Posted on 10/17/2012 8:50:15 AM PDT by jakerobins
Did we go in expecting a Fair fight?? This is like going to a street three card monte game and being shocked you lose your money. The debate was a set up from the get go.....We got suckered..OK. Now how do we deal with it?
First we need to stop being suckered into the Myth of "Debate Rules". Republicans are the only ones who follow the rules the DEMS will NOT!
Secondly show some backbone and stop allowing these uber liberal Moderators to pretend like they will be unbiased when doing their job.
I don’t mean to sound like Clintoon, but there’s a “third way”: just don’t worry about it.
Something like 70% to 80% of voters distrust the media and take it for granted that the media are in the tank for the libtards. It gets factored into the results. And remember, the results of a debate are NOT what the pundits think, but what the VOTERS think.
The trend of modern communications plays against the media getting away with their bias. In fact, the trend of modern communications augurs against the lamestream media’s future *existance*, let alone their influence.
LSM bias forces the conservative candidate to be stronger, and allows the liberal candidate to be weak. That’s not a recipe for liberal success.
Relax. It’ll all work out OK in the end.
What do we do about it?
NOTHING.
It was evident to all, that Crowley was a partisan, even to the left wing voters and especially the ‘undecideds’ and the precious ‘moderates’.
Her stepping in to support a lie on the side of Obama was a jaw dropping act of ultra stupidity or pre-planned treachery............
How about Fox, Drudge, FR, Brietbart, or someone like them sponsor a debate?
It’s pointless to complain about the current situation, even more pointless to expect mercy from these Alinskyites.
The left went and took over not only TV and journalism, but the education of the journalists, producers, writers, and production crew. The right must develop their own channels of communication, rather than complain about the sad state from the rear seat.
And if the left fails to show up, in protest because Michael Savage is the debate moderator, then the debate will be between the republican and an empty chair for 90 minutes.
The Mantra of Leftists is: BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. That about sums up everything they do or say.
Secondly show some backbone and stop allowing these uber liberal Moderators.
It mystifies me why the Republicans refuse to demand at least one Conservative moderator. They not only follow all the rules carefully where the Democrats do not follow the rules but they follow the Democrat formulated rules.
Rules are for regular people; libs can get “waivers.”
Sounds good to me! CNN is pretty much the DNC media arm why they are even called journalists is beyond me....
I’d like to see a three part response:
1) Have the Romney campaign and SuperPACs put out two ads. One regarding the obvious bias in the moderators, questions and setups.........suggesting that enough is enough. The future needs to be different. Two......the correct response regarding the Libya questions. It must be hard hitting.... Mr. President, you are offended that Mr. Romney questions you regarding your obvious lie on Libya? Well you have no idea how offended we as Americans are that you would sacrifice our diplomatic corps on the altar of political correctness to support your failed mideast policies. And fortunately your term is almost up, otherwise you’d find out how we feel about your lame coverup.
2) Have Newt appear on Bob Schieffer’s Sunday show and put him on notice that the credibility of his entire career is on the line in the final debate.
3) Align with YouTube (Google) for no moderator (timer only) debates in the future because the Mainstream media is irredeemably biased and appears beyond rehabilitation.
Thank you.
I have trouble with some of those _nce words.
I *could* use spell check. Or, I could just pick a random vowel from the set {a, e, i} and run with it. :-)
I will tell you this. If the Republicans(meaning conservatives) don’t show some balls, and stand up to the left, we will lose this country, regardless of who is POTUS.
We have already lost our media, our public schools, and our universities.
Why can’t we demand equal representation on moderators? Because we have no balls.
They have to talk slower to their voters.
I think this is the correct direction. Using YouTube would be a last resort if broadcast TV refuses to participate, but I think the timer-only moderation should be done.
The campaigns submit a ranked list of issues they would like to discuss, and address the top 5 from each, alternating from candidate to candidate.
On opening, the first candidate gets 2 minutes, the second candidate gets 2 minutes, and the 1st candidate gets a 1 minute rebuttal. Change the time intervals, if you like.
Use a colored light or card system to notify when a candidate has 60 seconds, then 30 seconds remaining. When the time is up, the microphone is shut off.
If a candidate interrupts the other during his time to speak, the interrupted candidate loses his next interval to speak, and the time is awarded to the candidate.
Any time remaining from a candidates speaking interval is "banked" for future use. The candidate can use it to expand on a future point, or for his closing speech.
It's time for a MODERATOR, not a referee. Crowley over-stepped many pre-agreed boundaries when she took sides in settling that particular dispute. And to top it off, she was wrong -- and she admitted it afterwards. However, most people will never know that.
Just get an actual forensic debate moderator/judge, rather than relying on journ-o-listers.
It’s such a given that the debates will be biased against the Republican, that I wonder if they’re seeking to use that to their advantage, ie, some kind of sympathy card. It would be one way of making lemonade when you’re given lemons. But it still doesn’t explain why they don’t just fight harder for fair debates, unless they really know that that would never truly be possible and it’s better to just have it be as blatantly biased as possible and use the advantage.
The ways of politics and politicians, it’s all too much for an honest and normal person to grasp.
Romney agreed to the debates and the rules because he needed the exposure. Obama would not have debated if he didn’t have the moderators on his side.
The fact that Romney came out looking Presidential makes the risk well worth doing the debates.
The bias of the debates and Obamao’s lies will come back to bite him....I hope.
I’m sure that Obama hoped he could slug it through with the moderators help and win the election.
The part I don’t like is that whenever I think Obama and his policies are toast it turns out the opposite of what I think
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.