Tonight at 9: the second Republican debate — 25 Comments
Baited. Breath. Like the cat that ate cheese and sat by the mouse hole. (The misspelling is intentional.)
I just wish I still lived in the Pacific time zone. Nine to eleven? Doesn’t anyone sleep any more?
Alas, I can not watch. My sock drawer isn’t going to arrange itself.
Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
There are seven baseball games scheduled to start between 7:20 and 9:45 p.m. ET tonight– any of which would be more interesting than the debate, and one of which might settle who wins the second NL Wild Card. It’s a measure of my disgust with politics in general right now that I’d rather watch the Boys of Summer during the last week of the regular season than a staged debate between the clowns and nonentities of either major party.
I’ll be watching, but I am prepared to be underwhelmed by the crappy format that Fox will use. IMO, Fox wants to create a lot of heat and not much light with its debate format. They favor the WWE type entertainment rather than heling voters understand the candidates’ positions and ideas.
Just got back from a vacation so I am not drinking for awhile. If I watched the debates I would kill a liter bottle of scotch. I can’t afford that so no I am not watching the so called debates.
I’ll watch clips of the highlights afterwards. I agree with J.J.; the format is more akin to tawdry entertainment than any serious discussion of ideas and policy.
Anytime you have more than three or four candidates on stage, it really stretches the language to call it a ‘debate’. It’s mostly just a shouting match with each candidate trying best to mug for the camera during the tiny amount of time he has.
Well, it kicked off with the third moderator, of whom I have never heard, introducing something or other in Spanish.
Good night Fox on general principles.
.
I liked it when I lived in the United States, an English speaking country. (I used to snicker on Canadian airlines when every announcement had to be made twice.)
Disclaimer. I grew up in part on the edge of Ybor City in Tampa, Fl. The wrong side. Most amenities were there, or required transit of Ybor to reach. Sometimes Cracker boys passed without comment, sometimes not.
A variation of Cuban-Spanish was common; but English was spoken in school by children with a variety of surnames, and at official functions.
Why is a Colombian citizen moderating an American presidential debate? Terrible moderators in a terrible format. “Vote off the island”?! Horrific.
There’s no such thing as a “debate” with more than two people. To paraphrase Woody Allen, it’s a mockery of a sham of a clusterfark.
The lady with the accent was there courtesy of Univision ( oona-vi-see-own’-eh), the Spanish language network, who were also carrying it live.
It wasn’t a debate (especially with that many bodies), it was a talking point recital.
My proposal:
When they get down to 4, put them on stage in soundproof glass boxes, with a speaker feeding each box and a microphone. Just prior to the show, each candidate submits four questions to be asked. Each candidate has his/her microphone turned on for 10 minutes, except 5 minutes for the originator of that particular question – they know what it is and should be able to be concise. No talking/shouting over the other’s answers, no rambling on, taking other’s time.
It would have been so easy to arrange for the microphones to go dead at the end of the allotted time. Which would have eliminated talking (shouting) over each other, and made it much more “watchable.”
buddhaha and others,
Listen to podcasts. I have heard Ramswamy and RFK Jr. speak for hours, uninterrupted, on a wide range of topics posed by interviewers. Just heard Desantis on an hour interview on Glenn Beck’s podcast. Megyn Kelly just interviewed Donald Trump for over an hour on her podcast. She has also interviewed Desantis (good interview, she pushed him hard on some points) and I think she’s interviewed Haley. I listened to Jordan Peterson interview Chris Christie for at least an hour.
I agree that major network, televised debates are a gosh awful format; especially with more than, perhaps three candidates participating.
It doesn’t seem like many people watched it, but I thought Desantis looked good.
Haley did a good job, except her attack against Tim Scott seemed mean.
Burgum was not given much respect, but that’s the nature of the format.
Glad to see everyone but Christie refuse to write someone off at the end (Desantis handled it especially well), but Christie’s reason was very well stated.
Watched CNN after the debate and they spent about 10 minutes in a separate segment rehashing Florida’s “racist, anti-black, pro-slavery” High School AP History instruction. Terrible, terrible reporting. And they gave no color nor credence to Desantis’ stance on Kamala Harris’ extremely cherry-picked attack.
Shortly after that segment they actually went to a panel to discuss it more, and one of the Dem pundits finally highlighted the black historian who wrote the actual quote and tried to bring some reason to the absurdly biased attacks on Desantis.
Pa+cat, actually…
How bout a playoff system. Pick the eight top poll sitters, draw random pairings. Put each pairing in front of a camera for one hour. First round: domestic issues. Old school debate style. Two pairings Wednesday night; two on Thursday. After all the pairings have had their airtime, wait a week, pick the top four poll sitters. Pair them up and give them an hour, topic: International issues.
By the end of round two you’re down to the two top poll sitters and you can have them debate as often as you want.
Candidates should be required to dress like NASCAR drivers with patches for all their corporate sponsors.
Jerry, PA + Cat and others,
It’s not High School. The concept of Presidential debates is way overblown. If Desantis and Newsom want to sit down with Sean Hannity, fine. Could be fun. But holding these up as some mandatory, essential and useful rite of passage for a President is foolish.
Long form interviews are great for allowing candidates to discuss issues, their proposed policies and their personal stories. Those exist today on podcasts, in more abundance than we have ever had before. One either believes a candidate is telling the truth and can achieve his or her goals, or one does not. There’s no magical game of musical chairs on a stage that will shine a light on the “one, true” nominee. It’s like the myth of excalibur.
A senseless format.
Reading the comments, I’m beginning to think vociferous street-level Republicans are starting to resemble Inspector Dreyfus from The Pink Panther.
== https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKn1wcASbos
well there are some that might well come up with the death ray
Although elimination of the UN was a worthy aspiration for Inspector Dreyfus. After he recovered from his dentistry.
@Rufus:A senseless format.
Senseless from the perspective of helping the voters decide who the candidate should be, I see that. But from the perspective of a media trying to sell a storyline, it’s really quite sensible…
All of the second tier behind Trump are irrelevant. Fox is irrelevant.
Baited. Breath. Like the cat that ate cheese and sat by the mouse hole. (The misspelling is intentional.)
I just wish I still lived in the Pacific time zone. Nine to eleven? Doesn’t anyone sleep any more?
Alas, I can not watch. My sock drawer isn’t going to arrange itself.
Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
There are seven baseball games scheduled to start between 7:20 and 9:45 p.m. ET tonight– any of which would be more interesting than the debate, and one of which might settle who wins the second NL Wild Card. It’s a measure of my disgust with politics in general right now that I’d rather watch the Boys of Summer during the last week of the regular season than a staged debate between the clowns and nonentities of either major party.
I’ll be watching, but I am prepared to be underwhelmed by the crappy format that Fox will use. IMO, Fox wants to create a lot of heat and not much light with its debate format. They favor the WWE type entertainment rather than heling voters understand the candidates’ positions and ideas.
Just got back from a vacation so I am not drinking for awhile. If I watched the debates I would kill a liter bottle of scotch. I can’t afford that so no I am not watching the so called debates.
I’ll watch clips of the highlights afterwards. I agree with J.J.; the format is more akin to tawdry entertainment than any serious discussion of ideas and policy.
Anytime you have more than three or four candidates on stage, it really stretches the language to call it a ‘debate’. It’s mostly just a shouting match with each candidate trying best to mug for the camera during the tiny amount of time he has.
Well, it kicked off with the third moderator, of whom I have never heard, introducing something or other in Spanish.
Good night Fox on general principles.
.
I liked it when I lived in the United States, an English speaking country. (I used to snicker on Canadian airlines when every announcement had to be made twice.)
Disclaimer. I grew up in part on the edge of Ybor City in Tampa, Fl. The wrong side. Most amenities were there, or required transit of Ybor to reach. Sometimes Cracker boys passed without comment, sometimes not.
A variation of Cuban-Spanish was common; but English was spoken in school by children with a variety of surnames, and at official functions.
Why is a Colombian citizen moderating an American presidential debate? Terrible moderators in a terrible format. “Vote off the island”?! Horrific.
There’s no such thing as a “debate” with more than two people. To paraphrase Woody Allen, it’s a mockery of a sham of a clusterfark.
Way after my bed time but glad I missed the Left wing talking point presentation
https://pjmedia.com/columns/paula-bolyard/2023/09/28/whose-side-is-fox-on-anyway-n1730536
The lady with the accent was there courtesy of Univision ( oona-vi-see-own’-eh), the Spanish language network, who were also carrying it live.
It wasn’t a debate (especially with that many bodies), it was a talking point recital.
My proposal:
When they get down to 4, put them on stage in soundproof glass boxes, with a speaker feeding each box and a microphone. Just prior to the show, each candidate submits four questions to be asked. Each candidate has his/her microphone turned on for 10 minutes, except 5 minutes for the originator of that particular question – they know what it is and should be able to be concise. No talking/shouting over the other’s answers, no rambling on, taking other’s time.
It would have been so easy to arrange for the microphones to go dead at the end of the allotted time. Which would have eliminated talking (shouting) over each other, and made it much more “watchable.”
buddhaha and others,
Listen to podcasts. I have heard Ramswamy and RFK Jr. speak for hours, uninterrupted, on a wide range of topics posed by interviewers. Just heard Desantis on an hour interview on Glenn Beck’s podcast. Megyn Kelly just interviewed Donald Trump for over an hour on her podcast. She has also interviewed Desantis (good interview, she pushed him hard on some points) and I think she’s interviewed Haley. I listened to Jordan Peterson interview Chris Christie for at least an hour.
I agree that major network, televised debates are a gosh awful format; especially with more than, perhaps three candidates participating.
It doesn’t seem like many people watched it, but I thought Desantis looked good.
Haley did a good job, except her attack against Tim Scott seemed mean.
Burgum was not given much respect, but that’s the nature of the format.
Glad to see everyone but Christie refuse to write someone off at the end (Desantis handled it especially well), but Christie’s reason was very well stated.
Watched CNN after the debate and they spent about 10 minutes in a separate segment rehashing Florida’s “racist, anti-black, pro-slavery” High School AP History instruction. Terrible, terrible reporting. And they gave no color nor credence to Desantis’ stance on Kamala Harris’ extremely cherry-picked attack.
Shortly after that segment they actually went to a panel to discuss it more, and one of the Dem pundits finally highlighted the black historian who wrote the actual quote and tried to bring some reason to the absurdly biased attacks on Desantis.
Pa+cat, actually…
How bout a playoff system. Pick the eight top poll sitters, draw random pairings. Put each pairing in front of a camera for one hour. First round: domestic issues. Old school debate style. Two pairings Wednesday night; two on Thursday. After all the pairings have had their airtime, wait a week, pick the top four poll sitters. Pair them up and give them an hour, topic: International issues.
By the end of round two you’re down to the two top poll sitters and you can have them debate as often as you want.
Candidates should be required to dress like NASCAR drivers with patches for all their corporate sponsors.
Jerry, PA + Cat and others,
It’s not High School. The concept of Presidential debates is way overblown. If Desantis and Newsom want to sit down with Sean Hannity, fine. Could be fun. But holding these up as some mandatory, essential and useful rite of passage for a President is foolish.
This modern format is nothing, nothing at all like the Lincoln – Douglas debates: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln%E2%80%93Douglas_debates
Long form interviews are great for allowing candidates to discuss issues, their proposed policies and their personal stories. Those exist today on podcasts, in more abundance than we have ever had before. One either believes a candidate is telling the truth and can achieve his or her goals, or one does not. There’s no magical game of musical chairs on a stage that will shine a light on the “one, true” nominee. It’s like the myth of excalibur.
A senseless format.
Reading the comments, I’m beginning to think vociferous street-level Republicans are starting to resemble Inspector Dreyfus from The Pink Panther.
==
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKn1wcASbos
well there are some that might well come up with the death ray
Although elimination of the UN was a worthy aspiration for Inspector Dreyfus. After he recovered from his dentistry.
@Rufus:A senseless format.
Senseless from the perspective of helping the voters decide who the candidate should be, I see that. But from the perspective of a media trying to sell a storyline, it’s really quite sensible…
All of the second tier behind Trump are irrelevant. Fox is irrelevant.
Meanwhile,
Elon Musk Has Fired Most Of Twitter’s “Election Integrity” Team
Because they were undermining election integrity.
Melisande,
Agreed.
https://www.dossier.today/p/fox-news-moderator-hosted-panel-at