Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Rennes Templar
Right. And I think this is a more desirable format for voters to learn about the candidates and the issues.

It's not bad. It's just not a debate, and bears no resemblance to Lincoln-Douglas. That label is a farce.

I'd like to see real debate of issues. You can have debate without "gotcha", no matter what Newt says.

They should do it like playoffs:

Paul v Cain
Romney v Newt

Have some mechanism for viewers to vote the winners.

Then a final between the winners.

13 posted on 11/06/2011 12:55:33 PM PST by Huck (TAX TEA NOW==SUPPORT 9-9-9!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: Huck

Actually, it was a debate, and not an argument, which is a loose interpretation of the word “debate”:

de·bate (d-bt)
v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates
v.intr.
1. To consider something; deliberate.

Now, if you mean you’d like to see more of where they disagree, well, that may be worthwhile. However, I personally loved the debate (not “bickering”) format, because they actually were able to address issues, although I don’t agree with many of their ideas, I do, however, believe that Cain, and to a lesser degree, Gingrich, both want to do what is best for our country (even if they aren’t sure what it is yet), or at least improve it.


20 posted on 11/06/2011 2:04:17 PM PST by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson