Debate dodging: The latest threat to our democracy
The Hill,
by
Deborah Turner
&
Virginia Kase Solomon
Original Article
Posted By: Moritz55,
10/17/2022 9:21:50 AM
In this age of hyper-partisanship and polarization, there is a dangerous trend in politics this election cycle: candidates refusing to face their opponents in debates.
These candidates expect to win the job with no job interview. Their rationale? The organizations hosting the events are “partisan.”
Some politicians are using this tiresome excuse to avoid answering tough questions and tackling issues that may be politically charged. Getting candidates on the record about issues and positions is integral to every debate and informs the voting public.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
bpl40 10/17/2022 9:25:47 AM (No. 1306934)
They don't want to 'legitimize' their opponents and their scurrilous claims that the last election was stolen!!
1 person likes this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Ditto1958 10/17/2022 9:48:47 AM (No. 1306962)
Note the two idiots who wrote this piece: it’s a republic, not a democracy.
5 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
MrDeplorable 10/17/2022 9:49:24 AM (No. 1306963)
Repeat after me. . . R-E-P-U-B-L-I-C, not D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y. Say ten times, mail in a donation to DJT and your sins will be forgiven. Go forth in Peace, my Child!
5 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Krause 10/17/2022 9:54:30 AM (No. 1306968)
In addition, I think politicians and deep staters should have to appear on both left and right leaning TV stations. As it is now you'll never see a Pelosi or a Schumer appear on Fox or Newsmax, as an example. They only run to friendly, lefty 'news' shows. Politicians should have to 'face the music' from all sides.
9 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Skinnydip 10/17/2022 10:02:41 AM (No. 1306981)
Articles from The Hill aren’t worth the energy it takes to transmit them.
8 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
DVC 10/17/2022 10:06:03 AM (No. 1306984)
It's a republic, you idiots, and never was a democracy.
4 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
MindMadeUp 10/17/2022 10:09:31 AM (No. 1306989)
Notice when they say "candidates refusing to face their opponents in debates" they don't mention that, as far as I know, most, if not all, the "candidates refusing" are Democrats. Nor do they mention the reason: Democrat candidates will likely face humiliating loss in any debate against a half-competent opponent, because their policies are all dung.
6 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
MDConservative 10/17/2022 10:14:20 AM (No. 1306996)
The simple fact is that there is no requirement to debate anyone anywhere. Most of these "debates" are rubbish, with insignificant discussion, and none in true debate form where the candidates address the other and ask/answer questions. It seems that whenever there is a "debate" one side or the other cries foul about the format or moderators. So, what's the point...especially when your favorite "loses"?
5 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
qr4j 10/17/2022 10:17:14 AM (No. 1307003)
If the journos didn't coddle their pals, if they didn't ask "gotcha" questions of the political opponents, then maybe the complaint of candidates' refusing to debate would mean something to me. Remember, Donna Brazile FED questions to the Hillary Clinton campaign. That sort of behavior is reason enough to nix at least some debate participation.
4 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
chance_232 10/17/2022 10:17:18 AM (No. 1307004)
The first question that needs to be answered is "who's being debated". The moderator or opposing candidate?
2 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
MDConservative 10/17/2022 10:19:10 AM (No. 1307008)
For #2 and #3...look up the term democracy in a dictionary. One wants to argue a term of art (political science) with the common vernacular use. Let's give it a break.
To save the trouble, from Mirriam-Webster: 1b. a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
2 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Robert Jones 10/17/2022 11:48:37 AM (No. 1307117)
The problem is that a fool can ask more questions than a wise man can answer. Also, the format favors liberals. All journalists at my college never cared about studying and only smoked pot and fornication. Those are our opinion leaders today.
2 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Gallo3 10/17/2022 1:07:05 PM (No. 1307172)
Why would any American candidate participate in a 'debate' sponsored by The League Of Liberal Women Voters?
Sandbagging questions given to Libs in advance; 'What are YOU going to do about Affordable Housing?'
and not any of them would ever vote for an American anyway. To heck with them.
1 person likes this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Msquared112 10/17/2022 2:27:50 PM (No. 1307209)
At least one debate should be the law for two candidates running against each other.
0 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
mifla 10/18/2022 6:56:55 AM (No. 1307724)
Dems are avoiding the debates because they have no answers for inflation, crime, and immigration. Instead, they run to liberal tv shows and scream about abortion rights.
0 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
CivilServant 10/18/2022 8:01:33 AM (No. 1307765)
#11:
“I pledge allegiance to the Flag, and the ………….. for which it stands.”
Fill in the blank.
Words have meanings. Sorry you accept the dumbing down of the language.
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Moritz55"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)