Posted on 09/27/2016 6:18:47 PM PDT by Helicondelta
“First of all, ninety-five percent of the people who watched the debate and we had pre-interviewed, of almost 900 interviews, said they didn’t change their minds. Of the small number of people who did, Trump ended up with a slight advantage among undecideds to him. But more importantly,” continued Caddell, “and this is what does matter long-term in debates, is how you deal with the challenges and impressions you have.”
Caddell said based on the polling, Trump “actually topped Hillary Clinton” on who was seen as plausible as president. “That was his great test,” said Caddell, “that he stand there and be seen most of all as plausible as president. He was preferred over her by four points.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
These debates are so far removed from what a political debate used to be, I’m wondering if candidates, campaigns and TV networks are going to start questioning the value of even having them at all.
They are glorified joint press conferences with a biased press. We need a list of common questions and a timekeeper. That’s it. Question 1: immigration. Mrs. Clinton, you won the coin toss, you have 3 minutes then Mr. Trump gets 3 minutes. One minute each for follow up then on to question 2. Ready? Begin.
YES, I agree!
The common questions would be things like Trump’s taxes or Trump’s birtherism.
Well, if nothing else, at least the debates can confirm that the candidate is still alive.
Without them, Hillary could plausibly pass away and they could hide the fact until after the election.
Exactly. I have a book that discusses spiritual warfare, and one of the principles that the author advances is: “Don’t allow Satan to choose the battleground.”
By participating in these sham debates, conservatives/Republicans are letting Satan choose the battleground IMO, which is very foolish.
Yes, but ‘old school’. He’s pretty disgusted with what the party has become.
It was her phony chuckling and that smarmy fake smile pasted on her overly- made-up face, symbolic of her lack of trustworthiness.
A real debate is having the candidates debate each other - no biased moderator to run interference or asking leading questions.
We might learn something illuminating about them. The present format puts the Republican candidate at a permanent disadvantage.
Trump should give the debate organizers an ultimatum: institute a real debate or I will walk. Its that simple.
Trump received some UUUGE help from Lester Holt, the Clinton supporter/moderator, who attacked Trump with “fact checking,” lies (Stop and Frisk is not “unconstitutional” according to the SCOTUS), and incessant interruptions. The people watching could plainly see the bias and resented it. That’s why the polls will show that Trump benefited from this partisan display by Holt.
It’s a shame that elections are decided by the most uniformed, wishy-washy tenth of the voters.
That should be uninformed, not uniformed.
They are show trials for the non marxist candidates.
I believe you are absolutely right. Holt's bias was so over the top that it was obvious and repulsive. The enemy is smart, but lacks wisdom.
bump
Fair format for future debates:
8 questions from the DNC (3 to their own party’s candidate 3 to opponent’s and 2 identical questions asked of both candidates)
8 questions from the RNC (3 to their own party’s candidate 3 to opponent’s and 2 identical questions asked of both candidates)
2 questions from the top rated conservative radio host
2 questions from the top rated liberal radio host
ditto with top liberal and conservative TV hosts. (two each)
Moderator keeps the time clock... and READS questions...
Please, let's not forget to mention that she actually threw She had to be high to do that in a debate! in a shimmy!
Should be: Please, let's not forget to mention that she actually threw in a shimmy! She had to be high to do that in a debate!
Why did the primary debates all have like 3 moderators on average and these presidential ones always seem to have like 1 moderator? It didn’t used to be that way either, as I can clearly remember the 1988 V.P. debate having like 3 moderators with Brit Hume being one of them. I can only assume the media, in their quest to tightly control the debate to skew it in favor of the Democrat, knows they can more easily control 1 moderator than 3.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.