2020 Democratic Primaries

[Minneapolitan]

It's true, the TV debates are antiquated and need to be dropped.

I think it's just the opposite. If televised debates were greatly expanded, candidates wouldn't be under such pressure to shout over each other just to make their point or to get their five-second sound clip for our shit media. True, this particular election cycle has a stupid number of candidates, but every election cycle seems to have debates this poor. If we had more televised debates, we could achieve what I was suggesting earlier, that each debate should be dedicated to just one or two topics.

This is particularly true for the general election debates. It's utterly laughable that "We the People" effectively get to hire our nation's most powerful and important employee, one whose credentials must be examined with a microscope, but instead we only get three televised opportunities to compare. Oh, but don't worry - we get ONE televised session for the job of Vice President too.

What harm would come by having more televised debates?

[Minneapolitan]

On another note...



How did I JUST discover this??

[Adm.Vogel]

It's true, the TV debates are antiquated and need to be dropped.

I think it's just the opposite. If televised debates were greatly expanded, candidates wouldn't be under such pressure to shout over each other just to make their point or to get their five-second sound clip for our shit media. True, this particular election cycle has a stupid number of candidates, but every election cycle seems to have debates this poor. If we had more televised debates, we could achieve what I was suggesting earlier, that each debate should be dedicated to just one or two topics.

This is particularly true for the general election debates. It's utterly laughable that "We the People" effectively get to hire our nation's most powerful and important employee, one whose credentials must be examined with a microscope, but instead we only get three televised opportunities to compare. Oh, but don't worry - we get ONE televised session for the job of Vice President too.

What harm would come by having more televised debates?

I'd also love to ditch the audience, and the advertisements, and 2,3,4,5 different moderators...
Can we just not do television debates anymore?

[Minneapolitan]

But why? Television in the US may be stupid but television as a medium...is truly wonderful. It's still wonderful. You get to see the candidate's temperament, their ability to see them work out an argument on the spot in the face of challenge, and everything else. These are things that get voters engaged in this grand decision-making process.

But here we're at a crossroads: Do we let this discussion change to the way we improve debates? That's a different but perfectly legitimate conversation. This thread is about the 2020 Democratic primaries in general and so far it's just you, myself, and Fatmo.

C'mon...I wanna hear from more of you!

[ospiter]

Very interesting thread.

I suggest that the discussion is unbalanced due to the lack of serious information on the candidates. There was a time when Political Parties developed platforms of positions to be taken on the issues of the day. Candidates would strive to explain their position relative to those issues, and advance in their relative standing by explaining the reasons that they adhere (or disdain) the various planks in the party platform.

I don't find a source of credible information on the many candidates, which serves to explain where they stand on the nation's interests. I am not interested in who was bussed to school and who voted against bussing a half century ago. I know "everyone" is a racist, according to one candidate or another. It is this foolish entertainment that the media are pushing. As the citizenry are unable to discern a standard, and then evaluate the candidate against a defined standard, we are witnessing a blind rush to the left as a way to pander to the ignorant masses. (No quotes needed for my use of the word "ignorant". That is the quality upon which the current spectacle depends.)

I read many words here about the Warren candidate. Yet she appears to be no different from Cory Booker. Who is indiscernible from (you fill in the name of any other candidate). With nothing published, we have nothing to measure, and nothing to hold onto as their positions change over time.

Perhaps the thread would benefit from a short review of the positions. I don't know where the candidates stand on the (physical, intellectual, emotional, economic, and spiritual) issues desired at the federal government level. As such, any candidate will suffice ... and any candidate will lose.

Remember that it was the positive message of OBama in 2008 that set him above Clinton. All other items paled in comparison.

In my humble opinion.

[Minneapolitan]

I suggest that the discussion is unbalanced due to the lack of serious information on the candidates.

I don't find a source of credible information on the many candidates...

I don't know where the candidates stand on the (physical, intellectual, emotional, economic, and spiritual) issues desired at the federal government level.

If you're on this thread then you're on the internet. The internet can take you directly to each candidate's website (at the very least) for more specific information. I think it's reasonable to assume those with actual input on the race itself to the Democratic nomination would already be on the left and don't need to put on a "display" of sorts for those who are not.

[Minneapolitan]

THREAD BUMP!!

Welp...the a lot has changed since this thread began. It's almost March. The crew has been whittled down to seven: Biden, Bloomberg, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Sanders, Steyer, and Warren. Iowa laid an egg. New Hampshire and Nevada went to a self-proclaimed democratic socialist.

C'mon, political junkies. What are your thoughts now?

More like Bl mberg, amirite?

[ruffdove]

Why wasn't Tulsi Gabbard in the poll? She's actually still running.

[Crunkus]

THREAD BUMP!!

Welp...the a lot has changed since this thread began. It's almost March. The crew has been whittled down to seven: Biden, Bloomberg, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Sanders, Steyer, and Warren. Iowa laid an egg. New Hampshire and Nevada went to a self-proclaimed democratic socialist.

C'mon, political junkies. What are your thoughts now?

More like Bl mberg, amirite?

At this point, mostly just resignation and shaking my head ruefully. Voting blue, but with my nose pinched this time I'm afraid, unless something drastic changes.

[Keirador]

"We see your corrupt, senile, elderly rapist, and we raise you a corrupt, senile, elderly rapist. Ours is better though, at least he won't tell you to huff bleach."