5123
Comments (437)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
95
patriotexpat 95 points ago +95 / -0

I don't understand why the commission keeps attempting to make this "unbiased".

Let's just embrace the bias and have the debate co-moderated by Hannity and Rachel Maddow.

Either that or let's just do away with the moderator. Let's have the candidates show up and actually have to work down the list of things they wanna talk about on their own without a 3rd person in there interrupting all the time.

39
ParadigmShift2070 39 points ago +39 / -0

Lol the commission itself is runned by the same group of biased politicians and urinalists

13
deleted 13 points ago +13 / -0
28
DisgustedByMisleadia 28 points ago +29 / -1

The original Presidential debate had no moderator. We should return to that.

My proposal: start with a list of topics. For each topic, randomly choose which candidate goes first.

  1. Candidate 1 gets 3 minutes.
  2. Candidate 2 gets 3 minutes.
  3. Candidate 1 gets a 1 minute rebuttal.

Use a chess-match clock to track the time. Any unused time is "banked" for their closing statement.

Microphones are turned off while the candidate is not speaking, and automatically turn off when the time expires.

19
NCW2D4TW 19 points ago +19 / -0

The lack of time for rebuttal in the first debate was infuriating.

  1. Trump speaks
  2. Biden slanders
  3. Wallace "mr president you had your time to speak"
16
isellmacs2 16 points ago +16 / -0

More like:

  1. Wallace slanders Trump in question to Biden
  2. Biden slanders Trump in response
  3. Wallace shuts down Trumps attempt to respond "let me ask my question first"
  4. Wallace slanders Trump again in question to Trump
  5. Trump attempts to respond
  6. Wallace interrupts arguing with Trump

Let's be real: the debates aren't intended to be fair or balanced in any way. They could easily do a dozen different things to improve them, but they won't since they are doing it the way they are doing it to rig it in Biden's favor.

I mean. The idea that they are asked different questions should give it away from the get-go. If both parties had to answer the same topic, that'd be inherently more fair.

6
NCW2D4TW 6 points ago +6 / -0

Yes! And the narrative from the media is "Trump was interrupting, Trump refused 'again' to denounce white supremacists"

I haven't talked to anybody in real life who understands how big of a deal it was that Trump exposed, in front of the largest TV audience in history, that the Obama administration planned a coup. That should have been all over the media if there was any bit of fair and balanced.

The government is compromised. Not for the people by the people. Someone from outside got in, someone they had no blackmail on, someone who would not do their bidding. So the entire system worked together and failed to get him out.

Trump's second term is literally the only way to move forward without a violent revolution.

11
boxmakingmachines 11 points ago +11 / -0

Wallace "mr president you had your time to speak"

Also Wallace leading a question by telling Trump his EO on prescription drugs was "largely symbolic".

9
HeadExam 9 points ago +9 / -0

That pissed me off more than anything

10
Donald 10 points ago +10 / -0

Agreed. I think a good solution would be to give the moderators strict rules, just as they do the candidates. I.e. all questions must be “topic” based and cannot have subtext. Leave it up to the candidates to bring up specifics about one another. For example:

Moderator: “President Trump, discuss your track record on the Economy, you have 2 minutes.”

Trump: “My track record on the economy is great. Look what we’ve done... “...” ... Joe Biden on the other hand wants to raise your taxes and say bye bye to your retirements.

Moderator: “Mr. Biden, your 2 minutes to discuss the economy, sir”

Biden: “Your right! If you elect me your taxes will go up not you know the thing”

4
catvideos3 4 points ago +4 / -0

Tucker

4
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 4 points ago +4 / -0

Haha, the debate would be between the moderators!

I do agree though that they could at least select openly biased moderators for each candidate and have them each moderate an equal number of debates. That would be fair.