What is the point of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates? It's basically a bunch of mud-slinging and saying what the other guy did or didn't do in the past as opposed to what the candidate is going to do in the future when they're in the White House. Plus, the Vice Presidential debate was downright terrible. It had a terribly bias moderator and both candidates did nothing except look silly, get facts wrong, attack the other side’s Presidential candidate, and then claim a victory. I was thoroughly disappointed in the debates. After hearing the acceptance speeches of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates I was looking forward to some good debates with good, sound politics and explanations of policies and beliefs. Instead I got stuck with a terrible mud-slinging event that explained nothing other than that our political system has fallen into terrible disarray. Why can't America get to see a real debate? Are the candidates that scared that their policies are going to fail or that their policies will cause them to lose the election? It is ridiculous! The only good things that came out of the debates were some hilarious "Saturday Night Live" skits and some hilarious fact check articles that made both candidates look extremely stupid.
User login
Like This Site?
If you would like to see ProgressiveU continue to grow, why not donate?
Have You Seen This Yet?
Recent blog posts
- How to treat a woman
- Children plus Abortion?
- Stay Healthy
- Disrespecting Your Older Sibling is So in.
- Music Really Does Influence Our Lives, Life Changing Events, and Taylor Swift (Again)
- Broken Wings Can Fly High
- Keep the spirit alive -1
- Survey on Stereotypes
- Unmarked patrols
- Comics and Cartoons as a Source of Cultural History in the United States, Part 3
Navigation
Who's online
There are currently 3 users and 436 guests online.
Online users
- sergey
- ransom
- tangle
Progressive U Features
Poll
Do you agree with the decision to try suspects linked to 9/11 in New York?
Yes
29%
No
38%
Undecided
19%
No opinion
14%
Total votes: 21
Vote
I thought Gwen Ifill was the consummate professional? What did she do that you felt was biased? Even the Republican talking heads took back their bias claims the next day. What did you see?
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I think you made your life more difficult by expecting these candidates to issue intelligent remarks based on the actual problems that we're dealing with today. I've been following this campaign for a while now and didn't expect anything different. Both candidates on both sides seem to have a problem addressing issues that actually matter in a straight forward way. To make things worse, these debates were watched by millions of people across the country, which means that all the independent voters who can't make up their minds have only these examples to determine their decisions.
liberalife, that's very true. It would be nice if the debates actually had some meaning. I mean, why even bother having them when the candidates are just going to dodge questions and not address the issues. Plus, it didn't really make my life difficult, I was just hoping that at the worst they'd be like the Democratic and Republican debates during the primaries that at least addressed the issues a little. And Gwen Ifill is writing a book about how Obama is so great. Plus, the questions she asked favored Biden more than Palin. She never asked any questions about abortion or gun control(which is a topic Biden and Obama disagree on) and barely addressed energy, which is a key policy to the McCain/Palin ticket. I'd just rather see one of the rather monotone ABC guys up there rather than a bias moderator either way. However, I will give Ifill some credit for being fairly professional during it.
A.) That is not what her book is about. Her book is about African Americans in politics up through today. How do you write that book without including Obama? Should she end it with Jesse Jackson in the nineties? And she hasn't written the chapters on Obama yet. You can't know what er book is about until you've read it, which you haven't because it has not been published yet. Her colleagues and friends say they've known her for decades and have no idea what her political views are, because she is an ethical journalist.
You failed to answer my original question: What did you see her do in the debate that was biased toward one candidate or the other?
B.) a blogging tip: You can address each comment individually by clicking the reply button in the comment box. It makes your comments easier to read, maintains the flow of conversation, and allows you to get more points. It's a win for everyone involved!
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
First, thanks for the tip, very helpful.
Second, as I said in that last reply, I noticed, as did others, that she covered topics that favored Biden more than Palin. She barely touched on energy, which had been a major issue until the stock market came tumbling down and with it gas and oil prices. She never touched on abortion, gun control, and other issues that are important to the people. Essentially, as I said originally, it was a pointless debate that ate up a couple hours of primetime television.