Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A group of low polling candidates could host their own debate and distribute it to many sites. If they can't get an hour on some cable news channel, it's time to go home and get other jobs.
Main debate stage is probably going to be US Senators and former governors like the Republican primary debate last presidental election. House members and outside figures will be the 2nd stage. Trump, Carson, and Fiorina are the anomaly though. Very rare.
Klobuchar, Harris, Booker, Warren, (Brown?), (Biden?) will definitely be on the biggest stage.
When there are 10 or more candidates onstage, all fighting for as many minutes of face-time they can get, a debate turns into nothing but a mess. One or two hog the debate, while the others struggle trying to get a word in. If a candidate is rude, he takes the debate, but if he follows the rules of civility, we never really get to know what he thinks or what his positions are.
The debates should be informative. Too many at once on stage doesn't really give the voters very much info to use when voting.
I think debates should never have more than 3 at the most in them, and if there are a lot of candidates who have enough support to debate, a round robin set of debates should be done, where each debate is limited to 2 or 3 people, but each can go head to head with another in another round.
That would create many more debates than we've ever had in the past, but it would allow the candidates the best way to present themselves and their positions in comparison to all the others.
When there are 10 or more candidates onstage, all fighting for as many minutes of face-time they can get, a debate turns into nothing but a mess. One or two hog the debate, while the others struggle trying to get a word in. If a candidate is rude, he takes the debate, but if he follows the rules of civility, we never really get to know what he thinks or what his positions are.
The debates should be informative. Too many at once on stage doesn't really give the voters very much info to use when voting.
I think debates should never have more than 3 at the most in them, and if there are a lot of candidates who have enough support to debate, a round robin set of debates should be done, where each debate is limited to 2 or 3 people, but each can go head to head with another in another round.
That would create many more debates than we've ever had in the past, but it would allow the candidates the best way to present themselves and their positions in comparison to all the others.
I mean only would be at most 4 Candidates. Rarely more than 4 Candidates on 48 or more ballots. Think it make the Election be more fair.
The first two debates of the 2020 presidential campaign will take place in June and July. dnc chair perez has already discussed how the primary dem presidential debates wil proceed:
Each debate will take place over the course of two consecutive nights in order to include up to 20 candidates. The lineup for each night would be selected at random by the DNC.
The first two debates of the 2020 presidential campaign will take place in June and July. dnc chair perez has already discussed how the primary dem presidential debates wil proceed:
Each debate will take place over the course of two consecutive nights in order to include up to 20 candidates. The lineup for each night would be selected at random by the DNC.
The DNC never does anything at random. It's all calculated depending on what outcome they want to see.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.