General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBernie Sanders Unveils 3 AMAZING IDEAS That Would Improve Democratic Presidential DEBATES
In a letter to DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) laid out three ideas that he felt would improve the Democratic presidential debates. In his letter, Sanders suggested earlier debates, In recent weeks, as I have traveled around the country, I have been hearing concerns from voters about the need for vigorous candidate debate. The people of this country are tired of political gossip, personal attacks, and ugly 30-second ads. They want the candidates to engage in serious discussion about the very serious issues facing our country today. In my view, the candidates for President should engage in a series of debates beginning this summer.
His second idea was inter-party debates, I believe we should be open to a less traditional form of debating by welcoming the opportunity to debate not only amongst members of the Democratic Party but also having debates between Democratic and Republican candidates during the primary process. I believe that these inter-party debates would put in dramatic focus the shallow and at times ridiculous policies and proposals being advocated by the Republican candidates and by their partys platform. It would also serve to engage large numbers of voters who typically do not pay attention to the process until much later when the general election begins to come into focus. By engaging these voters early and raising the stakes around the election, I believe we can get people to participate at higher levels which will undoubtedly benefit Democrats up and down the ticket.
Sen. Sanders third idea was to hold debates all across the country, not just in early primary states, I also think it is important for us to debate not only in the early states but also in many states which currently do not have much Democratic presidential campaign activity. While a number of these non-target states have not in the past had much-organized campaign presence, I believe it is critical for the Democratic Party and progressive forces in America to engage voters in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. By expanding the scope geographically of
debates beyond the early calendar states we can begin to awaken activism at the grassroots level in those states and signal to Democrats and progressives in places like Texas, Mississippi, Utah, and Wyoming that their states are not forgotten by the Democratic Party.
If two of the Sanders ideas were adopted, they would transform the Democratic debates. The idea of inter-party debates is bound to turn some people off. These same people probably also hate interleague play in Major League Baseball, but the idea of Democratic candidates being able to challenge the unpopular positions that the Republican Party has adopted is appealing.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/01/bernie-sanders-unveils-3-amazing-ideas-improve-democratic-presidential-debates.html
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)and a ton of small ones. Hell, put the candidates at a lunch counter and film the result.
peecoolyour
(336 posts)No one who has anything of value to say should run away from a debate.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Cerridwen
(13,260 posts)I'd like to see The League of Women Voters take them on again.
I have no hope they will, unfortunately.
http://lwv.org/press-releases/league-refuses-help-perpetrate-fraud
WITHDRAWS SUPPORT FROM FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE[/center]
<snip>
"It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and honest answers to tough questions," Neuman said. "The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."
Neuman said that the campaigns presented the League with their debate agreement on
September 28, two weeks before the scheduled debate. The campaigns' agreement was negotiated "behind closed doors" and vas presented to the League as "a done deal," she said, its 16 pages of conditions not subject to negotiation.
Most objectionable to the League, Neuman said, were conditions in the agreement that gave the campaigns unprecedented control over the proceedings. Neuman called "outrageous" the campaigns' demands that they control the selection of questioners, the composition of the audience, hall access for the press and other issues.
"The campaigns' agreement is a closed-door masterpiece," Neuman said. "Never in the history of the League of Women Voters have two candidates' organizations come to us with such stringent, unyielding and self-serving demands."
Neuman said she and the League regretted that the American people have had no real opportunities to judge the presidential nominees outside of campaign-controlled environments.
Read full story at link.
Oh, I'd also like more than just 2 major parties. But, I'm weird that way.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)calimary
(81,874 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)think
(11,641 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
4139
(1,897 posts)Gregorian
(23,867 posts)The corporations wouldn't approve.
I think the people just might demand it. Thanks Bernie!
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)With your sensible and logical ideas.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)of those ideas. I think DC has chosen its candidate already
and will not endanger her by an unruly "democratization"
of its conditions. We have to remember that the "democratic
party" is not democratic at all. People are chosen from the
top down, not from the bottom up.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)The first and the last proposal only strengthen the Party; but the 2nd proposal has NO chance of happening.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)However, I seriously doubt that the gop will agree to engage in pre-General Election, inter-party debate ... Why would they agree to do so (for exactly the reason Sanders indicates ... the republicans will be shown, by whatever Democratic opponent to be shallow and ridiculous).
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)say what you will, the republicans are far more accomplished at maintain party and messaging discipline ... probably because the gop doesn't give a good crap (or bad fart) what people, let alone Democrats, or their non-rabid base thinks about them.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)But, Bernie, you know Debbie Wasserman Schultz isn't interested in fairness or anything but getting Hillary the noimination.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Debbie ain't gonna be interested.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Especially if those people might vote for anyone other than Hillary.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)and many "democrats" will support the effort.
peecoolyour
(336 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Delmette
(522 posts)I live in Montana and our primary votes just don't count because candidates have dropped out. I'm worn out listening to all the primary information, choosing who I want to vote for, and then knowing it doesn't matter.
druidity33
(6,465 posts)CrispyQ
(36,727 posts)Hard to get enthused about the process when the candidate is already selected.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Why do they the fear the people scrutinizing the candidates?
Why do they fear what amounts to free advertising?
LWolf
(46,179 posts)don't want the nation to see them flounder, lol.