Debates. How good could it get?
Should there be debates between primary opponents in the area?
Why or why not? And what do you think would be the outcome?
posted by The Inside Dope @ 2/15/2006
13 comments
February 15, 2006
Why or why not? And what do you think would be the outcome?
About Me
- Name: The Inside Dope
- Location: NW Illinois, United States
Wise, all-knowing, omniscient, and a snappy dresser besides. Often misunderestimated.
Readers are strongly encouraged to send along any tid-bits, story ideas, event notices, links to articles, background info, or other stuff they feel may be of interest. Just contact me at the link below. It's a lot easier than throwing it through my window tied to a rock.
NOTE:
Due to the fact that the foolish and the disturbed will always be among us,
Your comments may not show up immediately.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You do not have a RIGHT to have your comments published here, they will appear at the editor's sole discretion.
Contact The Inside Dope
by clicking here
or send mail to theinsidedope@gmail.com
READER SUPPORTED
Change is Good
Please Help NOMRF Assist
New Orleans Musicians
Who Are Still Displaced
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Live video and extensive coverage of
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Click for "Illinoize". By Feed Digest
CURRENT TERROR
ALERT LEVEL
New Orleans Musicians
Who Are Still Displaced
Spies, Lies, and the Con Man Who Caused a War
Recommended for wingnuts still wallowing in Bush propaganda
about the phoney intel they used to drive us to war.
Confessions of a Republican Operative
My Secret Life of (Republican) Scandal, Corruption,
Hypocrisy and Dirty Attacks That
Decide Who Gets Elected (and Who Doesn't)
Reclaiming Faith and Politics after the Religious Right
A Citizen's Guide to Faith and Politics
Reviving Faith & Politics in a Post-Religious Right America
--->
Previous Posts
- Happy Valentine's Day
- Cheney's Got A Gun
- One year down the road
- Rumler gains two endorsements
- The case of the senator and the masseuse / researcher
- They'll say anything
- Cheney tires of animals, bags "ultimate prey"
- Lying Liars
- Early voting measure is now reality n Illinois
- Son of Roman Pucinski found dead
The Illinois Channel
Live video and extensive coverage of
all aspects of Illinois government
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sites You Should Know
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
ILLINOIZE
Illinois blog feed
Click for "Illinoize". By Feed Digest
ALERT LEVEL
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.
13 Comments:
According to the debate guidelines a challenger has to have 17% of the vote to be a viable canidate and Rumler doesn't have that amount. I don't know what percent Huff has so far.
According to WHOSE debate guidelines???
Is there some sort of international debate rules committee with their own police force or something?
Where'd you pull out that stuff?
Any candidates can debate any time they want under any rules they want.
Rumler apparently has agreed to debates. Are you saying that Jacobs is hiding behind some weird "guidelines" as an excuse not to debate??!!!
Seriously, where do those "guidelines" come from?
I say its time to put up or shut up. Get em ole two boys in the ring and have em duke(debate) it out.
Imagine all of the posts after a rumler/jacobs debate. wow this would be good stuff.
I wish I had the capability to run a live chat type of thing, it would be great to be able to submit questions and have a debate live, on-line where an audience could watch.
The participants could even take selected questions from the viewers.
Hope things along those lines are common someday.
I'd like to do interviews with local pols using that technology as well. I know it's possible, just not sure how to go about it.
I think a classic political debate between Rumler and Jacobs would be enlightening, as would a debate between any of the contenders.
Getting a local station to step up to the plate and offer to produce a debate? That could be done.
Getting Jacobs to agree to actually debate someone on the issues? Not so sure. Even if he would agree to, his handlers would probably forbid it.
Like any good defense lawyer, you never let your client testify in his own defense, especially not young Mr. Jacobs.
The problem with a chat debate is that we wouldn't know who anybody was since it is all anon. Even the moderator. We could have Jacobs being Jacobs and his Mother being Rumler. What a novel idea.
That's true and could be a problem. I suppose something would have to be devised to ensure that the candidates themselves were providing the answers.
As to knowing who the moderator was, what the hell difference would it make? The questions asked would be seen by all. Why would who was asking them make any difference?
If I were the moderator, I think people pretty much know my views by now. They'd simply have to trust that I'd conduct the debate fairly, which I would.
After all, there would be rules to ensure fairness, and each candidate would have the opportunity to answer the same questions.
It's possible to construct questions which are leading or more damaging to one candidate than the other, but I'd have to try to avoid that, and in the end, the viewers would have to be the judge as to whether the questions were fair and how the candidates did in reponding.
But it's likely a moot point anyway, as I don't see Jacobs agreeing to a debate of any sort, anywhere, anytime, for obvious reasons.
Yes the League of women’s voter has said that if a candidate does not have 17% of the vote then they are not deemed worthy of a debate. This was put into effect after the Admiral Stockdale debate. They are trying to protect the fringe candidates from embarrassing themselves and the voters.
I'd urge you not to make the mistake of confusing a debate between local primary candidates with a presidential debate.
Don't be silly.
The LWV aren't going to be sponsoring any debates around here.
Nice try at a dodge though, and thanks for your honesty.
After all of this only two people are calling for debates. I don't even think Rumler is one of them. In the paper you could tell that he was being called on the carpet. He didn't call the paper and demand a debate. The paper called him and asked him if he wantedd to debate. Go back and look. They didn't even have a quote to use from him.
No they are not going to be sponsoring any debates around here because one canidate doesn't have 17% of the vote.
Again, this BS that you continue to hold on to is ridiculous on it's face. How can a challenger for office have 17% of the vote?
And obviously, having never gotten a public vote in his life, Jacobs doesn't qualify under that standard either.
Your entire argumment is a joke.
And I don't know if you can read or not, but as I've said, this is not a presidential debate and the "guidelines" of the League of Women voters has NOTHING to do with any possible debates between the candidates.
Let the great debate begin!!
You're right about that, so far, both candidates have exactly zero percent of the votes. It's neck and neck. You guys are ridiculous.
Mikey would never debate because he's clearly overmatched. Rumler has experience in congress as well as at the state level, and he had grades that Mike never even sniffed. Mike would blow his top and threaten to beat everyone up, and then he'd be the laughingstock.
Or if Rumler brought up any embarassing facts, Jacobs might threaten to sue. How great would that be??
Post a Comment
<< Home