Which is exactly how we should hold debates. There's absolutely no reason to allow a bunch of screaming people and candidates to interrupt each other constantly. Debates are to scrutinize candidates, not see who can get the most attention.
this post was submitted on 17 May 2024
113 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19072 readers
4413 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Almost exactly. They really should be hosted by a non-partisan service. I agree with the rest.
No crowd, mics muted... Trump has zero intention of showing up for these debates. 10 to 1 he weasels out.
I like those odds. Put me down for 100 on the weasel weasling out.
I would add that the candidates can't hear each other's responses and no rebuttals. Just ask the question and let them give their answers and hopefully have a fact checker because you know trump will just spew out lie after lie after lie after lie like he does daily.
That's not a debate. Why even have them together? These piss poor excuses for a "debate" are already: take your questions, give your talking points and go home. Let them press each other on shit, not water it down even more.
Zero chance he doesn't.
Mute buttons on timers.
Except instead of muting, a voice changer that pitch shifts up an octave or two.
Every second it just goes higher until it’s out of human range.
Play their own voice back with a directional microphone, delayed a fraction of a second, to make it impossible to speak.
Keeps them from yelling and distracting the person who's turn it js
People acted all surprised they agreed to debates...
But I don't know how people think they'll manage to actually agree to the terms. Especially when there's no neutral third party organizing it. That's one thing they did both agree on, kicking them out of the equation.
From the article:
...and that the hosts weren’t from outlets with an ideological bent toward Trump.
At this stage I think it will be very difficult to find someone unbiased when it comes to Trump. The best you can hope for outside an assiduous hermit, is someone who is ethically committed to fairness.
Or a non-American. Obviously not possible for the jury selection which is why that was so difficult, but perfectly possible here. (Will probably still have some opinion, but not a strong/religious one).
Imagine if all the US had to tune in to the Vietnamese public broadcaster for this.