Posted on 09/27/2016 6:18:47 PM PDT by Helicondelta
Now that would have been debating. Of course then JFK was assasinated and Goldwater HATED Johnson with a passion (not that it wasn't mutual). But Kennedy and Goldwater had respect and admiration for each other. They were going to present their own cases and let the people decide.
It might have become a far different America today had they been able to pull it off.
Anyone know who the moderator(s) will be next debate, and will it be the same format? Please don’t tell me it will be Keith Olbermann with Barbara Streisand.
Martha Raddatz will make Lester Holt seem like a raving Trump fan.
2 questions from the top rated liberal radio host
Wouldn't that be unfair? Who would have even heard of the top rated liberal radio host?
At least Trump’s smirks are genuine. She is such a phony. That one where she said “Woo” and then wiggled her shoulders— we all cringed at that.
I dont know who she is but are you kidding, ANOTHER leftist???? WHY is Trump agreeing to this?
Obama was a guest at Martha Raddatz’ wedding. That was before anyone else knew who Obama was!
Not to worry: The RNC agreed to Anderson Cooper alongside Raddatz to balance her bias.
I can’t see any value in these debates for informed people like us,,, primary debates yes, but not these debates. It does offer an opportunity for our candidate to educate the people that are largely uninformed and get their news from the mainstream media.
LOL Anderson Cooper, yeah that makes it fair LOL LOL Rudy Giuliani was right, Trump should refuse anymore debates until it is in a non-partisan format, this is ridicurious. Like Trump always says, the system is totally rigged. It really is.
Top dem dogs would send a ‘packet of questions’ to the ‘top’ liberal radio person... There is very little free thought on that side. Even the press gets their ‘talking points’ to back up the ‘newest white liberal elite’ meme.
So, yeah you're right on one level DemMom - the same stuff that goes out to the press, on-air ‘talent’ and to their paid trolls - would all be the same. On that level it makes no difference... liberal elites will write all the questions on that side... but my system breaks up OUR questions so citizens who are conservative have their concerns addressed.
That is why we need to have a HUGE turnout of votes to offset voter fraud and the votes of “the stupid people.”
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.Correct.
The timekeeper should be a simple chess timer which controls which microphone is live and which one is dead. No moderator, no questions, and no restriction on notes or even laptops, albeit laptops limited to a prearranged web site on which all graphics and statistical sources are filed in advance. You could even have an assistant, perhaps, to operate the laptop to display slide shows, etc.Think about it: wouldn’t you rather your candidate have a second, and your candidate’s opponent have a second - rather than your candidate have no second - and your opponent have the moderator on her side???
And wouldn’t you rather your candidate have the ability to focus the audience on a graphic to illustrate his point - at least long enough that he can scratch his nose?
There is such a thing as over reliance on PowerPoint. Your candidate would have to know that discipline - and so would his opponent. But overall, I would expect such a debate to be far more interesting, and far more attractive to an audience - and far fairer - than the present Democrat-favoring one.
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.