First debate may not happen......

[KevinTheOmnivore]

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/polit...Noted_Now.html

S E P T. 25, 2004—

MIAMI, WE HAVE A PROBLEM: A senior Republican official tells ABC News' Jonathan Karl that the first presidential debate, scheduled for Thursday in Miami, could be canceled unless there is a breakthrough soon in negotiations between the two campaigns and the Commission on Presidential Debates.

The only remaining sticking point, Karl reports, is the reluctance of the Commission on Presidential Debates to sign the agreement negotiated by the Bush and Kerry campaigns.

The commission and the campaigns have been negotiating a side letter the commission (and moderators) would sign instead of the agreement, but the Bush campaign finds the current draft of the letter too weakly worded.


DEBATE OFFICIAL RESPONDS: A senior official with the Commission on Presidential Debates says the debates are in jeopardy and puts the blame squarely on the Bush campaign, Karl reports.

"If they don't want to debate, that's fine. They can tell the world why the don't want to debate," the official told ABC News. "If they decide to pull out, it's on them."

[ziggytrix]

I don't understand how this is the Bush administration's fault if the agreement has been negotiated by Bush and Kerry's campaigns, and they just need the debate commission to sign off on it.

Please explain.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

From what i had previously heard, there was a problem with the format, in that the Bush camp didn't want it to be "town hall" style, or whatever.

It states that the Bush camp isn't happy with the "side letter," which was supposed to be an alternative.....blah blah.....bottom line, one of our THREE generous debates may not happen, and Im a sad panda.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

HERE is a Miami Herald story on it.....

[KevinTheOmnivore]

So here's the good news: If the debate hapens, it'll be more like a simultaneous press conference.

[AChimp]

I was wondering what the hell this side letter was supposed to be until I read that Miami Herald article. So fucking gay... just stupid.

I doubt very many Americans watched the Canadian debate, but here's the procedure:

The leaders of the major parties all show up with a big binder full of stuff and stand at their podiums. Starting order is randomized, and some questions are directed specifically at certain candidates because of things they've said so far in the campaign. Once the question has been asked, it's a no holds barred free-for-all of yelling. Personal attacks are virtually non-existent. Usually two or three parties gang up on the others for certain issues, and it's entertaining to watch the alliances shift depending on the question. Then there's always usual the PM vs Everyone Else part that it inevitably slides into, during which time Everyone Else tells the PM that he's doing a shitty job and the PM says, "Well if you're so good, why aren't you all running the country? HAHAHA!"

When the moderator tells you to shut up, you all shut up and wait for the next question because the moderator is the Grand Poobah. Cameras are usually focused on a wide angle shot that encompasses two or three politicians.

What's the legal issue?

[KevinTheOmnivore]

We need a stronger, bi-partisan, publicly funded debates comission. The reason the debates are so fake is because the candidates could pull out.......THAT SHOULDN'T EVEN BE A MOTHER F'N OPTION. YOU WANNA BE OUR LEADER, YOU DEBATE....PERIOD. THAT'S RIGHT, ALL YOU "CONSTITUTIONALISTS," MAKE IT LAW, LET THE GOVERNMENT ENFORCE IT, TAX AND SPEND, TAX AND SPEND!!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!!

[AChimp]

You know what our "debates commission" is?

The CBC.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Yeah, I'd like to be the guy who proposes that NPR or PBS run the debates......

[AChimp]

Yeah, it would be horribly un-American if you couldn't fill the debates up with commercials to make up for the lack of content.

[Ant10708]

Originally Posted by AChimp

I was wondering what the hell this side letter was supposed to be until I read that Miami Herald article. So fucking gay... just stupid.

I doubt very many Americans watched the Canadian debate, but here's the procedure:

The leaders of the major parties all show up with a big binder full of stuff and stand at their podiums. Starting order is randomized, and some questions are directed specifically at certain candidates because of things they've said so far in the campaign. Once the question has been asked, it's a no holds barred free-for-all of yelling. Personal attacks are virtually non-existent. Usually two or three parties gang up on the others for certain issues, and it's entertaining to watch the alliances shift depending on the question. Then there's always usual the PM vs Everyone Else part that it inevitably slides into, during which time Everyone Else tells the PM that he's doing a shitty job and the PM says, "Well if you're so good, why aren't you all running the country? HAHAHA!"

When the moderator tells you to shut up, you all shut up and wait for the next question because the moderator is the Grand Poobah. Cameras are usually focused on a wide angle shot that encompasses two or three politicians.

What's the legal issue?

I don't think the Canadian debates were covered at all. We don't really care about the elections of other countries unless we are trying to run them. Your debates sound alot more entertaining and effective than ours. :/

[ranxer]

I've been saying for a long time that bush won't debate.. we might have a resemblance of a debate but that's all. I'll be shocked if we don't even get a resemblace of a debate.

If Kerry doesn't lay the blame on bush and crew it's more evidence to me that we don't have a two party system.

we used to have the League of Women Voters hosting debates every election up until Bush Vs. Gore when they formed a new debate 'commission' to do an end run around letting Nader(and Buchanon) in the dabate.. just pathetic. Actors only folks, no real people allowed in!

[mburbank]

The debates (if they happen) have indeed become a farce, BUT they are the closest thing we've got to reality. It's sad, it's paltry, but it's still just a little bit better than nothing.

I like the lead up, where each camp says their opponent is the best debater since Senecca. That's at least good for a laugh.