Do we even need a political debate between Biden and Trump?

[Votto]

We already have had 4 years under both, which did you prefer?

 

[Blaster]

We already have had 4 years under both, which did you prefer?

Trump's policies were great for America.

 

[Independent thinker]

We already have had 4 years under both, which did you prefer?

I feel sad, with 70% of Americans saying for over two years now that the country is going in the wrong direction, for anyone thinking the country would be better off under Biden. It flies in the face of logic. But, you're right. No debates are really needed. It's not like anyone is going to watch them with an open mind. You either prefer the country going in the wrong direction or you don't.

 

[Votto]

Trump's policies were great for America.

Like I said, we have what it was like under both

Which do you prefer?

With all the looming legal crap over Trump, he should not debate or say a word.

Just hide in the basement like Joe did last time.

 

[The Duke]

Like I said, we have what it was like under both

Which do you prefer?

With all the looming legal crap over Trump, he should not debate or say a word.

Just hide in the basement like Joe did last time.

Hide in the basement and let the cheating do the work like last time?

That people can believe Biden got the most votes ever in America after not campaigning for the last 5 weeks

of the election is flabbergasting. Hillary and Obama were out there workin' for it, but didn't get as many votes.

 

[martybegan]

Trump's policies were great for America.

The problem is are we going to get the 2016 Trump?

Anything's better than Biden though.

 

[alang1216]

We already have had 4 years under both, which did you prefer?

We know the past but what is being offered by each. Does either have any ideas going forward?

Trump needs to debate or he'll be the one hiding in his basement whining that everyone is out to get him. Biden needs to debate to show he is still sharp enough to lead and has policies that will work.

 

[alang1216]

Hide in the basement and let the cheating do the work like last time?

That people can believe Biden got the most votes ever in America after not campaigning for the last 5 weeks

of the election is flabbergasting. Hillary and Obama were out there workin' for it, but didn't get as many votes.

Don't underestimate the power Trump has to motivate Dems and Indies. And he still got it.

 

[Toro]

I’m all for it.

Watching Orange Jesus whine about how the 2020 election was “stolen” from him for 90 minutes will remind voters once again that MAGA are losers.

 

[rampart]

We already have had 4 years under both, which did you prefer?

i think a debate would be useful in comparing the trim fit president with bis debauched predecessor. asking either a policy question would be useless, but we know this next election will not be determined by "policy"

 

[MisterBeale]

Generally, IIRC, the Commission on Presidential Debates took over from the LWV to host the debates, to rig the whole process and make sure Americans didn't have much say in the matter.

They did this to keep third party people out of the process, and keep meaningful dialog around issues that Americans really cared about, from actually occurring.

This all happened around the time of Ross Perot.

League Refuses to "Help Perpetrate a Fraud" | League of Women Voters

NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 3, 1988 LEAGUE REFUSES TO "HELP PERPETRATE A FRAUD"

www.lwv.org

Ever since the League of Women Voters stopped hosting it? The debates have been nothing but propaganda press conferences for the Council on Foreign Affairs. They are closely managed staged affairs, lacking all spontaneity and honesty.

These events never include the Liberatarian or Green party candidates, even those these candidates, generally poll around 2-3% of the electorate.

". . .Criticism

Commission on Presidential Debates - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In 2000, the CPD established a rule that for a candidate to be included in the national debates he or she must garner at least 15% support across five national polls.[9] This rule has been controversial[10] as it has effectively excluded U.S. parties other than the two major parties.

In 2003, a 501(c)(3) called Open Debates was formed[11] to advocate debates that included third parties and that allowed exchanges among the candidates.[12] Criticism by Open Debates of CPD for the 2012 election include the secret contract between CPD and the Obama and Romney campaigns (a complaint joined by 17 other organizations including Judicial Watch)[13] and CPD informing the candidates of the debate topics in advance.[14]

In 2004, citing the CPD's 32 page debate contract, Connie Rice on NPR's The Tavis Smiley Show called the CPD debates "news conferences," and "a reckless endangerment of democracy."[15] On October 8, 2004, two presidential candidates, Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik and Green Party candidate David Cobb were arrested while protesting the Commission on Presidential Debates for excluding third-party candidates from the nationally televised debates in St. Louis, Missouri.[16]

In 2008, the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) labeled the CPD a "secretive tax-exempt organization". The CPI analyzed the 2004 financials of the CPD, and found that 93 percent of the contributions to the non-profit CPD came from just six donors, the names of all of which were blacked out on the donor list provided to the CPI.[17]. . . "

This year, has been different for the first time, since Nader, and that a third party candidate has actually polled as high as 5%.

I read a poll that Cornell West has actually gotten as high as five or six percent.

Of course, RFKjr., probably could as well, but he has continually insisted, he would refuse a third party bid.

Only when a candidate polls 15% are they eligible for the national debate.. . . according the the duopolies' staged cartel rules.


. . . and after that? All the TEE VEE watching drones, and talking heads? Well, the game might actually change, who the hell knows?

 

[rampart]

Generally, IIRC, the Commission on Presidential Debates took over from the LWV to host the debates, to rig the whole process and make sure Americans didn't have much say in the matter.

They did this to keep third party people out of the process, and keep meaningful dialog around issues that Americans really cared about, from actually occurring.

This all happened around the time of Ross Perot.

League Refuses to "Help Perpetrate a Fraud" | League of Women Voters

NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 3, 1988 LEAGUE REFUSES TO "HELP PERPETRATE A FRAUD"

www.lwv.org

Ever since the League of Women Voters stopped hosting it? The debates have been nothing but propaganda press conferences for the Council on Foreign Affairs. They are closely managed staged affairs, lacking all spontaneity and honesty.

These events never include the Liberatarian or Green party candidates, even those these candidates, generally poll around 2-3% of the electorate.

". . .Criticism

Commission on Presidential Debates - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In 2000, the CPD established a rule that for a candidate to be included in the national debates he or she must garner at least 15% support across five national polls.[9] This rule has been controversial[10] as it has effectively excluded U.S. parties other than the two major parties.

In 2003, a 501(c)(3) called Open Debates was formed[11] to advocate debates that included third parties and that allowed exchanges among the candidates.[12] Criticism by Open Debates of CPD for the 2012 election include the secret contract between CPD and the Obama and Romney campaigns (a complaint joined by 17 other organizations including Judicial Watch)[13] and CPD informing the candidates of the debate topics in advance.[14]

In 2004, citing the CPD's 32 page debate contract, Connie Rice on NPR's The Tavis Smiley Show called the CPD debates "news conferences," and "a reckless endangerment of democracy."[15] On October 8, 2004, two presidential candidates, Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik and Green Party candidate David Cobb were arrested while protesting the Commission on Presidential Debates for excluding third-party candidates from the nationally televised debates in St. Louis, Missouri.[16]

In 2008, the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) labeled the CPD a "secretive tax-exempt organization". The CPI analyzed the 2004 financials of the CPD, and found that 93 percent of the contributions to the non-profit CPD came from just six donors, the names of all of which were blacked out on the donor list provided to the CPI.[17]. . . "

This year, has been different for the first time, since Nader, and that a third party candidate has actually polled as high as 5%.

I read a poll that Cornell West has actually gotten as high as five or six percent.

Of course, RFKjr., probably could as well, but he has continually insisted, he would refuse a third party bid.

Only when a candidate polls 15% are they eligible for the national debate.. . . according the the duopolies' staged cartel rules.


. . . and after that? All the TEE VEE watching drones, and talking heads? Well, the game might actually change, who the hell knows?

every green candidate since nader has been arrested trying to attend the debates as a spectator.

even on this forum it seems as if there are 2 and only 2 allowable answers to any question. new ideas often originate out in the 3rd parties and beyond (the dems incorporated much of the progressive platform in the new deal. the repubs are pretty much libertarians who enforce "christian" values with an iron fist)

 

[bodecea]

We already have had 4 years under both, which did you prefer?

Sure....will be wild!

 

[Votto]

Hide in the basement and let the cheating do the work like last time?

That people can believe Biden got the most votes ever in America after not campaigning for the last 5 weeks

of the election is flabbergasting. Hillary and Obama were out there workin' for it, but didn't get as many votes.

I'm not sure what debating Biden has to do with preventing election fraud.

They will just send a body double to debate Trump when we all know Joe is too old.

 

[The Duke]

I'm not sure what debating Biden has to do with preventing election fraud.

They will just send a body double to debate Trump when we all know Joe is too old.

There still should be a debate. I might would trust Lester Holt to be a moderator, believe it or not.

 

[The Duke]

I’m all for it.

Watching Orange Jesus whine about how the 2020 election was “stolen” from him for 90 minutes will remind voters once again that MAGA are losers.

 

[rampart]

I feel sad, with 70% of Americans saying for over two years now that the country is going in the wrong direction, for anyone thinking the country would be better off under Biden. It flies in the face of logic. But, you're right. No debates are really needed. It's not like anyone is going to watch them with an open mind. You either prefer the country going in the wrong direction or you don't.

yes, we are still going in the wrong direction. there is no chance that trump, or any republican, knows which direction to steer after they mandate all the trannies wear pants

 

[miketx]

Anything's better than Biden though.

Harris?

 

[JoeMoma]

No debate between Biden and Trump needed; however, I would like to see it for the entertainment value.

 

[JoeMoma]

Harris?

Hair-Ass