Posted on 09/12/2016 12:32:36 PM PDT by Mozilla
In an interview Monday on CNBC’s Squawk Box, Donald Trump predicted the upcoming presidential debates would be “very unfair,” and suggested doing away with moderators entirely. “Let Hillary and I sit there and just debate,” he said.
Trump pointed to criticism of NBC’s Matt Lauer for his role as moderator of the network’s Commander-in-Chief forum last week. “They’re saying about how Matt Lauer was nice … he wasn’t nice to me, he was tough on me,” Trump said. “Everyone saying he was soft on Trump. Well, now the new person is going to try and be really hard on Trump just to show the establishment what he can do. I think it’s really unfair.”
(Excerpt) Read more at adweek.com ...
“......Predicting ‘Very Unfair’ Debates, Suggests Doing Away With Moderators”....
An excellent idea. As an alternative, let each candidate pick ONE of their choosing.
It doesn’t take AI to implement a chess timer to even out the microphone time.
Why did team Trump agree to the ‘Debate Commission’ to begin with?
True, but I was thinking more along the lines of being able to ask follow-up questions based on the candidates' responses.
AI would just introduce a different dimension of faux objectivity.
“9/11 now has a new significance; the hag’s power hungry political career is finished as of 9/11/16. God does work in mysterious ways.”
That is an astute observation. People were noting yesterday that karma is a bitch, but really, it is very, very symbolic that she should be struck down (smitten) on this calamitous day.
Oh they have special timers called Event Timers that are designed for expressly that purpose. With a little red light that goes on when the speaker goes over.
He said the other day that he thinks the debates are important, and feels an obligation to do them. He didn’t say why it is always, inevitably a hostile moderator.
sounds good
1. Economy
2. Foreign Affairs
Etc.... then let them use their 5 minutes on each topic to explain their position and why. PERIOD.
The Lincoln-Douglas debates had no moderator.
Have you ever seen a moderator who actually contributed or enhanced a debate? I have yet, but then I have only been watching debates since Nixon-Kennedy.
The "oligarchy" observation that Mike Savage offered a decade ago would explain why the Republicans never complained.
Sounds good.
I would tie the event timer and red light to a seat platform that drops them in a tank of water after two seconds. But that's me. Would be rude to the candidates, but it would be very entertaining for the audience. Do it once, they won't go into the red again.
But that is not what is wanted. What is wanted is precisely a chess timer controlling the mic. That is, there is no presumption that a speaker has a certain amount of time, use it or lose it, to be devoted to a given topic. What is needed is a switch you throw to turn off your mic so you can conserve your time, of which you and your opponent have an equal initial amount. Your opponent has the same.That, and no other moderator. Jungle rules, as far as each participant’s choice of topic. If you pick a topic your audience isn’t interested in, and ignore the topic that your opponent scores with, shame on you. If you burn up most of your time pontificating early, your opponent dominates late. Discipline!
The rules of prior “
debates” joint news conferences have precluded things like notes and exhibits; I would see both participants put up any exhibits, and supporting evidence/links, on a web site, long enough in advance that neither side is blindsided. That could entail negotiation as each prepares to rebut the other’s evidence. The objective is to advantage facts and logic over sophistry and emotional appeals.
The chess timer idea is interesting.
Haha! Hillary’s been complaining about moderators too.
I hope Trump mentioned that a timer that switches microphones on/off would be fair.
Here’s what Trump said:
http://www.teaparty.org/trump-wants-debate-clinton-without-moderator-186942
“The fact is they are gaming the system,” Trump said of the criticism of Lauer, “and I think maybe we should have no moderator. Let Hillary and I sit there and just debate. I think the system is being rigged so it’s going to be a very unfair debate.”
SPECIAL: The Tea Party is recruiting an Army of Observers to prevent a Rigged Election by Hillary Clinton. Please chip in $35 or more to Stop the Steal…
He added, “I can see it happening right now because everybody was saying he was soft on Trump and now the new person is going to try and be really hard on Trump just to show the establishment what he can do. I think it’s very unfair what they are doing.”
Back before modern communications the attention span could burn out after three minutes on average. I imagine it has dropped since then, but that’s a useful reference point.
I think there should be quick segments overall because someone who feels strongly about things will be tempted to ‘burn up’ too much time early. It would be better if they could mention that they will elaborate more on their websites or even on Twitter.
But the ‘chess timer’ is interesting. Maybe a roof on their time early on? Then they could ‘cut it short’, save time for ‘the hole’ and use up their excess time in turns later on.
This is a great starting point for debate negotiations.
It gives Trump leverage.
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.