GOP Pulls Debate Support

[Revoltingest]

HERE HERE!!

Where? Where?

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes. Much more so than watching their sound-bite commercials, or going to their driveling websites.

Heaven help us when people make their decision about
whom to vote for based upon debates & commercials.
Ever consider looking at their records in public office
to see a past that portends the future? Does their
stated agenda comport with their record?

 

[Revoltingest]

Speaking personally, I do get value from watching them. Part of what makes a debate better or worse is the substance of questions being asked and the ability of the moderator to control unruly participants (which with Trump proved near impossible). The ability to respond substantively to policy questions, as well as cross-examination about their positions, is something I want in a President.

Trump's debating style won him many voters.
And you encourage this?
In a "debate" there is no substantive policy info provided.
What little there is, one can find from their platform, which
has far more detail. More important is their record in office.
Does it comport with what they say? Or are they pretending
something to appeal to emotions, without actually intending
to follow thru?
Such questions & answers mean more than extemporaneous
performances on TV. Alas, I now I understand why we get
the poor choices the parties provide....it's about how they
appear on TV.

 

[Revoltingest]

Stress and pressure tolerance, and ability to be clear and concise in speech seems important to me. But who am I but one lowly voter?

Agendas that a politician intends to implement
mean more to me than ability to handle stress on TV.

 

[Revoltingest]

It does help the popcorn industry.

The old Popcorn Industrial Complex problem, eh.

 

[Kenny]

Heaven help us when people make their decision about
whom to vote for based upon debates & commercials.
Ever consider looking at their records in public office
to see a past that portends the future?

But he looks so cute and i love the way he dresses... SURELY that is the qualification. Besides, he is so nice and reminds me of my grand-dad.

 

[Revoltingest]

But he looks so cute and i love the way he dresses... SURELY that is the qualification. Besides, he is so nice and reminds me of my grand-dad.

And he really zinged that other guy with his clever quip.
That's what I want in a President...someone who really
looks & sounds presidential...& really emotes with such
sincerity. Still, the zingers are most important.

 

[Kenny]

And he really zinged that other guy with his clever quip.
That's what I want in a President...someone who really
looks & sounds presidential...& really emotes with such
sincerity. Still, the zingers are most important.

How can I refute what is empirical and verifiable evidence?

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Heaven help us when people make their decision about
whom to vote for based upon debates & commercials.
Ever consider looking at their records in public office
to see a past that portends the future? Does their
stated agenda comport with their record?

Of course. That is also helpful in selecting those who set the agenda and tone of our nation. But I wanna hear ‘em talk too.

 

[Revoltingest]

How can I refute what is empirical and verifiable evidence?

People are so unaware how subject they
are to letting emotional impressions guide
their affection for politicians.
I'm vulnerable too. So I never watch debates,
lest I be corrupted by a slick persona.

 

[Kenny]

People are so unaware how subject they
are to letting emotional impressions guide
their affection for politicians.
I'm vulnerable too. So I never watch debates,
lest I be corrupted by a slick persona.

In reality, as you so well noted, Presidential debates are useless and there is no need listen to them. Just look at their records and you will find all you need to know.

 

[Left Coast]

Trump's debating style won him many voters.
And you encourage this?

No, I encourage debates of substance and moderators who cut people off when they break the rules.

In a "debate" there is no substantive policy info provided.
What little there is, one can find from their platform, which
has far more detail.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Often questions are asked in debate about issues which aren't clear from their campaign websites or other public statements.

More important is their record in office.
Does it comport with what they say? Or are they pretending
something to appeal to emotions, without actually intending
to follow thru?

Their record is something that they also do (and should) get questioned about during debates.

Alas, I now I understand why we get
the poor choices the parties provide....it's about how they
appear on TV.

So then I assume you're against all campaign commercials as well? And all public speeches and press conferences and interviews? Unfortunately part of being a public figure is that you do have to...go out in public, which means appearances become relevant to some extent. However debates provide an opportunity, if done well, to pressure candidates to provide substantive answers.

 

[Revoltingest]

Of course. That is also helpful in selecting those who set the agenda and tone of our nation. But I wanna hear ‘em talk too.

That's where the error lies, ie, in allowing
accent, voice quality, emotion, vocabulary,
appearance, & gift of gab to sway one's vote.

 

[Stevicus]

The old Popcorn Industrial Complex problem, eh.

Orville Redenbacher was a capitalist.

 

[Revoltingest]

No, I encourage debates of substance...

Do those ever happen?
Not in my experience.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Often questions are asked in debate about issues which aren't clear from their campaign websites or other public statements.

Can you recall a politician clarifying or adding
info to their previously proffered platform?
(I like alliteration, but that was accidental.)

Their record is something that they also do (and should) get questioned about during debates.

Again, has this ever yielded new info or clarification for you?

So then I assume you're against all campaign commercials as well?

I'm vigorously opposed to my ever seeing such horrors.
However, they must be legal.
Never are they useful...just manipulative claptrap.

And all public speeches and press conferences and interviews?

I prefer to read of them...so as to avoid hearing & seeing them.

Unfortunately part of being a public figure is that you do have to...go out in public, which means appearances become relevant to some extent. However debates provide an opportunity, if done well, to pressure candidates to provide substantive answers.

I'd prefer that debates be long & drawn out....with time
given to fully consider answers.
I remember Obama mocking Romney for calling Russia
a threat. Obama won points in the debate. But Romney
was right. Obama continued wasting money & lives on
2 useless wars (that he pledged to end) instead of
addressing the looming threat of Russia (& China).
For Romney to explain why, the televised debate
venue was inadequate to the task. It's too much the
sound bite environment.

Televised debates tend to favor the better comedian.
The best example ever....

 

[Revoltingest]

Orville Redenbacher was a capitalist.

So was Sanders.
BTW, it was Dave Thomas (founder of Wendy's) who
invented that bucket, which greatly increased sales.

 

[Left Coast]

Do those ever happen?
Not in my experience.

Can you recall a politician clarifying or adding
info to their previously proffered platform?
(I like alliteration, but that was accidental.)

Again, has this ever yielded new info or clarification for you?

Yes and yes. I've also watched politicians fail to meaningfully add anything, indicating all they've done is memorize a line without understanding the policy they're advocating. Remember when Rick Perry couldn't remember all the departments he supposedly wanted to shut down?

I prefer to read of them...so as to avoid hearing & seeing them.

Reading/writing is not without bias and things done for effect either. Campaign websites are just virtual ads. Unfortunately part of living in our world means sifting through slogans and such to find substance.

I

'd prefer that debates be long & drawn out....with time
given to fully consider answers.

I agree, I'd prefer that as well.

I remember Obama mocking Romney for calling Russia
a threat. Obama won points in the debate. But Romney
was right. For him to explain why, the televised debate
venue was inadequate to the task.

I mean, he would've been mocked regardless I suspect. No venue is perfect, but debates do still have value. If you don't want to watch though, no skin off my back.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes and yes. I've also watched politicians fail to meaningfully add anything, indicating all they've done is memorize a line without understanding the policy they're advocating. Remember when Rick Perry couldn't remember all the departments he supposedly wanted to shut down?

Rick Perry was obviously an "empty chair"
beforehand. This was no new info.
Did you actually consider voting for him
before you saw that gaffe?

Reading/writing is not without bias and things done for effect either. Campaign websites are just virtual ads. Unfortunately part of living in our world means sifting through slogans and such to find substance.

But having time to consider one's words
yields a better picture of their thinking IMO.

I mean, he would've been mocked regardless I suspect. No venue is perfect, but debates do still have value. If you don't want to watch though, no skin off my back.

I see the debates as detracting from voter information
because of the emotional manipulation by impression.

People too often think they can get a sense of a person
by looking them in the eye, & hearing their words. It's
like the old handshake & a man's word is his bond.
Experience has taught me to distrust that easy leap to
belief.

 

[Stevicus]

So was Sanders.
BTW, it was Dave Thomas (founder of Wendy's) who
invented that bucket, which greatly increased sales.

Yeah, but it just goes to show how they can profit from those who turn U.S. politics into an entertainment spectacle. People sitting back and watching it all while eating popcorn.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yeah, but it just goes to show how they can profit from those who turn U.S. politics into an entertainment spectacle. People sitting back and watching it all while eating popcorn.

And fried chicken.