presidential debate

anonymous asked:

How do you think the GOP should do their debates? Is Fox's idea of only having the top 10 polling candidates debate fair?

I think the Republican Party should consider adopting some of the features of the WWE’s Royal Rumble match. Put all of the candidates’ names in a random drawing and pick two people to start. Every two minutes, another name would be randomly chosen in order to join the debate. Now, in the WWE match, there are eliminations, so I don’t know how to incorporate that into the debates, although I’d love to see somebody throw Rick Santorum off the stage. Maybe they could do a mash-up of the Royal Rumble match and American Idol (Fox owns the franchise, right?). Yeah, I think that’s it – we’re definitely onto something.

Okay, here it is: all of the candidates’ names are placed in a random drawing and two people start out the debate. Every two minutes, another candidate’s name is chosen (randomly) and they join the debate. After five candidates are on the stage, the viewing audience can start to vote to eliminate candidates (that are already on the stage) from the debate. But, in order to make sure that it’s somewhat fair to the party and to the candidates, in order to vote to eliminate a candidate, members of the audience would have to make a donation of at least $1 to the Republican Party. I think that’s fair. Once everybody’s name has been drawn, there can be no more eliminations, so if the audience chooses to eliminate half of the people, it has to be done before the last candidate’s name is drawn. If there are 15 candidates still on the stage at that time, the debate just moves forward with everyone involved.

Moderating the debate is always a clusterfuck anyway, so that won’t really be any different. The entertaining part will be the countdown until the next candidate enters the debate, Royal Rumble-style. Maybe once a candidate is eliminated, they get 60 seconds to make a parting statement, too. You know…to keep it dignified. I don’t know. There are so many ways to go. Really, this could totally revitalize Presidential politics and make the endless electoral cycle actually somewhat worth experiencing: the 2016 American Idol/Royal Rumble Republican Presidential Debate. Who isn’t down with this idea? EVERYONE would watch that.

You’re welcome, Reince Priebus.

“The League of Women Voters is withdrawing its sponsorship of the presidential debate scheduled for mid-October because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter,” League President Nancy M. Neuman said today.

“It has become clear to us that the candidates’ organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and honest answers to tough questions,” Neuman said. “The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.”

— 

http://lwv.org/press-releases/league-refuses-help-perpetrate-fraud

“And there was a point where

the League of Women Voters…

…who used to always

moderate the debates

[They] retired from the process

and issued a statement

that should be emblazoned on tablets

and thrown down upon us

as we dance naked among golden calves.

But instead, because it wasn’t written by god

it was forgotten

[Dan paraphrasing]

They said

‘We are not moderating debates anymore’

‘We are tired of participating in a bipartisan sham’…”


Harmontown episode #144

youtube

“Change the Presidential Debates”: Gary Johnson and Our America’s Bold New Lawsuit

The Our America initiative, which is headed up by 2012 Libertarian presidential candidate and former two-term New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, has produced a sharp commercial asking for donations to fund a legal challenge to presidential debates. The basic argument? The debates should be open to “all qualified candidates.” Which implies that both the Dems and Reps may have to rethink their candidate-selection processes.

Watch above and go here for more background.

“Well now let’s look at these bills that the Vice president suggests were too extreme. One was a bill for a dollar twenty-five cents an hour for anyone who works in a store or company, that has a million dollars a year business. I don’t think thats extreme at all. And yet nearly two-thirds to three-fourths of the Republicans in the House of Representatives voted against that proposal. Secondly was the Federal aid to education bill, it was not an extreme bill. And yet we could not get one Republican to join. At least, I think, four of the eight Democrats voted to send it to the floor of the House, not one Republican, and they joined with those Democrats who were opposed to it. The third is medical care for the aged, which is tied to social security, which is financed out of social security funds, does not put a deficit on the Treasury. The proposal advanced by you and by Mr. Javits would have cost $600 millions. Mr. Rockefeller rejected it in New York; he said he didn’t agree with the financing at all; said it ought to be on social security. So these are three programs which are quite moderate. I think it shows the difference between the two parties. One party is ready to move in this program, the other party gives them lipservice.”

CNN anchor who saved Obama during 2012 debate gets an award

CNN anchor who saved Obama during 2012 debate gets an award

http://twitter.com/#!/gwenifill/status/441351896125546497

Let’s all take some time to remember back when we still had hopes that Barack Obama would be a one-term president, and how those hopes were dashed by a lapdog media willing to do whatever was necessary to keep him in office. It was during the first presidential debate that CNN’s Candy Crowley jumped into the frayto lie for Barack Obama…

View On WordPress

youtube

why isn’t this all over tumblr already 

youtube

“Eye Of The Sparrow” — A Bad Lip Reading of the First 2012 Presidential Debate (by BadLipReading)

The American dream that we have nursed for so long in this country, and lately neglected, is not that every man must be level with every other man. The American dream is that every man must be free to become whatever God intends he should be.
— 

Ronald Reagan - October 28, 1980

Reagan - Carter presidential debate.