<p>What a great idea!
No prepared remarks, no teleprompters, no canned questions.
Just mano-a-mano.
What a great way for THE PEOPLE to have input into this election process and for the candidates to really show who they are & their command of the issues.</p>
<p>I really look forward to these debates - hope Obama accepts the challenge.</p>
<p>I actually like pre-selected questions from the audience. It would avoid the spectacle of someone asking a three-minute question such as McCain experienced recently, or utterly trivial questions (“what’s your favorite brand of cereals” type). Overall, though, questions from the audience have proved more interesting than questions posed by moderators (especially those on the ABC debate).
I also think that an informal time limit should be imposed, so that the candidates have an equal opportunity to present their case and rebut each other if necessary. I want to hear candidates speak, not witness a verbal wrestling match.
Ten debates are too many. Sure, there is plenty to discuss, but it hobbles candidates’ ability to do other, equally important things.</p>
<p>marite - I agree with just about everything you posted - I don’t think the candidates going head-to-head once a week is too much tho’. What is more important than the citizens getting to see and compare the candidates as much as possible? I almost think they should be just about inseparable for the whole of the campaign - as equally matched as possible so that the best comparison can be made.</p>
<p>Barack needs to get off the teleprompter anyway, Give us the real deal - up close & personal. The next prez is going to have to be able to thnk on his feet - and I sure like the idea of “we the people” getting to see the candidates in such a straightforward setting - not overly canned or prepared. Let’s see how they really THINK!</p>
<p>Call me cynical, but I wouldn’t take this challenge if I were Obama because I think this is just McCain’s way to get free publicity because he doesn’t have Obama’s money. Twelve of these things??? Too many. I’d agree to two or three depending on how they are set up.</p>
<p>Having debates once a week would make it difficult for the candidates not only to campaign but also to travel abroad. That’s my main concern.</p>
<p>I heard Obama at the Compassion Forum which had the format I’m suggesting. He came across as sometimes halting and hesitating, which I understand irks some, but to me suggested he was actually thinking through the questions instead of using them as hooks on which to hang pre-planned mini-campaign speeches. That’s my take on his speaking style, but others may see it as not being fast on his feet. </p>
<p>I think it would be better to decide what are the important topics to debate (taxes, SS, health, Iraq, Iran, etc…) and then settle on the number of debates rather than picking a number arbitrarily.</p>
<p>marite - you hit on a good idea - if each of the debates stuck to a certain issue, then we could really get a complete picture of each candidate’s plan. Of course an hour (or whatever) might be too long to discuss any single topic, but it would make sense to discuss each issue completely instead of bouncing around from topic to topic. And I agree w/ you about the irrelevant questions (boxers or briefs). Hopefully the candidates would be able to provide some levity w/out undermining the seriousness of the debate.</p>
<p>Whether McCain is making this challenge because he has less $$ or not doesn’t matter; it’s a great idea, and having the candidates meet together on the same stage w/out canned speeches is the way to go. Besides, the amount of $$ a candidate has shouldn’t be the overriding basis on which the success of the campaign is predicated. There should be ample opportunity for the candidates to engage eachother w/out $$ giving one an overriding advantage - just mho.</p>
<p>I would love nothing more than a good old fashioned debate. I’m tired of these moderated, homogenized debates. Let’s find out which one will do the better job. I’m not so sold on one that I wouldn’t vote for the other.</p>