The Democratic National Committee announced on Tuesday night that there will be no live audience at the Democratic presidential primary debate in Phoenix, Arizona on Sunday.
All debates should be like that
Catcalls hooting and Hollerinâ contribute nothing
And no spin rooms, either (as will be the case with this one).
Itâll be interesting to see how viewers will assess the actual arguments made in the debate without the âhooting and hollerinââ to guide them.
I actually think this might make that debate much better. Being forced to play to the audience is never the same as speaking to the American people all around the country anyway.
It may turn out to be more like an academic discussion of sorts if CNN can avoid getting some asswipe moderator that wants to turn everything into a sideshow where they intentionally try to provoke one candidate into going after the other, as theyâve generally done in the past. All that does is end up being more on the level of personal attacks, which is what CNN tries to get candidates to do to one another so they can say they put on a good show or something. Generally, that ends up telling us nothing of where they stand on the issues in any depth. I would rather hear about other matters that have gotten little attention in other debates and this would be the best way for that to happen. Like I say, it all depends on what moderator they get to conduct this thing however. Hopefully it wonât be some dipshit that just wants them to duke it out rhetorically.
To a limited extent, they tell us what messages resonate with the unrepresentative segment of the voter base that has the interest and resources to attend a debate. Thatâs not nothing, but I think itâs clear that a live audience is a net negative.
That said, I think debates themselves are of very limited value in modern politics. This isnât 1960; I can trivially learn as much as I want about a candidateâs policy positions and history from the comfort of my living room on my own schedule. I consider myself to be at least one standard deviation more knowledgeable about politics than the median voter, and I havenât watched a primary or general debate in at least a decade.
Jake Tapper, Dana Bash, and Jorge Ramos.
Evaluate accordingly.
First, get rid of Dana Bash. Sheâs horrible. Jake Tapper can go either way. He has the ability to go high or go low. And Jorge RamosâŚgenerally a very good moderator.
I agree with these, and for the reasons you stateâand now, that itâs a two-person race (unless Gabbard can force herself onto the stage), weâre likelier to get substantive questions and respnses.
Still, as I read your comment, I couldnât help but think that at least one of the questions might be something like, âI want each of you to speak directly to the camera and make your best case why Warren should endorse you and not your opponent.â The Bachelorette: The Dem Primaries Edition.
But who will Bernie yell at?
Ugh. Need more coffeeâŚ
I hope that itâs more of a round table discussion than a debate. I want both Joe and Bernie to show where they agree and where can come together for the sake of the Democratic Party and for the country.
I agree with this up to a point. There can be a value to them, though, when we see the extent to which a participant is listening closely to what someone else is saying there in the moment and responds to that. Warren showed she was/is really good at that when she went after Bloomberg with the request to release complainants from their NDAs. That part was planned, I suspect, but she set it up by repeating part of what heâd just said about those complaints.
ETA: Candidates really just ignoring the questions and, even, what other candidates have just said in favor of repeating prepared talking pointsâthatâs not debating. Listening and responding, thinking on your feet: thatâs debating.
Not debates anyway
Never have been
Extended Press conferences with questions
WhatâŚis your name?
WhatâŚis your quest?
WhatâŚis the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?
For reference:
de¡bate
/dÉËbÄt/
noun
noun: debate ; plural noun: debates
WHy DOes SENILE Joe want a SIT down DEbate? Because ALzheimERs has made hiim lose His balance. Bernie can STAnd!
Start cancelling Trump rallies, his energy would be exhausted in a few weeks⌠he feeds on the crows applause and noiseâŚ
Caw, Caw, Caw.
I hear what folks are saying about this and certainly agree with the general vapidity of it all. It rarely rises above the beauty contest level. I guess there might be value in the fact that the candidates are trying in part to push each other off balance. It might reveal some intangible qualitiesâpoise, say, and ability to give and take. National leaders are successful or not at least in part depending on their ability to talk in a room with a bunch of strong egos and come away with some percentage of their policy agenda moving forward. That said, I donât know what we could possibly learn from this debate that we didnât know for a long time.
This is what, #15? Gotta agree with you on that for the most part.
These are not fresh new faces weâre seeing, about whom weâre curious and eager to know more. I guess itâs like hemlines, the voting public has decided and now the fresh new faces are over on the discount table.
A succinct and accurate summary of the made for television debates. They donât even rise to the level of a public service announcement.