Should the networks stop with the debates?

There were 22 debates in 2012; there are 11 this year. It's about the proper amount.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

If you've been paying attention--apparently not--you will notice that there is typically a debate held on a Thursday night prior to a primary/caucus that is held on the following Tuesday. The debate is held in a city of one of the states that is holding the primary. Thus, it IS necessary to have a decent number of debates.

Also, there needs to be several debates before the first primary is held in order to winnow down the number of candidates.

All of this is a silly discussion because your premise is flawed. The networks don't decide on the number or the location of the debates, the political parties decide. Thus, the GOP set the number of debates and the location.

We understand that your candidate, Donald Trump, cannot hold a debate candle to any real debater. The man cannot answer a question directly, especially a question involving the word "how" or one that might contain numbers in it. He just regurgitates his talking points and his answer to "how" is to say that because he's Trump, IT WILL HAPPEN, just by force of his personality. And let's be honest, Trump's personality is what is attracting his rubes.

 

I have not seen any of the debates to this point (No TV)

It seems that the first few they had two different ones, and the main one had something like 10 candidates. It must have diluted how much you could really learn about the ones that still remain.

Now with it being down to 4, I would watch them if I could.

 

Perhaps he has started to realize if he keeps his mouth shut he will appear more like presidential material?

 

It would be nice if there were debates. The carnival side-show passed as debates is an insult to voters.

 

Let them debate each other, and have the moderator there to, well moderate. The moderator could step in with a question/topic to get things rolling, and then keep things civil, and move things along when they had beat the dead horse long enough. If they did that I might waste my bandwidth allowance to watch.

 

I am convinced that most watch the debates for the theatre, much the same way that many watch Hockey for the fights. Most do not care for any meaningful debate.

 

Of course not. I can't even think of that 'talk show' host who had the program in which every one broke into a fight with the audience clapping rhythmically to the action. But people watch(ed) it because they wanted to see people try to hurt each other physically. So much for a 'talk show.'

Nevertheless, always remember the purpose of a political debate is to draw votes away from one's opponent. If anyone is surprised they don't really debate, that's not what they're there for.

 

Personally, I prefer the "town hall" style, where citizens get to ask the questions. Under this scenario, the candidates get to answer without Trump interrupting them and calling them names.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/16/media/donald-trump-republican-debate-fox/

Trump is affecting Fox's programming.

 

They are still letting their Frankenstein control them. It's hilarious. Can't use him for ratings so they just cancel it.

 

No kidding. Trump IS Fox's programming.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/how-and-...old-its-soul-to-facilitate-trumps-nomination/

 

Trump doesn't want any more debates because he knows he can't compete against Kasich and Cruz. But an even better reason is because he knows he can't fill up a minute and a half of his allotted time each time he's called on during a two hour debate. He knows he doesn't have anything substantive to say beyond his sloganeering and would be exposed as an infant on policy positions.

 

BINGO. Thumbsup

 

You're just parroting the talking heads who said the same thing last night. I think it's B.S. You think Kennedy was intimately acquainted with policy? Johnson? Carter? Clinton?

I think he knows that he will be hit with the same old "you're a racist," "you're a misogynist" KKK type questions. And policy questions will by like, "What's you're opinion of the (non-existent-because-I'm-just-now-making-up-the-term) Bush doctrine?"

Kasich will be asked, "What's you're favorite color?"

Cruz will be asked about citizenship and the theocracy he wishes to establish, and his wife's globalism.

 

He's everyone's programming. He's the candidate to beat.