Candidate debates ending in future elections? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 03, 2024, 12:22:00 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Candidate debates ending in future elections? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Candidate debates ending in future elections?  (Read 1483 times)
Kitteh
drj101
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,436
United States


« on: October 03, 2012, 07:00:40 PM »

I agree with the others who have said that debates should be changed, not scrapped. If I were in charge of the debates, I would:

1) Allow in any candidate on the ballot in states worth 270 electoral votes (i.e. any candidate who could theoretically win). This allows third-party viewpoints without having to let in Jimmy McMillan and David Duke. This year that would mean Stein and Johnson, but not Anderson, Goode, or any others.

2) The topic of the debates (i.e. foreign policy, domestic policy, etc) is not announced before hand. That way it's a little bit harder for candidates to just rehearse talking points and then spit them out on camera.

4) After each question, the moderator should challenge the candidate's answer and offer counterpoints. The candidate can then offer a response to the moderator. The idea being that each candidate's answers don't just go unchallenged. The moderator's counter to the candidates should be forceful and serious, no softballs.

5) In one debate, the candidates should be banned from mentioning the names of or in any way referencing any other candidate in their answers. The idea being to make candidates explain their own positions, not just attack their opponents positions.

6) Each candidate's answer to each question should be a minimum of three minutes long,  in order to make the candidates really explain in detail their positions, not just give talking points.

7) There should be four presidential debates, not three, in order to accommodate the third party candidates and minimum time requirements.

8) Some questions should be more abstract, not just common issue questions. I'm thinking along the lines of "What qualities do you think are most important for a leader of our country to have?" or "How would you define whether a law is 'fair' or 'unfair'?" Things to get at the candidate's general philosophy of government, not just a list of their stances on certain issues.

That's just a few things I would propose. Not that it matters at all what I think about this :p
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.017 seconds with 10 queries.