Newsline

Newsline , Society

Now is the Time to Reform Presidential Debates

Posted on Friday, February 4, 2022
|
by AMAC Newsline
|
76 Comments

AMAC Exclusive – By Barry Casselman

The word “forensic” is a technical term usually applied to the scientific investigation of crime or examination in medicine, but it can also be used in many other human endeavors, including the practice of public speech and debate — where I first encountered it as a member of my high school varsity debate team.

It comes to us from Latin, derived from forum, and means “in open or public view.’’

After high school, I had little interest in formal debate until I took an interest in politics, where candidate debates are routine and presidential debates became a national institution after they began to be televised in 1960.

Beginning in 2012, the presidential debate environment became increasingly controversial as Republicans asserted that the supposedly non-partisan Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), which had been put in charge of organizing the debates, was not insisting enough on neutral debate moderators and questions — a circumstance that became abundantly clear during the 2020 debates between Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

After repeated requests by RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel to make reforms were denied or delayed by the Commission, McDaniel has threatened to require Republican presidential candidates to boycott the 2024 CPD-organized debates — which, if put into effect, would cancel the CPD debates.

The pandemic complicated the planning process for the Commission in 2020, and the difficulty of having moderators and questioners maintain neutrality in the current polarized political environment then and now made, and still makes, the CPD’s work especially challenging. But that does not relieve them from the obligation to create an even playing field for the 2024 presidential nominees.  

Political debate has a long and rich tradition in the U.S., including the historic 1858 Illinois U.S. Senate debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas.

There have been high points and low points in the various presidential debates since 1960, but few of these could match the iconic drama that pitted the young Republican incumbent vice president, Richard Nixon, and the young Democratic U.S. Senator, John F. Kennedy, against one another in that first debate broadcast nationally on radio and TV. Polls afterward indicated that those who only heard that debate on radio thought Nixon had won, but those who saw the debate on TV thought the more telegenic Kennedy had won. Thus, presidential debate politics entered a new telecommunications age.

Some years ago, I was part of an instructive and notable non-presidential debate in 2007, when two potential presidential candidates, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, held a nationally broadcast debate at the Cooper Union in New York City. Gingrich and Cuomo held very different views on almost every issue, but that did not prevent them from agreeing to a fair and civilized debate format. Harold Holzer, the eminent Lincoln scholar, and former Cuomo press secretary, along with the TV news broadcaster Tim Russert, who was respected by all sides, were part of the planning team that I was privileged to be part of as well. In the same venue in which Lincoln made his most consequential speech (it led to his eventual nomination and election), two of the nation’s leading public speakers lucidly and eloquently spoke of the political differences then current in the nation. Mr. Russert skillfully and with scrupulous fairness moderated the event.

(Mr. Cuomo, perennially high in the national polls, never did run for president, but Mr. Gingrich did in 2012.)

The point of recalling this event is to illustrate that it can be done, even if it can’t be done by the present Committee on Presidential Debates. McDaniel is right to insist on a fair debate environment, as would be the Democratic National Committee.

With more than two years before the next presidential election, and the nominees unknown, now is the time to plan, negotiate, and finalize the format and rules for the next presidential debates so that the terms of the debate can be acceptable to both sides. If the current Committee on Presidential Debates is unwilling or unable to do so, a new organizing structure should be created.

America’s voters want and deserve fair presidential debates.

Share this article:
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
76 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tim Toroian
Tim Toroian
2 years ago

Now is the time to quit this horse hockey of 12 or 14 people on stage and at a minimum a questioner from the right who will ask serious questions and a panel of three questioners in rotation. And once candidates are chosen two debates with mandatory attendance with a question from each party in rotation. Media people who complain about not being involved can be told their lousy reporting makes them ineligible.

Stephen Russell
Stephen Russell
2 years ago

Debate Reform:
Indie moderator IE CSPAN
Questions from audience
Timed rebuttals
Air all channels & online
Take online questions file pre debate
ALL debates
NO more news control IE CBS NBC etc save reporters in audience

Boz
Boz
2 years ago

I’ve been saying this for 27 years.

anna hubert
anna hubert
2 years ago

Those debates would be OK if not for the the obvious bias of the “moderators” it’s beyond pathetic debate became a blather

George Washington's Admirer
George Washington's Admirer
2 years ago

America’s voters are tired of debates where most of the contestants do not like debating in the first place. There are probably more gifted and interesting contestants at our high schools. You can carefully structure a debate all you want. You can write the most pertinent questions. You can hire the very best in interviewers. However, if one or both contestants is an imbecile, doesn’t like debates in the first place, or has the personality of a dead rat; then, good luck. To have an excellent debate; first of all talent must be heir apparent; an IQ and some type of personality is also, helpful. Thinking back to famous orators such as: Abraham Lincoln and Patrick Henry; having the debater or orator really BELIEVE in what he/she is saying is probably the most important element. The audience can spot sincerity about all else! Looking back at the successful orators amongst Our Founding Fathers is an example of raw unsurpassed talent. Its possible to see a great debate in this day and age; however, don’t hold your breath. May God Inspire This Country In Our Time Of Need!

PaulE
PaulE
2 years ago

The purpose of a moderator is to ask truly probative questions on a variety of issues of interest to the general public and to ensure the respondent stays within the agreed upon timeframe. That’s it is a nutshell. An open and honest exchange of ideas on how various issues and problems would be addressed by each respective candidate.

The CPD, which was formed in 1987, as one of those poorly thought-out ideas between RINOs and Democrats to show Republicans could “reach across the aisle (and eventually live to regret it as always happens to be the case) quickly morphed from a supposedly bi-partisan commission to one completely controlled by left meaning Democrats setting the terms and conditions for these debates. Before the CPD, debates were organized between the two parties through negotiations on everything from subjects, time frames for responses, moderators for each debate, to topics to covered in each agreed upon debate. A much more sane, rational and fair process than what the CPD has consistently delivered.

What we have had for decades in this country, at the presidential debate level thanks to the CPD, is a series of ever more left leaning debate moderators, that have tailored the subjects and the questions asked to favor one party. That being the Democrat Party. Who would ever think a Democrat controlled organization would consistently tailor the presidential debates to favor the Democrat candidate? Well duh!!!

What we had in 2020 was essentially any pretense of impartiality of the moderators, all registered Democrats by the way, being completely discarded. Both presidential debates covered the exact same topics, with very similar questions that would play well with Democrat voters. The moderators selected openly acting as backup support for the Democrat candidate, when the Democrat candidate started to get into trouble. The same goes for the topics and questions asked during VP debate. Where the moderator also had to step in and run cover for VP candidate Harris, when she was in over her head with Pence. In all 3 cases, completely ignored were any and all issues of real interest to most Republican voters. In short, a rigged game designed to make one Party, that being the Democrat Party, look better. So my only question for the head of the RNC is “What took the Republican Party so long to finally grow a little bit of spine and say enough may actually be enough?”

For the vast majority of apathic and uniformed voters out there, that at best get most or all their information about the candidates from watching one or maybe two debates, listening to the MSM which relentlessly pushes Democrat policies and candidates, and the endless TV ads that run non-stop after Labor Day, the debates have been little more than glorified commercials for the Democrat Party. So why on earth should the Republican Party continue to be stupid enough to keep playing this game? Now let us see if RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has the backbone to actually hold her ground.

Philip Hammersley
Philip Hammersley
2 years ago

The candidates should thrash out the rules themselves. No crooked moderators like Chris (trying to be like daddy) Wallace who asks a question which had already been answered REPEATEDLY just to injure one candidate.

PFArizona
PFArizona
2 years ago

I refuse to support the RNC until they actually do something about this liberal committee and their selections of horrible moderators.

joe mchugh
joe mchugh
2 years ago

Finally! The Republican Party has noticed the liberal proclivities of the presidential debate “moderators”. This outrageous behavior of the liberal minded moderators came to a head in 2020, when Donald Trump wondered if he was debating the moderator instead of the brain damaged Biden. Kudos to RNC Chairwoman, Ronna McDanial for for her stand on the liberal control of these debates.

This is not the only problem with our national election system. The irregularities in many state regulated elections has been widespread for decades. It’s not that people didn’t notice these voting scandals, it’s because there has been, up to now, no concerted Republican efforts to rectify the situation.

Now, if the Republican Senators and Representatives would also effectively oppose the Democrat drive to socialize America, we might still survive as being a free nation. The problem with the Republicans is that they are so afraid of upsetting the independents, that they bend over backward to appear to be accommodating and fair minded, instead of calling out the usual Democrat acolytes for being the apparatchiks that they are.

The independents are not as obtuse as the politicians think that they are. They understand the weaknesses of BOTH political parties. However, when one political party fails to protest an injustice in political behavior, some independents might take that as evidence supporting the charges of the other party.

This lack of Republican assertiveness seems to be one of their main causes for their poor showing at the polls. Not that the Republicans are saints. They are just as suseptiblle to corruption as any other human beings. It’s up to the voters to pick the path for our society to follow, individual freedoms or socialism. Then it’s up to the voters to watch their representatives like hawks.

Myrna Wade
Myrna Wade
2 years ago

This comes down to decisions about which topics to include/exclude and how to force the candidates to follow the rules such as time limits. It has been a long time since we had good presidential debates. I hope the candidates have a choice about meeting opponents, but I don’t think an organization spending 4 years to make plans will improve. Simple questions such as “What is the most important problem for a president to address?” reveal what voters need to know.
That is not what any of the news producers want to include. Career politicians and big corporations are running these debates without consideration for the good of the country.

Spade David
Spade David
2 years ago

Here is a suggestion…. write out simple questions on 3×5 inch cards. Let the Republicans and Democrats put in a dozen cards each and place the cards in a hopper. No multi questions cards, just one sentence cards with questions that are clear and concise. Each candidate has a chance to respond to the question on the card without undue follow up questions or political influence by the host. Once all questions are selected from the hopper, the debate is over. The candidates have three minutes for each question….and that is it. That makes the best use of the viewers’ time and eliminates the bias from the hosts.

Art
Art
2 years ago

THERE ARE NO DEBATES ONLY POLITICAL THEATER. SOUND BITES DON ‘T CUT IT. A HERD OF CANDIDATES ONLY SCREAMING “LOOK AT ME” IS NOT A TRUE DEBATE. PERHAPS IT IS GOOD FOR TV AND THE ENLIGHTENMENT OF THE USEFUL MASSES BUT HOW IS IT THAT IN THE PAST A CANDIDATE HAS LOST ITS HOME STATE AND DROPS OUT OF THE RACE AND STILL SURFACES AS A VP CANDIDATE??????? LATER WE “DISCOVER” THAT A PARTICULAR CANDIDATE,THAT WAS ELECTED,MAY HAVE BEEN LYING. GLORYOSKI WHAT A THOUGHT AND REVELATION.

R.J. from Arizona
R.J. from Arizona
2 years ago

Why does the moderator have to be from the media?
Second, I agree with RNC to boycott the debate,,or political show, unless changes are made.

John E Nanney
John E Nanney
2 years ago

Agree 100% – as long as we are so openly willing to talk about fairness in debates – lets get ALL the party selected candidates that are officially on all state ballots on the stage. You know, those pesky other people – Libertarian, Green, Constitution, and American Part to name a few… Let’s let the American people see that there are actual choices outside of the Oligarchies choice. Wouldn’t that be fair… wouldn’t that be American?

edgar fletcher
edgar fletcher
2 years ago

I’d love to see Biden debate ANYONE!!!!

Judy
Judy
2 years ago

No one is addressing election integrity!! NO ONE!! So what good are debates of any kind between any candidates?? Every Commudem state has mail-in voting. In our state of Sodom and Gomorrah Oregon, it was reported, a mail truck was found in out in a field with hundreds of unopened ballots in it. The Commudems cheat in every election, they just got caught red handed in 2020 with all the video evidence but none of the courts would even look at it. One state even changed its election policies which was against that states own Constitution. Everybody was threatened with total violence and chaos to their family members and across the country, and that’s why even the U.S. Supreme Court caved to the thug traitors who have taken over this country!! Commudem states cover at least nearly one third of the geographical area of our country. Now because that traitor Biden’s DC election control bill bombed, the blue states are redistricting so that the GOP’s chances for Senate seats is even more limited.
These evil demons are fighting us tooth and nail to gain power and control any way they can!! They’re also trying to do away with the Electoral College!! Why can’t the people we elected in the times our elections were fair and legal, take these traitors down??? When they don’t, as I see it, they are complicit as traitors destroying our Republic!! It appears it’s all just a big game to entertain their political audience with these debates. And actually just a total Clown Show with the Commudem moderators. What a joke!!

InsanitySquared
InsanitySquared
2 years ago

I agree – the networks need to ask the question and let the speaker make his or her case. The other side should not interrupt.

I have a feeling that the 2024 elections will be more normal. Why? Because Trump will not be in them. Republicans need to dump the childish loser and pick stronger, more level-headed candidates. DeSantis or even Pence are people that can articulate coherent thoughts and win.

Now, I know that most of the registered Republicans prefer Trump. Well, let me tell you something as a right-leaning Independent. If y’all pick Trump in 2024, I will be voting Democrat. And I live in a swing state where every vote matters. The only way I am (maybe) voting for Trump again is if the Democrats select Hillary Clinton again, LOL.

papayec
papayec
2 years ago

Give me a break. The communist DNC would NEVER accept an unbiased debate.

Tom
Tom
2 years ago

Someone here commented about Trump. Clearly another case (ho hum, big yawn) of TDS. Of course he interrupted the illegitimate crook because the farcical “debate” playing field was so tilted the other way. If this format is so important they should be moderated by unsnarky, unbiased real journalists and not the clowns that moderated previously. You wanted a clown show? Every debate WAS one. Level the playing field or fogetabout it. Vote for Hillary…

Gen. Grant
Gen. Grant
2 years ago

I agree, these crooked Marxists have to cheat at everything. They had that creepy looking Chris Wallace as a so called “UNBIASED” moderator, what a joke! He asked Biden ice cream questions, nothing about Hunter Biden and the Biden Crime Family, his soft on crime approach–574 riots in American cities, it was the type of debate you would have in Russia. The crooked main stream media can’t be trusted——–but AMERICANS have got a lot smarter over the last 5 yrs!!

Karen
Karen
2 years ago

Don’t believe they should have debates. They don’t help me at all to decide who I want to vote for.
If they have to, please don’t put Chris Wallace as moderator. What a dummy and obviously a liberal. No fairness in the last debate by him. JERK

Homer Howell
Homer Howell
2 years ago

Not one mention of the donna brazil debacle with hillary clinton. I think it is about time we put spending limits on campaigns, so the rich can not buy the elections, and do something about soros

Gerald M Serlin
Gerald M Serlin
2 years ago

This article fails to consider that there are more than two pllitical parties.in the United States. In the last several presidential elections, the Libertarian Party was on every ballot in every state, but their candidate was excluded from the debates. This was a significant factor in why the Libertarian Party failed to do well in any of these elections.

Purposely excluding any party from fairly participating in any major election event is not only unfair to that party, but to the American People as well, as they do not have free access to all parts of the election process.

Tim Toroian
Tim Toroian
2 years ago

Now is the time to quit this horse hockey of 12 or 14 people on stage and at a minimum a questioner from the right who will ask serious questions and a panel of three questioners in rotation. And once candidates are chosen two debates with mandatory attendance with a question from each party in rotation. Media people who complain about not being involved can be told their lousy reporting makes them ineligible.

Stephen Russell
Stephen Russell
2 years ago

Debate Reform:
Indie moderator IE CSPAN
Questions from audience
Timed rebuttals
Air all channels & online
Take online questions file pre debate
ALL debates
NO more news control IE CBS NBC etc save reporters in audience

Boz
Boz
2 years ago

I’ve been saying this for 27 years.

anna hubert
anna hubert
2 years ago

Those debates would be OK if not for the the obvious bias of the “moderators” it’s beyond pathetic debate became a blather

George Washington's Admirer
George Washington's Admirer
2 years ago

America’s voters are tired of debates where most of the contestants do not like debating in the first place. There are probably more gifted and interesting contestants at our high schools. You can carefully structure a debate all you want. You can write the most pertinent questions. You can hire the very best in interviewers. However, if one or both contestants is an imbecile, doesn’t like debates in the first place, or has the personality of a dead rat; then, good luck. To have an excellent debate; first of all talent must be heir apparent; an IQ and some type of personality is also, helpful. Thinking back to famous orators such as: Abraham Lincoln and Patrick Henry; having the debater or orator really BELIEVE in what he/she is saying is probably the most important element. The audience can spot sincerity about all else! Looking back at the successful orators amongst Our Founding Fathers is an example of raw unsurpassed talent. Its possible to see a great debate in this day and age; however, don’t hold your breath. May God Inspire This Country In Our Time Of Need!

PaulE
PaulE
2 years ago

The purpose of a moderator is to ask truly probative questions on a variety of issues of interest to the general public and to ensure the respondent stays within the agreed upon timeframe. That’s it is a nutshell. An open and honest exchange of ideas on how various issues and problems would be addressed by each respective candidate.

The CPD, which was formed in 1987, as one of those poorly thought-out ideas between RINOs and Democrats to show Republicans could “reach across the aisle (and eventually live to regret it as always happens to be the case) quickly morphed from a supposedly bi-partisan commission to one completely controlled by left meaning Democrats setting the terms and conditions for these debates. Before the CPD, debates were organized between the two parties through negotiations on everything from subjects, time frames for responses, moderators for each debate, to topics to covered in each agreed upon debate. A much more sane, rational and fair process than what the CPD has consistently delivered.

What we have had for decades in this country, at the presidential debate level thanks to the CPD, is a series of ever more left leaning debate moderators, that have tailored the subjects and the questions asked to favor one party. That being the Democrat Party. Who would ever think a Democrat controlled organization would consistently tailor the presidential debates to favor the Democrat candidate? Well duh!!!

What we had in 2020 was essentially any pretense of impartiality of the moderators, all registered Democrats by the way, being completely discarded. Both presidential debates covered the exact same topics, with very similar questions that would play well with Democrat voters. The moderators selected openly acting as backup support for the Democrat candidate, when the Democrat candidate started to get into trouble. The same goes for the topics and questions asked during VP debate. Where the moderator also had to step in and run cover for VP candidate Harris, when she was in over her head with Pence. In all 3 cases, completely ignored were any and all issues of real interest to most Republican voters. In short, a rigged game designed to make one Party, that being the Democrat Party, look better. So my only question for the head of the RNC is “What took the Republican Party so long to finally grow a little bit of spine and say enough may actually be enough?”

For the vast majority of apathic and uniformed voters out there, that at best get most or all their information about the candidates from watching one or maybe two debates, listening to the MSM which relentlessly pushes Democrat policies and candidates, and the endless TV ads that run non-stop after Labor Day, the debates have been little more than glorified commercials for the Democrat Party. So why on earth should the Republican Party continue to be stupid enough to keep playing this game? Now let us see if RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has the backbone to actually hold her ground.

Philip Hammersley
Philip Hammersley
2 years ago

The candidates should thrash out the rules themselves. No crooked moderators like Chris (trying to be like daddy) Wallace who asks a question which had already been answered REPEATEDLY just to injure one candidate.

PFArizona
PFArizona
2 years ago

I refuse to support the RNC until they actually do something about this liberal committee and their selections of horrible moderators.

joe mchugh
joe mchugh
2 years ago

Finally! The Republican Party has noticed the liberal proclivities of the presidential debate “moderators”. This outrageous behavior of the liberal minded moderators came to a head in 2020, when Donald Trump wondered if he was debating the moderator instead of the brain damaged Biden. Kudos to RNC Chairwoman, Ronna McDanial for for her stand on the liberal control of these debates.

This is not the only problem with our national election system. The irregularities in many state regulated elections has been widespread for decades. It’s not that people didn’t notice these voting scandals, it’s because there has been, up to now, no concerted Republican efforts to rectify the situation.

Now, if the Republican Senators and Representatives would also effectively oppose the Democrat drive to socialize America, we might still survive as being a free nation. The problem with the Republicans is that they are so afraid of upsetting the independents, that they bend over backward to appear to be accommodating and fair minded, instead of calling out the usual Democrat acolytes for being the apparatchiks that they are.

The independents are not as obtuse as the politicians think that they are. They understand the weaknesses of BOTH political parties. However, when one political party fails to protest an injustice in political behavior, some independents might take that as evidence supporting the charges of the other party.

This lack of Republican assertiveness seems to be one of their main causes for their poor showing at the polls. Not that the Republicans are saints. They are just as suseptiblle to corruption as any other human beings. It’s up to the voters to pick the path for our society to follow, individual freedoms or socialism. Then it’s up to the voters to watch their representatives like hawks.

Myrna Wade
Myrna Wade
2 years ago

This comes down to decisions about which topics to include/exclude and how to force the candidates to follow the rules such as time limits. It has been a long time since we had good presidential debates. I hope the candidates have a choice about meeting opponents, but I don’t think an organization spending 4 years to make plans will improve. Simple questions such as “What is the most important problem for a president to address?” reveal what voters need to know.
That is not what any of the news producers want to include. Career politicians and big corporations are running these debates without consideration for the good of the country.

Spade David
Spade David
2 years ago

Here is a suggestion…. write out simple questions on 3×5 inch cards. Let the Republicans and Democrats put in a dozen cards each and place the cards in a hopper. No multi questions cards, just one sentence cards with questions that are clear and concise. Each candidate has a chance to respond to the question on the card without undue follow up questions or political influence by the host. Once all questions are selected from the hopper, the debate is over. The candidates have three minutes for each question….and that is it. That makes the best use of the viewers’ time and eliminates the bias from the hosts.

Art
Art
2 years ago

THERE ARE NO DEBATES ONLY POLITICAL THEATER. SOUND BITES DON ‘T CUT IT. A HERD OF CANDIDATES ONLY SCREAMING “LOOK AT ME” IS NOT A TRUE DEBATE. PERHAPS IT IS GOOD FOR TV AND THE ENLIGHTENMENT OF THE USEFUL MASSES BUT HOW IS IT THAT IN THE PAST A CANDIDATE HAS LOST ITS HOME STATE AND DROPS OUT OF THE RACE AND STILL SURFACES AS A VP CANDIDATE??????? LATER WE “DISCOVER” THAT A PARTICULAR CANDIDATE,THAT WAS ELECTED,MAY HAVE BEEN LYING. GLORYOSKI WHAT A THOUGHT AND REVELATION.

R.J. from Arizona
R.J. from Arizona
2 years ago

Why does the moderator have to be from the media?
Second, I agree with RNC to boycott the debate,,or political show, unless changes are made.

John E Nanney
John E Nanney
2 years ago

Agree 100% – as long as we are so openly willing to talk about fairness in debates – lets get ALL the party selected candidates that are officially on all state ballots on the stage. You know, those pesky other people – Libertarian, Green, Constitution, and American Part to name a few… Let’s let the American people see that there are actual choices outside of the Oligarchies choice. Wouldn’t that be fair… wouldn’t that be American?

edgar fletcher
edgar fletcher
2 years ago

I’d love to see Biden debate ANYONE!!!!

Judy
Judy
2 years ago

No one is addressing election integrity!! NO ONE!! So what good are debates of any kind between any candidates?? Every Commudem state has mail-in voting. In our state of Sodom and Gomorrah Oregon, it was reported, a mail truck was found in out in a field with hundreds of unopened ballots in it. The Commudems cheat in every election, they just got caught red handed in 2020 with all the video evidence but none of the courts would even look at it. One state even changed its election policies which was against that states own Constitution. Everybody was threatened with total violence and chaos to their family members and across the country, and that’s why even the U.S. Supreme Court caved to the thug traitors who have taken over this country!! Commudem states cover at least nearly one third of the geographical area of our country. Now because that traitor Biden’s DC election control bill bombed, the blue states are redistricting so that the GOP’s chances for Senate seats is even more limited.
These evil demons are fighting us tooth and nail to gain power and control any way they can!! They’re also trying to do away with the Electoral College!! Why can’t the people we elected in the times our elections were fair and legal, take these traitors down??? When they don’t, as I see it, they are complicit as traitors destroying our Republic!! It appears it’s all just a big game to entertain their political audience with these debates. And actually just a total Clown Show with the Commudem moderators. What a joke!!

InsanitySquared
InsanitySquared
2 years ago

I agree – the networks need to ask the question and let the speaker make his or her case. The other side should not interrupt.

I have a feeling that the 2024 elections will be more normal. Why? Because Trump will not be in them. Republicans need to dump the childish loser and pick stronger, more level-headed candidates. DeSantis or even Pence are people that can articulate coherent thoughts and win.

Now, I know that most of the registered Republicans prefer Trump. Well, let me tell you something as a right-leaning Independent. If y’all pick Trump in 2024, I will be voting Democrat. And I live in a swing state where every vote matters. The only way I am (maybe) voting for Trump again is if the Democrats select Hillary Clinton again, LOL.

papayec
papayec
2 years ago

Give me a break. The communist DNC would NEVER accept an unbiased debate.

Tom
Tom
2 years ago

Someone here commented about Trump. Clearly another case (ho hum, big yawn) of TDS. Of course he interrupted the illegitimate crook because the farcical “debate” playing field was so tilted the other way. If this format is so important they should be moderated by unsnarky, unbiased real journalists and not the clowns that moderated previously. You wanted a clown show? Every debate WAS one. Level the playing field or fogetabout it. Vote for Hillary…

Gen. Grant
Gen. Grant
2 years ago

I agree, these crooked Marxists have to cheat at everything. They had that creepy looking Chris Wallace as a so called “UNBIASED” moderator, what a joke! He asked Biden ice cream questions, nothing about Hunter Biden and the Biden Crime Family, his soft on crime approach–574 riots in American cities, it was the type of debate you would have in Russia. The crooked main stream media can’t be trusted——–but AMERICANS have got a lot smarter over the last 5 yrs!!

Karen
Karen
2 years ago

Don’t believe they should have debates. They don’t help me at all to decide who I want to vote for.
If they have to, please don’t put Chris Wallace as moderator. What a dummy and obviously a liberal. No fairness in the last debate by him. JERK

Homer Howell
Homer Howell
2 years ago

Not one mention of the donna brazil debacle with hillary clinton. I think it is about time we put spending limits on campaigns, so the rich can not buy the elections, and do something about soros

Gerald M Serlin
Gerald M Serlin
2 years ago

This article fails to consider that there are more than two pllitical parties.in the United States. In the last several presidential elections, the Libertarian Party was on every ballot in every state, but their candidate was excluded from the debates. This was a significant factor in why the Libertarian Party failed to do well in any of these elections.

Purposely excluding any party from fairly participating in any major election event is not only unfair to that party, but to the American People as well, as they do not have free access to all parts of the election process.

An older blonde women laughing in the kitchen with a grey haired man.
AMAC’s Medicare Advisory Service
The knowledge, guidance, and choices of coverage you’re looking for. The exceptional service you deserve.
The AMAC App on 3 different iPhone
Download the AMAC App
The AMAC App is the place to go for insightful news wherever you are and whenever you want.
Demonstration for stop the persecution Falun Gong in China. New York, USA - September 23, 2014:Stop the persecution of Falun Gong in China in 47 street and 1st Ave.
Ronald Reagan makes a dapper picture with a boutonniere in his lapel. The occasion was Reagan`s address before the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations on St. Patrick`s Day, March 17, 1980. At the time, the former movie actor and two-term California governor was running for the Republican Party nomination for president.
Usa and Venezuela Realistic Half Flags Together

Stay informed! Subscribe to our Daily Newsletter.

"*" indicates required fields

76
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x

Subscribe to AMAC Daily News and Games