Comments on: So Who Won This Time?

By: mikebdot

mikebdot — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:48:59 +0000

12 minutes to wapner…uh oh, fart…i’m definitely not wearing my underwear….k-mart in cincinatti.

Sorry, had to do it.

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:48:26 +0000

I once worked for the company which produced People’s Court — there was a survey at the time which indicated that a quarter of the American people thought that Joe Wapner was on the Supreme Court — so I don’t think the questions were too surprising — my guess is that it’s more or less the same thing as when candidates are in coffee shops in New Hampshire and Iowa, except on national television.

By: doug

doug — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:45:38 +0000

Hard to say if anyone actually won this thing… nothing of any substance was actually discussed. As in most Democratic forums it was a lot of questions about how the candidates “feel” about different things. Compassion trumps policy every time.

Kucinich and Gravel…(two of the biggest nut-cases in recent memory), won because they got their faces and ridiculous voices on free TV for 2 hours…. Joe Biden won because he seemed to be the only one of them that seemed irritated by how ridiculous an exercise it really was.

The concept is not bad, real people asking real questions… but does anyone really think that the ones that were selected represent the broad majority of people in this country?? If it does, the entire debate should be about the education system which has evidently completely failed us..

By: Bob from Ohio

Bob from Ohio — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:36:00 +0000

Yawn, still 6 months to the first primary. Perhaps I’ll care then.

“Debates” are almost always a waste of time that change no minds. Everyone wants to recreate 1960.

Since Kennedy/Nixon, only two debates to my memory had any real impact. Reagan/Carter, since it was the only one in 1980 did seem to (according to the polls) help swing the election. Earlier that year, the “I paid for this microphone” NH debate seems to have helped President Reagan regain his momentum.

Otherwise, not much. Kerry won the 2004 debates for instance. President Bush did well in 2000 but lost the popular vote.

VP debates are even more useless though.

By: Jaded

Jaded — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:34:38 +0000

I found it silly what with the faux snowman asking about global warming to the two supposed “rednecks” asking a question and the ultimate insulting portion was the guy with the military style gun asking the candidates what they would do about his “baby”. These people are supposed to be the possible next President of the United States and I felt like I was watching an episode of America’s got talent, just beneath the dignity of the office, sad.

By: peter

peter — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:17:42 +0000

I’m with Fargus: anything which gets the electorate involved is a good thing, at least provided that Simon Cowell isn’t a participant. (Although think how much fun it would have been if Chuck Barris replaced Anderson Cooper). It’s retail politics for the YouTube age. I bet if James Madison were around today, he’d think it was great.

By: too many steves

too many steves — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:16:05 +0000

While it is true that having constituents ask questions is valuable, whether a moderator reads the question or, as was done last night, the constituent does, someone screened them ahead of time. So, maybe my issue is with the screener who allowed the snowman question and the one about whether Barack Obama considers himself an “authentic” black man.

I like your idea Mark. I really want to know what these folks believe (both parties) and to better understand their vision for the country. I can get some of that information from their position papers, web sites, and speaking engagements, but there is tremendous value in having the candidates defend themselves and their point-of-view in an adversarial environment. That’s the sort of debate I want. As you say, this would be impossible to do with 17 candidates, which explains, I think, why we had that silly thing that was put on last night.

By: Fargus

Fargus — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:35:29 +0000

I think you’re probably an old-fashioned grouch, and I mean that not in a disparaging way. Personally, I didn’t watch the debate (I heard some coverage this morning on the radio, and I’ll watch some clips tonight after work), but I have the feeling that anything that encourages active engagement by the electorate cannot be a bad thing. Maybe it shouldn’t be the standard format for debates (and maybe it’d better be called a Q&A than a debate), but there’s something much different about watching a constituent ask a question than hearing a moderator read a question he says is from a constituent.