Would You Like To See Weekly Presidential Debates Between Nominees Starting Several Months Before Election Day.?

by strawberry Posted 2012/07/31 01:12:27

Related Topics: Elections, Breitbart, Election, Time, Media, Presidential, 2008, America, Waste, Americans, Campaign, Presidential Debates, US, Questions, Televised, Government

Read More

12 votes
Read all 13 opinions
View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	I SURELY WOULD. DEBATES ARE MORE PRODUCTIVE.	6 votes	50%
	TELEVISED DEBATES ARE A WASTE OF TIME.	6 votes	50%

Forget political ads, campaigning across America, waste of millions in campaign money. Let's have more televised debates between both nominees. Televised debates really show the nominee for who he or she is. There are too few debates between nominees. A weekly debate would give Americans a better look at what their favored nominee really has to say. Such debates give us a close up view of actions and reactions of each nominee. Who is more intelligent, who can't answer questions, etc. Televised Presidential Nominee Debates

Televised 2008 Presidential Nominee Debates

Add a comment above

Denny 2012/07/31 03:47:10

TELEVISED DEBATES ARE A WASTE OF TIME.

Oh Please no. these Idiots all they do is talk and say nothing.

reply
strawberry to Denny 2012/07/31 23:22:18

+1
Then how do you pick your candidate then nominee.?

reply
Denny to strawberry 2012/08/01 04:49:25 (edited)

+1
Now I would have them meeting the people together with no damn TV's where the people ask the questions. and not the media hacks.

reply
strawberry to Denny 2012/08/01 17:45:52

+1
That is a great point. Often I would love to ask them questions, really put them on the spot to give answers.

reply
JERSEYDUDE 2012/07/31 01:38:22

I SURELY WOULD. DEBATES ARE MORE PRODUCTIVE.

+1
if only LOSER AMERICANS WATCHED IT!!!

i remember back when the repub debates were going on one particular debate had only 70,000 viewers meanwhile dancing the stupid stars had over 20 million viewers.....so sad!

reply
strawberry to JERSEYDUDE 2012/07/31 02:02:40

That is sad. It is hard for nominees or candidates to fake while on national television. In 2008 debates is when I already eliminated candidates not trusting them. Same with debates for 2012 Election. Often the eyes, movements, anger control, etc. can be picked up as signs of negative or positive qualities of debaters.

reply
Denny to JERSEYDUDE 2012/08/01 18:17:54

+1
Problem is that it's not dramatic enough. Kennedy and Nixon had just one debate and now here we are making stars of the damn press. (or so they think) Maybe after someone answers a question after 20 other debates, a candidate would go over and punch the media guy in the mouth, then the ratings would go up. Or maybe even another candidate.

reply
strawberry to Denny 2012/08/01 19:43:01

+1
LOL!

reply
NPC 2012/07/31 01:21:14

TELEVISED DEBATES ARE A WASTE OF TIME.

+1
Debates only prove who is more photogenic. i say 2 debates and that is it.

reply
strawberry to NPC 2012/07/31 01:26:06

Thanks for your opinion. Personally I benefit from the debates, would love a weekly debate.

reply
strawberry 2012/07/31 01:20:41

I SURELY WOULD. DEBATES ARE MORE PRODUCTIVE.

I can pretty much size up candidates from the start, just through televised debates. In fact many Americans make their minds up through such debates, not silly political ads, or arranged campaign stops. Weekly televised debates between Mitt Romney and President Obama would be a great asset for all American voters.

reply
HarleyCharley 2012/07/31 01:16:21

I SURELY WOULD. DEBATES ARE MORE PRODUCTIVE.

+1
Romney would decimate the empty suit.....

reply
strawberry to HarleyC... 2012/07/31 01:23:38

Thanks for your opinion.

reply