has finished statement.
More time should be allowed for the responses. I'm sick of bumper sticker policies.

 

[TNHarley]

Last night was a waste of time for those of us interested in hearing the participants take on issues. How do you feel about these rule changes:

• Only one microphone is on at any time
• The microphone of the speaker will be shut off when the time set by the moderator is reached
• Rebuttals will be provided equal time (2 minutes for each, the initial question, and the rebuttal)

Only one mic at a time sounds good, but we should ask G.T. if that is feasible.
A warning light (these were used in some of the primary debates) would give the speakers fair warning to wrap up and mic shouldn't be cut off until speaker has finished statement.
More time should be allowed for the responses. I'm sick of bumper sticker policies.

You cant explain a complicated policy in 2 minutes. You just cant.

 

[Wry Catcher]

War on Coal? How many times did Pence uttered this lie? See the Fact Check linked here:

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton And Coal Jobs

 

[TNHarley]

Trump raising taxes on the middle class? Does Kaine know anything?

 

[G.T.]

Last night was a waste of time for those of us interested in hearing the participants take on issues. How do you feel about these rule changes:

• Only one microphone is on at any time
• The microphone of the speaker will be shut off when the time set by the moderator is reached
• Rebuttals will be provided equal time (2 minutes for each, the initial question, and the rebuttal)

Only one mic at a time sounds good, but we should ask G.T. if that is feasible.
A warning light (these were used in some of the primary debates) would give the speakers fair warning to wrap up and mic shouldn't be cut off until speaker has finished statement.
More time should be allowed for the responses. I'm sick of bumper sticker policies.

Its not a matter of equipment being capable. Sure it is.

It's that, in a debate - its nauseating to hear the counter-debater BEGIN a 2 or 3 minute screed about something that you've got the "counter" to within its first sentence. Because every soul's time is wasted if its a false premise screed. Its hard to let it "rip," so to speak.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Last night was a waste of time for those of us interested in hearing the participants take on issues. How do you feel about these rule changes:

• Only one microphone is on at any time
• The microphone of the speaker will be shut off when the time set by the moderator is reached
• Rebuttals will be provided equal time (2 minutes for each, the initial question, and the rebuttal)

Only one mic at a time sounds good, but we should ask G.T. if that is feasible.
A warning light (these were used in some of the primary debates) would give the speakers fair warning to wrap up and mic shouldn't be cut off until speaker has finished statement.
More time should be allowed for the responses. I'm sick of bumper sticker policies.

You cant explain a complicated policy in 2 minutes. You just cant.

Of course one can, most of the time the responses never answer the question put to them, they rely on canned speeches practiced over and over (Build a Wall, Make America Great Again, Unbeliveable! Terrible!)) and usually utter the same talking point to different questions ("war on coal", uttered at least three times by Pence, and each time a non sequitur).

 

[TNHarley]

"FBI said we couldn't vet refugees"
"they are wrong"
2 min later---
"emails"
"but the FBI said"

contradictory old coot. so funny to me.
Its all theater! Or these people are just frikkin retarded!

 

[TNHarley]

Last night was a waste of time for those of us interested in hearing the participants take on issues. How do you feel about these rule changes:

• Only one microphone is on at any time
• The microphone of the speaker will be shut off when the time set by the moderator is reached
• Rebuttals will be provided equal time (2 minutes for each, the initial question, and the rebuttal)

Only one mic at a time sounds good, but we should ask G.T. if that is feasible.
A warning light (these were used in some of the primary debates) would give the speakers fair warning to wrap up and mic shouldn't be cut off until speaker has finished statement.
More time should be allowed for the responses. I'm sick of bumper sticker policies.

You cant explain a complicated policy in 2 minutes. You just cant.

Of course one can, most of the time the responses never answer the question put to them, they rely on canned speeches practiced over and over (well, except for Trump who simply emotes) and usually utter the same talking point to different question ("war on coal", for example).

No you cant. You can give a general idea. That's about it.

 

[deltex1]

War on Coal? How many times did Pence uttered this lie? See the Fact Check linked here:

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton And Coal Jobs

Obabble already decimated the coal workers.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Last night was a waste of time for those of us interested in hearing the participants take on issues. How do you feel about these rule changes:

• Only one microphone is on at any time
• The microphone of the speaker will be shut off when the time set by the moderator is reached
• Rebuttals will be provided equal time (2 minutes for each, the initial question, and the rebuttal)

Agreed, with the addition of "The Moderator will ask the question, then shut the hell up."

These are debates between candidates, not candidates and moderators.

 

[mudwhistle]

Last night was a waste of time for those of us interested in hearing the participants take on issues. How do you feel about these rule changes:

• Only one microphone is on at any time
• The microphone of the speaker will be shut off when the time set by the moderator is reached
• Rebuttals will be provided equal time (2 minutes for each, the initial question, and the rebuttal)

Electric shock for rudely interrupting and have then hooked up to lie detectors.

 

[ClosedCaption]

"FBI said we couldn't vet refugees"
"they are wrong"
2 min later---
"emails"
"but the FBI said"

contradictory old coot. so funny to me.
Its all theater! Or these people are just frikkin retarded!

Maybe because the FBI never said we couldnt vet refugees. You guys leave out words and details to try and make a point that came from nowhere. Of course when that fact that the FBI didnt say that is presented to you you will just call names and deflect as a response but you cant ever ever ever post the quote where the FBI said what you claim

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

"FBI said we couldn't vet refugees"
"they are wrong"
2 min later---
"emails"
"but the FBI said"

contradictory old coot. so funny to me.
Its all theater! Or these people are just frikkin retarded!

Maybe because the FBI never said we couldnt vet refugees. You guys leave out words and details to try and make a point that came from nowhere. Of course when that fact that the FBI didnt say that is presented to you you will just call names and deflect as a response but you cant ever ever ever post the quote where the FBI said what you claim

 

[TNHarley]

"FBI said we couldn't vet refugees"
"they are wrong"
2 min later---
"emails"
"but the FBI said"

contradictory old coot. so funny to me.
Its all theater! Or these people are just frikkin retarded!

Maybe because the FBI never said we couldnt vet refugees. You guys leave out words and details to try and make a point that came from nowhere. Of course when that fact that the FBI didnt say that is presented to you you will just call names and deflect as a response but you cant ever ever ever post the quote where the FBI said what you claim

prove it big boi

 

[ClosedCaption]

"FBI said we couldn't vet refugees"
"they are wrong"
2 min later---
"emails"
"but the FBI said"

contradictory old coot. so funny to me.
Its all theater! Or these people are just frikkin retarded!

Maybe because the FBI never said we couldnt vet refugees. You guys leave out words and details to try and make a point that came from nowhere. Of course when that fact that the FBI didnt say that is presented to you you will just call names and deflect as a response but you cant ever ever ever post the quote where the FBI said what you claim

Whenever you guys just lay out a link, you know it doesnt say what you claim and this followed suit. Thanks

 

[ClosedCaption]

"FBI said we couldn't vet refugees"
"they are wrong"
2 min later---
"emails"
"but the FBI said"

contradictory old coot. so funny to me.
Its all theater! Or these people are just frikkin retarded!

Maybe because the FBI never said we couldnt vet refugees. You guys leave out words and details to try and make a point that came from nowhere. Of course when that fact that the FBI didnt say that is presented to you you will just call names and deflect as a response but you cant ever ever ever post the quote where the FBI said what you claim

prove it big boi

Its right above you

 

[Mac1958]

Stay specifically on the issues, specifically (1) what they plan on doing when in office & why, and (2) hypothetical situations and how they would react.

No silly gotcha questions or time spent flinging mud at the other debater.

Just kidding, the press would never do that. Too boring, too important.
.