Official Presidential Debate thread 10/16

[Ridge]

Both candidates pretending to answer the question for 11 seconds, then using the last 1:49 to talk about something unrelated that the other guy did, got pretty old, pretty quick.

Can't argue with that.

[tmleadr03]

Can't argue with that.

Foreign policy debate will be interesting for one reason. I want to see who makes up what to try to differentiate themselves from the other.

Otherwise it is going to be like McCain and Obama debate on the economy. "I agree with him on that".

[J]

I would personally prefer a 3-5 question debate wherein candidates are required to show their work. A Bipartisan set of examples:

1. Obama says that gas prices were artificially low, and that was a contributing factor the the economic collapse. I have never seen any evidence to that point.... show your work in 10 minutes or less as to how the gas prices were a factor to the collapse and how either a) your policies WILL (not maybe) reduce them or B) how the value they are at now is the permanent stable value it needs to be!

2. Romney says that Obama policies have actually reduced/hindered domestic natural gas production. Most things I have seen suggest otherwise (one of the few things I believe he has done OK). Show your work in 10 minutes or less on how his polices have reduced natural gas output and how your polices can increase it!

Perhaps that's just the enginerd in me... but does anyone else agree? Show your work, make me understand how you will do it! Then I believe. I have to imagine there are others like me who are not blind faith voters (though the 2008 election might suggest otherwise).

[Rucker61]

I would personally prefer a 3-5 question debate wherein candidates are required to show their work. A Bipartisan set of examples:

1. Obama says that gas prices were artificially low, and that was a contributing factor the the economic collapse. I have never seen any evidence to that point.... show your work in 10 minutes or less as to how the gas prices were a factor to the collapse and how either a) your policies WILL (not maybe) reduce them or B) how the value they are at now is the permanent stable value it needs to be!

2. Romney says that Obama policies have actually reduced/hindered domestic natural gas production. Most things I have seen suggest otherwise (one of the few things I believe he has done OK). Show your work in 10 minutes or less on how his polices have reduced natural gas output and how your polices can increase it!

Perhaps that's just the enginerd in me... but does anyone else agree? Show your work, make me understand how you will do it! Then I believe. I have to imagine there are others like me who are not blind faith voters (though the 2008 election might suggest otherwise).

I'm as data-driven as you are, and this would be a great format. Will it be open book? Can they use calculators? I think McCain is the only recent candidate who would be capable of using a slide-rule

[ChunkyMonkey]

Facts? Records? That would be the extinction of politicians.

[Rucker61]

Facts? Records? That would be the extinction of politicians.

The goal isn't to be correct; it's to be elected.

[tmleadr03]

I would personally prefer a 3-5 question debate wherein candidates are required to show their work. A Bipartisan set of examples:

1. Obama says that gas prices were artificially low, and that was a contributing factor the the economic collapse. I have never seen any evidence to that point.... show your work in 10 minutes or less as to how the gas prices were a factor to the collapse and how either a) your policies WILL (not maybe) reduce them or B) how the value they are at now is the permanent stable value it needs to be!

2. Romney says that Obama policies have actually reduced/hindered domestic natural gas production. Most things I have seen suggest otherwise (one of the few things I believe he has done OK). Show your work in 10 minutes or less on how his polices have reduced natural gas output and how your polices can increase it!

Perhaps that's just the enginerd in me... but does anyone else agree? Show your work, make me understand how you will do it! Then I believe. I have to imagine there are others like me who are not blind faith voters (though the 2008 election might suggest otherwise).

If they get to use Google I want to see the screen they are seeing.

[Ridge]

Jesus this wind. Must be the low pressure system of hot air coming out of NY.

[Irving]

Show your work, make me understand how you will do it! Then I believe. I have to imagine there are others like me who are not blind faith voters (though the 2008 election might suggest otherwise).

This is the most important thing that you've said. How can you realistically tell a nation that there is a lot of hard work to be done, and everyone needs to do their part, if you don't bother to explain what you are talking about and get everyone onto the same page? You want to convince a voter that your idea is the best one? Make sure you at least try and explain it enough that the voter can grasp the general idea. Heck, they don't even have to be able to explain it to their buddy the next day, just understand it as it is spoken to them. There is no point in preaching about banding together to tackle challenges if no one even knows what step number one is. Just throwing money at a candidate isn't banding together, and it isn't hard work.

[Goodburbon]

Its windy as all getout up here.

Was very annoying to watch the debate. It was honestly " who can ramble on about their grandparents without answering the question, then insist on exceeding the 2 min limit because what they have to say isimportant...the best?"