Debate issue

Discussion in 'Politics' started by MikeE, May 28, 2006.

  1. MikeE

    MikeE Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    With the coming elections, there will be organized debates between candidates. It is conventionaly held that a debate is better if the candidates do not know what questions will be asked beforehand.

    But consider, when a candidate is elected, they will not be alone in office. They will have a staff which processes things. Would it not be a better format to give the questions before the debate so that the staffs can add their contribution to the responce?

    Its true that the answer will be massaged to sound nice. But as it is set up, "blind" debates are only good for determining which candidate is quick-witted. Either with the facts and positions or with the sound bite. Debates with unannounced questions do not give us a good picture of how either candidate will govern.
  2. SunLion

    SunLion Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    That's a very good point. That somehow brings to mind a talk I once saw on CSPAN years ago, featuring then-candidate Gary Hart. What fascinated me was that Hart spent a lot of time talking not about his opinions, but rather, the mechanisms that he would establish in the policy-making process to better ensure that good, reasoned policy is in fact established.
  3. Dr Phibes

    Dr Phibes Banned

    Would it be better if the audience wasnt vetted - and neither were the questions - since the questions will be posed from a loyal support base
    of the belief that certain questions should not be asked. I am trying to get to the point that sometimes what is not asked is more important. and the audience will inevitably be those who support one or other candidate - no chance then for questions like
    "Will you compensate Iraqi civillians for killin their kids"?
    "If you take the USA to war - how many politicians will be going to the frontline"? "And if not them - then their sons and daughters!
  4. MikeE

    MikeE Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    Sorry, but I oppose the draft, even for the children of warmongers.

    Back on topic- My assumption was that the questions would come from some neutral source (League of Women Voters??) rather than from the public. Answering barbed questions from partisans would be entertaining, but I doubt it would help people make good choices at the polls.
  5. Dr Phibes

    Dr Phibes Banned

    how was that off topic ?????

    My answer is that all the people at these nice little comfy debates are vetted and so to a certain extent the questions are vetted. You will not get a true reflection either way since the whole process is rigged ! The answers are a reflection of the questions - the questions a reflection of the audience. The audience are people who do not oppose the political right of either candidate to rule - they have preferences but not differences.
    How will you have a reflection of opinion without an audience that does not just oppose one or the other candidate, but opposes both? These lovely little debates you think are HS are in fact stage managed pimpery for the masses

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice