Who won the debates?
Well, the first Democratic and Republican presidential debates are over.
Yawn.
I think most people would agree that there's no effective way to hold a debate that includes 10 candidates at once. Nobody has enough time to make any point stick, or to make clear a position on any issue. The whole thing turns into forgettable sound bytes and hand gestures. Here are the only trends I took away from the first debates:
-- Every Democrat wants voters to know that they're against the war in Iraq.
-- Every Republican wants voters to think they're the next coming of Ronald Reagan.
Still, I suppose every debate has a winner and a loser. Who do you think won the first debates? Guiliani? McCain? Clinton? Obama? Or one of the others?
There's 19 months of politickin' and posturin' to go before the next president is actually elected. The only thing I'm relatively certain of is that a Democrat won't win in Okaloosa, Santa Rosa or Walton counties.
Nationally, though, I would have to give the edge to the Democrats -- unless a Republican comes forward with a legitimate plan to extricate get the U.S. out of Iraq while avoiding a complete humanitarian catastrophe there.
posted by Patrick Rice @ 11:56 AM
13 Comments
13 Comments:
Pat, we all lost. This is the sorriest bunch ever assembled. I can not believe, in this country we can not do better. You want to know why people don't vote - there is your answer bot sides Rep and Dem are horrible.
I haven’t watched any of the debates for the past 20+ years. They’re no more than choreographed press releases where the candidates don’t say anything specific, and certainly nothing different than they, and they’re handlers have been saying since they hit the trail.
The only thing anybody remembers is who got the best one-liner, or the best zinger (What do you remember from Reagan vs. Mondale or Bentsen vs. Quayle?), and that’s certainly no way to decide who to vote for. At one time debates may have been worthwhile, but not anymore.
I say lets get each candidate on the hot seat where they have to answer rapid fire questions from 4 reporters in one interview. The reporters will come from each of the major networks (ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC)
Each candidate will be grilled at the same time, so nobody can get any advanced warning. Each network will send as many reporters as there are candidates and the reporters will be randomly assigned to the candidate right before the interviews start. These filmed interviews will then be broadcast in their entirety and unedited for the voters.
The stations can help by sending reporters with different areas of expertise, for instance NBC may send a couple of the economic and financial reporters from CNBC. Others can be military analysts etc.
This way maybe we can get something other than a public affairs type talking points press release from the candidates.
So FOX is a major news channel and CNN isn't?
Geez.
Those are the broadcast networks, CNN is a cable channel.
Rep. Paul won the Republican Party debate. He was logical, practical and clear spoken. He has limited name exposure and does not have the acting skills of former President Ronald Reagan, but it was clear that he will work hard and be open.
John Edwards won the Democratic Party debate. It was perfectly clear that he is an intelligent, hard working man who cares about family, God and country. Given that his father did not buy him a degree and a gubertorial position, I think we will see a hard working, honest man who cares about all.
none of these people are sorry. on both sides. a great bunch of people...for the most part.
people don't vote because they're too freakin' lazy and ignorant. to think otherwise is foolish and ridiculous.
Obama and Romney won the debates in my opinion. Both have new styles to bring to the office, and both don't have a billion spouses, brothers, etc. who are in politics.
I gotta admit though, my favorite part of any of the debates was when Chris Matthews asked the GOP candidates if they thought it would be a good thing for Bill Clinton to be at the White House and Mitt Romney said, "You've got to be kidding me!" Politics aside, that was freakin' hilarious. Plus...they're both very articulate (sorry, couldn't resist!)
Just look on the bright side. It could be worse: we could have Michael Moore and Pat Robertson running for the White House!
god help us. 18 months of "vote for me, i promise you everything. don't look at what i've promised/done before, just listen to what i'm promising now." i thought the war on terror was bad enough, but now this. can't somebody shut these idiots up?
to the nameless name-caller,
If you think everyone's a idiot, why don't you run for office? you don't have to live here, you know?
every single place I post on this website someone is calling someone else a name, like "idiot".
next time any of you name-callers have a urge to attack someone else, try this: just let it go. no one else cares.
I also found Ron Paul very convincing during the debate. I think the media needs to do their jobs and cover this guy. The way those post-debate stories were written, you wouldn't figure he was there at all.
Drew, I won't call you an idiot, but they have you hook line and sinker.
I miss the good old days when people could just get along and live by the “if you don’t have something nice to say, then don’t say anything” credo.
I know it must be hard to resist the urge to back slap me, but I assure you, you can overcome. Just try to keep your urges to yourself. Trust me, no one else cares.
Drew, I agree with you. And, for those who want a true alternative, go to www.unity08.com, as lauded by Sam Waterson. It is unique.
Too much name calling in general at least in this area, and i have lived in several areas. Shalimar Partisan
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home