Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

YouTube to Host Presidential Debate

Posted by Zonk on from the bringing-dancing-cats-to-the-world-of-politics dept.

skotte writes "Wired is reporting that July 23 at the Citadel in Charleston, South Carolina, Anderson Cooper will host presidential debates in which debaters are asked 20-30 questions culled from a specially designated section of YouTube, where the voting populace can post questions directly. You and I (assuming you're American, probably) can ask questions ourselves, not just a reporter in a crowd. Candidates won't know which questions they are being asked, and the video selection process will remain a complete secret. Interesting, but also the slightest bit scary."

9 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. fantastic idea by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 5, Funny

    0b4m4, u r like totally teh r0x0r! U r in my computerz stealing my votez!!

  2. Been done before by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ok, video is new, but this has been done before with more traditional formats. We've seen questions from the audience - sometimes even live - to presidential candidates before. The problem has always been not the questions, but the answers. Ask any question you want, but there is no way to compel the candidate to really answer it. Most don't.

    What they do is speak about the topic with prepared mini-speeches...

    Voter: Sir, does the right to free speech mean I can burn a flag?

    Candidated: Let me tell you, I stand second to none in my love for the flag or this great country that it stands for. That flag represents all the people who have risked their lives and died to save her...

    And after ten minutes of posturing and spouting non-sequiturs, he still will not have said yes or no. But for some reason, most people do not seem to notice the fact.

    What we need is not a new way of asking questions, but a new way of getting answers.

    I personally favor the rack.

    1. Re:Been done before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I personally favor the rack.
      So you're voting for Hillary?
    2. Re:Been done before by stinerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's quite obvious why they don't answer the question directly. They aren't sure which side of the issue 50%+1 of the populace is on. Furthermore, if you don't answer the question directly, you don't run the risk of alienating some people who might vote for you.

      This is one reason I like Ron Paul. He and I don't agree on everything, but he's not afraid to say what he thinks. He's authentic, and I think that is why people are gravitating toward him. They know that no one wants to abolish the Depts. of Education, Homeland Security, etc. because he thinks it's going to get him votes. He does so because that is what he truly believes.

      I'll take a true believer that I disagree with on some substantive issues over someone that can't decide if they are for or against something until they see the polls.

    3. Re:Been done before by griffjon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      American politics has been stripped of the shades of gray enough as it is - how would a moderate republican who supports abortion in cases of rape, incest or the health of the mother respond to an "Abortion: Yes or no?" question adequately? Fine, require a "straight" answer of yes or no, but don't prohibit explanations of why they hold that position.

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
  3. A question for Hillary by sfjoe · · Score: 5, Funny


    You voted in favor of the Iraq war. If you can be mislead by a bungling fool like George Bush, how can we trust you as President to deal with world leaders who are actually intelligent?

    --
    It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
  4. Ron Paul by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope they don't allow Ron Paul on this. Ron Paul would be a disaster for socialism, internationalism, and government sponsored murder and tyranny in this nation and around the world. We cannot allow this man to speak. He is a terrorist.

  5. Just a nit or two... by HellYeahAutomaton · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It absolutely annoys me in the mainstream (Democratic and Republican) debates that all of the candidates don't get to answer the same question.

    During the Rep. debate that just occurred, but was also annoying was that the candidates were not self-policing their own timers, as well as talking over the moderator who wanted to interrupt them. This makes both the moderator and the candidates look like amateurs. Perhaps the idea is to shut off their microphones when they run out of time.

    Please people, get your point across, and do it in a timely manner.

    1. Re:Just a nit or two... by eln · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps the idea is to shut off their microphones when they run out of time.

      Electrical shocks. Send them steadily more powerful electrical shocks until they shut up. At the very least, it will make the debates more entertaining.