• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Debate format may change for next debates

pete6032

pete6032

Diamond Member
Well hopefully this will pan out. Thoughts?

www.nytimes.com

Some Republicans Criticize Trump for Failing to Denounce White Supremacy (Published 2020)

The Commission on Presidential Debates plans to change the debate format after President Trump’s frequent interruptions threatened to derail the first debate. Joe Biden campaigned on a train tour of Ohio and Pennsylvania.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
Members of the commission, a bipartisan nonprofit that has organized the debates since 1987, were frustrated by the way Tuesday’s event played out, as Mr. Trump interrupted both his Democratic opponent, Joseph R. Biden Jr., and the moderator, Chris Wallace of Fox News.

The commission is also weighing whether to grant moderators the power to shut off a candidate’s microphone to help restore order, the people said, although both cautioned that those discussions were in a preliminary phase.

Cutting off a microphone, although widely prescribed on social media as a remedy to Tuesday’s problems, can be complex from a television production standpoint and may not prevent a candidate from continuing to speak in the debate hall.

Another option under consideration is to penalize an interrupting candidate by forcing him to yield more time back to his opponent, the people said.

A spokeswoman for the debate commission declined to comment on Wednesday.

“Last night’s debate made clear that additional structure should be added to the format of the remaining debates to ensure a more orderly discussion of the issues,” the organization wrote in a formal statement, which did not elaborate on the specific changes its members had in mind. “The C.P.D. will be carefully considering the changes that it will adopt and will announce those measures shortly.”
Click to expand...
 
I would definitely look at penalties — mic off, more time for opponents if you interrupt. Overrunning and interruptions were problems well before Trump, but he's a good incentive to crack down on the behavior.

Can you imagine if that happens? Biden might have the debate to himself within 10 minutes! Trump would whine that the "fake news media" was being unfair to him, but I suspect anyone who isn't one of his drones would be reminded of how much of an overgrown brat he is.
 
I was thinking shock collars. lol, soulcougher beat me to it.

Add on nerf swords and they battle gladiator style.
 
Soundproof booths and controlled mics.

2 minutes uninterrupted and mic cut off after. Allow video of the opponent without audio while the other's mic is on.

Nothing screams impotent fool than an idiot speaking into a muted mic.

Figures we'd need a gameshow format for Trump.
 
Last edited:
If people want to act like children we should treat them as such. When persistent interruption happens the candidate should be forced to turn around and sit in a corner. Repeated attempts to interrupt would then require the candidate to wear a dunce cap. If repeated still, the moderator should have the authority to spank or scold the candidate. If that still isn’t enough then remove the candidate and allot the rest of the time to the remaining candidate.
 
They just need one of those cartoonish articulated arms with the big glove on it. If you act like a child you get a spank, if you lie you get slapped.

Which, I don't support spankings and other physical punishment for children as data seems to show it has long term negative psychological consequences, but for a 70 year old acting like a child, I bet it'd do wonders for behavior like Turmp has shown.
 
The Commission needs to move to a chess clock format. Because each major Topics was suppose to be 15 minutes, each candidate would be given a clock with 7.5 minutes and a button that turns off their clock/mic and turns on their opponents clock/mic. The Moderator is given three buttons: a pause button and a start button for each candidate. The pause button stops both clocks and turns off both mic off. The start button turns on clock/mic for a particular candidate.

If this was in place for the last debate, Chris Wallace would of introduce the first major topic, ask a question to one candidate(Trump) then hit the start button for Trump. Then Trump would be able to talk uninterrupted until either he hits his button or runs out of time. Once Trump hits his button, then Biden would be able to talk uninterrupted until either he hits his button or runs out of time. They keep going back and forth until both run out of time. Whenever Chris Wallace thought both candidates had answered the question and were starting to going off topic, Chris could hit the pause button and ask a new question to refocus the debate back on topic. Once both candidates run out of time, They move on to the next major topic, refill both clocks and start again.
 
Here is my idea: Both candidates are in their own separate greenrooms. Each has a video feed of the stage, and the moderator, Zoom style.
The Moderator asks a question, and they are each given their pre-determined amount of time to speak. At any time a candidate can give up the rest of their time, but at the pre-allotted time the mic is automatically cut off (Bonus idea, let them bank time some of the primary question response time for later questions.) Then the other candidate is given the opportunity for a 1 minute rebuttal to what the other just said. there is a pre-determined amount of 'free conversation' time in which both mics are on, and they can have a conversation. That way each person can say their thing, and still argue with each other.

So it goes like this:
Moderator: (both mics are off) Question 1, Candidate1 goes first.
Candidate1: 5 minutes of uninterrupted response. (only mic1 is on)
Candidate2: 5 minutes of uninterrupted response. (only mic2 is on)
Candidate1: 1 minute rebuttal. (only mic1 is on)
Moderator: 5 minutes of free conversation (both mics are on for 5 minutes).
Moderator: (both mics are off) Question 2, Candidate2 goes first.
Candidate2: 5 minutes of uninterrupted response. (only mic2 is on)
Candidate1: 5 minutes of uninterrupted response. (only mic1 is on)
Candidate2: 1 minute rebuttal. (only mic2 is on)
Moderator: 5 minutes of free conversation (both mics are on for 5 minutes).
And so on.
 
Personally, I'd be all for sweeping changes to the debate formats. Even when things aren't being derailed by a gibbering baboon, I've long been dubious about the value of making the candidates try to give meaningful answers to complicated questions in 2 minute blocks. The L-D debates were one candidate speaking for 60 minutes, the other 90 minutes and then the first candidate got 30 minutes to respond.

I know Americans probably don't have that kind of attention span these days, but the current format seems to encourage the "debates" to be about seeing who can land the best zinger rather than anything resembling a meaningful debate.,
 
There's no format that Trump can't beat down with his motor mouth because his job is to turn any debate into a fiasco that he and his miserable record as POTUS can hide behind.

Trying to force him to take a stand on his many fvckups and his obvious compromising relationship with Putin and his puppet oligarchs is not going to happen along with so many other unpopular nonsensical positions he's taken since taking office.

His only defense is to obfuscate, deflect and deny in such a way as to also deny Biden a chance to take a crack at his many failures, goofs and general overall incompetence at doing his job.

In essence, Trump has had to commit himself to covering up his many misdeeds, malfeasance and other such sundry violations of ethical and moral code that he's built up over the years he's held office while being watched by the whole world on a stage he can't control to his liking.

End result is what we all just witnessed a couple of days ago. Any rules that forces him to own up to his own word and deed as POTUS will of course be rejected in negotiations and ignored on stage because it will expose to the world what we already know about him and what he has denied by mouth yet admitted by his own actions.

His supporters are having to do the very same thing that Trump is doing: a massive purposeful coverup of his miserable incriminating actions that led to his being impeached and proven guilty by procedure yet given a get out jail free card by his cronies in the Senate.
 
simpletron said:
The Commission needs to move to a chess clock format. Because each major Topics was suppose to be 15 minutes, each candidate would be given a clock with 7.5 minutes and a button that turns off their clock/mic and turns on their opponents clock/mic. The Moderator is given three buttons: a pause button and a start button for each candidate. The pause button stops both clocks and turns off both mic off. The start button turns on clock/mic for a particular candidate.

If this was in place for the last debate, Chris Wallace would of introduce the first major topic, ask a question to one candidate(Trump) then hit the start button for Trump. Then Trump would be able to talk uninterrupted until either he hits his button or runs out of time. Once Trump hits his button, then Biden would be able to talk uninterrupted until either he hits his button or runs out of time. They keep going back and forth until both run out of time. Whenever Chris Wallace thought both candidates had answered the question and were starting to going off topic, Chris could hit the pause button and ask a new question to refocus the debate back on topic. Once both candidates run out of time, They move on to the next major topic, refill both clocks and start again.
Click to expand...
As ridiculous as it sounds this might be the best approach.
 
I don't think any of these measures is going to produce a debate which isn't a disgrace.

While I think further debates are more likely to benefit Biden than Trump, I'm of the opinion that the Commission should cancel the remaining debates. Not because Trump was obnoxious, but because Trump is using the debates as a platform to undermine the election itself.
 
As far as Trump is concerned, there is no debating in these "debates". There is only him on stage controlling the narrative while using Biden as his personal punching bag and whipping boy. It's the only way he can "win" because he has nothing of substance he can take a stand on and "look presidential" all while heading off any moderator's wish to "moderate" his behavior.

He has a requirement to be shifty, elusive and unrestrained in what he wants to accomplish at these "debates", which is to turn them into one of his Liar's Convention campaign rallies.
 
woolfe9998 said:
I don't think any of these measures is going to produce a debate which isn't a disgrace.

While I think further debates are more likely to benefit Biden than Trump, I'm of the opinion that the Commission should cancel the remaining debates. Not because Trump was obnoxious, but because Trump is using the debates as a platform to undermine the election itself.
Click to expand...

Nope. Trump as President is a national disgrace & we need to let him show us all the truth of that so we can change it. I firmly believe that the electoral system will withstand whatever he can throw at it, simply because he has no control of it. It all happens from the ground up, from the counties & states.
 
Jhhnn said:
Nope. Trump as President is a national disgrace & we need to let him show us all the truth of that so we can change it. I firmly believe that the electoral system will withstand whatever he can throw at it, simply because he has no control of it. It all happens from the ground up, from the counties & states.
Click to expand...

Numerous articles have detailed ways in which Trump could steal this election with post election day legal maneuverings. You may not believe it, but even a small chance of it is worth taking seriously.

I don't think the Debate Commission should provide a platform for Trump to undermine the election and undermine democracy.
 
I still don't think they should change the format much. Biden and the moderators should be a bit more forceful but let Trump keep digging his own holes.
 
I HAVE A SOLUTION!!!

Yes I am kidding but I am also kind of serious.

Have a timer and give them a few seconds to run over, whatever the normal debate standard is.
Allow speaking over anyone for a few second I’m not sure what the number should be so let’s go with 3 seconds
Anything over the allotted amount is a $10,000 per second. The fine that could go to some voters rights group or even national debt payments.
Put his money on the line and Trump will shut the fuck up
**this plan would require a prepayment**
 
Combine the debates with the gong show. When someone goes over their time and the moderators or audience gets tired of the rambling they can ring the gong. If they keep talking yank 'em off the stage.

gong-show-o.gif


KEwjzF.gif
 
Jhhnn said:
Imagine a country where the presidential debate commission has to change the rules to rein in the insane behavior of the incumbent. Imagine it all being so normalized that people will vote to keep him. That's some serious mind fuckery.
Click to expand...
Imagine Trumps base arguing that Trump was being forceful and not backing down to Biden! A true law and order President my ass!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top