Presidential Debates Set

The debates are set, there will be four of them: Sept. 30, Oct. 8, and Oct. 13, and Oct. 5 for the VPs. All are at 9 p.m. Eastern. Get more details and read the memorandum of understanding (it is unreadable in Preview for me, I had to use Acrobat). There's not much different in here than in previous years. Says CNN: "A senior Kerry source said the Bush campaign was 'hung up' over whether a light or something audible like a buzzer would be used to tell the candidates when their time is up. A Bush official acknowledged that last-minute questions, mostly over the time cue issue, held up the agreement." In related news, it appears the first debate proposed by the truly nonpartisan Citizens' Debate Commission, scheduled for this Wednesday in Columbus, isn't going to happen.

Comments

Re:useless - Kerry is already kebabized

[N3WBI3]

According to "the Economist", however, Kerry is already "kebabized" over Vietnam and his changing mind over the Iraq war, while Bush is very hard to kebabize about his military record the silver spoon he had in his mouth when he was born

That might be because Kerry decided to run on his Vietnam service and his 15 positions on Iraq..

districts are gerrymandered

In a presidential district the only state that districts matter are ME an NB (total 10 EV).

the vote is amplified by the electoral colleges

As it is intended to be, we are a federal Republic not a direct democracy

and everyone has already accepted the result thanks to biased polls

The same polls had Kerry Winning two months ago? If kerry loses this its because he refused to define himself as anything other than a vietnam vet who would do "everything" "different" in Iraq (note the specifics he has given)..

MOU comments and question

[Malfourmed]

The MOU outlining the debate procedures strike me as incredibly anal, cf:

Notwithstanding subparagraph 5(c), the candidates may take notes during the debate on the size, color, and type of paper each prefers and using the type of pen or pencil that each prefers. Each candidate must submit to the staff of the Commission prior to the debate all such paper and pencils with which a candidate may wish to take notes during the debate, and the staff of the Commission will place such paper, pens, and pencils on the podium, table, or other structure to be used by the candidate in that debate.

or:

The stools shall be identical and have backs and a footrest and shall be approved by the candidates' representatives.

Mindboggling, but I suppose given the stakes that's not surprising.

I guess the following is to protect Bush or Kerry's ass if either stuffs up majorly:

Neither film footage nor video footage nor any audio excerpts from the debates may be used publicly by either candidate's campaign through any means, including but not limited to, radio, television, internet, or videotapes, whether broadcast or distributed in any other manner.

As if a major faux pas (or pratfall!) wouldn't get media coverage anyway, but I guess it's not as bad as if it was used in an opposition campaign ad...

Can someone explain this to me? I'm not sure what is meant by it:

The candidates shall not address each other with proposed pledges.

But what irks me most is that the format does not allow sufficient time for comprehensive, you know - debate. Come on: 120 seconds for a statement, 90 seconds for a rebuttal and a maximum of a further 60 seconds split between both candidates for extended discussion (and then only at the moderator's discretion)?

Coupled with the following:

The candidates may not ask each other direct questions, but may ask rhetorical questions.

I know there are a lot of topics and only so much time, but this isn't going to lead to debate (as I understand the term) but a series of extended and pre-rehearsed soundbites. And the inability to actually ask your opponent questions strikes me as stupid and cowardly (what are these guys afraid of?), but I guess I'm used to a parliamentary model where candidates are at each other's throats much more directly.

Incidentally, I wonder how often the domestic/economic questions will be turned into homeland "security" questions, viz economic security, healthcare security, unborn child security, national park preservation ... security.

Re:bush is hard to beat

[DavidNWelton]

He got the Harvard MBA and everything else thanks to his dad from what I can tell. I would much, much rather see someone like Powell or McCain in his place. Those are men I can respect.

If Bush is not below average, who the hell are the presidents who pulled the average that low?! You've got to be pulling my leg...

Sure there are people who are smart but poor speakers, but for someone whose job description includes speaking with the world at large and its leaders on a regular basis, I sure wouldn't hire someone with as tenuous a grasp on the language as Bush.

Re:Average for US citizen or average for president

[N3WBI3]

I see the average person (in your opinion) is smart enought to get an MBA from harvard and fly a fighter interceptor

Where are Nader, Cobb, Peroutka and Badnarik?

[PackMan97]

Badnarik is on 49 ballots.
Cobb is in 28 ballots.
Nader is on 44 ballots
Peroutka is on 39 ballots.

All four candidates have the potential to win the Electoral College due to the states on which they have ballot access.

Why does the "nonpartisan" debate commission insist on excluding every candidate that can win?

With the Democratic Primary debates we saw that you can have a debate with 10 candidates, so why not have one with 6?

It is a shame that Republicans talk about economic freedom and Democrats talk about personal freedom, but at the end of the day neither party wants you to have POLITICAL FREEDOM!

Re:That's simple.

[N3WBI3]

Yale students are at the extreem end of the scale. To be low there is to be well above average nationally. My GRE was the 92% percentile, nationally that would put me somewhere in the 99% range and I just went to a state school.

He was not just above the averge he was more than 25% over it (keep in mind that in the 60's not everyone took the SAT only those intending to go to college which was a much smaller % of the population than today).

Your proof he is of average intelligents is that he was below the median at *YALE*, pardon me if I dont buy that as some kind of "proof" he is just average. I bet a C student at Yale has more upstairs than B students at some other university.