124
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
124 points (87.3% liked)
politics
19104 readers
2598 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I like this kind of idea, but to be honest, I’m still uncertain of the value added by the debate format.
A president doesn’t pass policies by debate. They formulate an agenda and work with policy experts to construct a means to achieving those items. They form a cabinet, which ideally consist of people skilled in management and with enough subject matter expertise that they can provide a similar approach to the management of their various departments, and so on.
Debates are simply theatrical performances that are not replicated nor relevant to the job of the executive. They have scripted lines that they try to fit in, they’re coached on talking points and how to deflect on subjects their handlers don’t want them to talk about.
I vastly prefer policy positions published in detail and unscripted interviews with professional journalists who are not looking to protect their access but rather to both clarify points the candidates have made and more importantly to bring up issues that are relevant but which the candidates have avoided.
To be crude, I literally don’t give a fuck that the line “I knew John F Kennedy, and you’re no John F Kennedy” was one of the best retorts in (vice) presidential debate history, and anyone who would vote on that kind of thing - in my opinion - is not properly exercising their choice.
I’m okay with stump speeches - I think they’re still pretty useless for many of the same reasons - but they do give a sense of the personality of the candidate and their approach to addressing the public. That is an important factor - the charisma effect - and I think we should keep them around.