We need debates operated by the Women's League of Voters!

[mysteryowl]

It used to be that way and we could get away from media lead debates.

[apcalc]

1. Excellent idea!

[LisaM]

2. +10,000

Among other things, they operated by actual debate rules.

[mysteryowl]

3. The DNC can make that happen!

[Nanjeanne]

4. THIS!

[blm]

5. ✔️

[George II]

6. Great idea. These have gotten out of hand. I've skipped two altogether....

....and turned off the last three during the first hour.

The moderators just can't control any of the candidates.

[octoberlib]

7. Yep. I've been complaining about that ever since they got rid of them.

[Grins]

42. Me too. It was a fraud as soon as they did that change and still is.

Bring them back. Media can attend, but - as reporters!

[spooky3]

8. The night Rachel was among the moderators, they were good, but the others

have not met that high standard.

[alwaysinasnit]

9. K&R

[earthside]

10. 75 second answers is stupid.

This format is designed to create a shouting match.

CBS and the DNC should be ashamed.

[mysteryowl]

18. It was poorly done.

[brooklynite]

41. What do you consider an acceptable block of time?

Which candidates would you delete and which questions would you not ask to compensate?

[xmas74]

11. Either them or moderated by a college debate

Instructor.

Debate is always hit and miss in college. Why not run all the debates at various universities in conjuction with their debate/forensics department, assisted by the League of Women Voters?

[mysteryowl]

12. I like it, let's have some of both.

[xmas74]

13. A debate coach will tell them to cut the mic

If they run over.

I was on a college debate team. It's brutal. They're sticklers for rules.

[mysteryowl]

14. And, universities have large arenas to hold it.

So, we can alternate, one debate by the League of Women Voters, and then the next run by a university professors.

[xmas74]

15. Imagine how incredible it would be.

A well moderated debate, sticking to the issues.

[mopinko]

40. that's a great idea. i have a trumpkin in my life who was a debate team champ

in hs and college. happened to catch the last debate w him, and he was impressed w warren. he's also a lawyer and admired her framing and questioning.

she would be great.

[TwilightZone]

16. They pulled out a long time ago because of the demands of the candidates.

And they didn't believe they were serving a useful purpose any longer.

"LWV President Nancy Neuman said that the debate format would "perpetrate a fraud on the American voter" and that the organization did not intend to "become an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Women_Voters#Activities

[Sparkly]

17. Excellent idea!!!

[brooklynite]

19. The LWV never moderated a Presidential debate...

they always used Network News correspondents

[relayerbob]

24. Incorrect

They did for a while from 1976 through around 1984, IIRC. Not long, but they were very well controlled

[MontanaMama]

20. Yes we do.

The debates this cycle are unwatchable, imho.

[mysteryowl]

21. It was embarrassing to see our leaders turned into this mess.

[relayerbob]

22. Agreed, and they also need to give more time for answers

as 1-1:30 minutes is not long enough for substance. They also should turn off mics for anyone who is not being called on to stop the screaming matches.

[hedda_foil]

23. It's League of Women Voters.

[pazzyanne]

25. Amen and strongly agree!

Have been a member of the League of Women Voters for 35 years. It is a strong nonpartisan organization that encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and advocacy. Have been inspired by what this group does to support healthy political action.

[dotism]

26. K&R

[Hoyt]

27. At this point, we need less desperate candidates on stage.

[dotism]

32. Indeed.

So much time was lost tonight on people who are obviously not serious contenders. I even blanked out at times, working on other things.

We need to tighten things up, yet I can't reconcile the issue. I believe Elizabeth Warren should be our next president wholeheartedly, yet Sanders has so much support that I can't deny his premicy. And we are on the same side of the fence, us progressives.

Amy Klobuchar is my favorite moderate, though things are bananas out there in the moderate wing of our party: they are fighting over scraps and for what?

Sigh. Our open-mindedness and compassion becomes our demon. Who wants to hate on Mayor Pete?

Yet there is an obvious choice who should stand for our party, and I am hoping we can coalesce around this sooner than later.

[Hekate]

28. Not just yes, but HELL YES!

[Mersky]

29. Yes.

Would be a substantive debate. Have turned to them for information ever since I started voting.

[Karadeniz]

30. Now you're talking! Thanks!❤

[Buzz cook]

31. Fewer debates and not as much TV time.

I doubt you'd get the networks to cover this many debates without exclusive content.

A presidential debate gets enough eyes for all the networks to cover them. Primary debates, no so much.

[SunSeeker]

33. Yes!

[Jim_S]

34. I agree totally and do you remember that during the republican debates of 2016

many of the questions directed to the candidates were framed so that they could comment on a so-called 'bad' Obama policy? Not so this time... I wonder why? Bring back the League of Women Voters, please. These are hard to watch.

[yaesu]

35. I agree 100%. nt

[redqueen]

36. Too bad - the parties insisted on being able to script questions.

The lwv refuse to host this Kabuki bullshit.

[yonder]

37. Agreed.

[redqueen]

38. League Refuses to "Help Perpetrate a Fraud"

10/3/1988
NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
October 3, 1988

LEAGUE REFUSES TO "HELP PERPETRATE A FRAUD"

WITHDRAWS SUPPORT FROM FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE

WASHINGTON, DC —"The League of Women Voters is withdrawing its sponsorship of the presidential debate scheduled for mid-October because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter," League President Nancy M. Neuman said today.

"It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and honest answers to tough questions," Neuman said. "The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."

Neuman said that the campaigns presented the League with their debate agreement on
September 28, two weeks before the scheduled debate. The campaigns' agreement was negotiated "behind closed doors" and vas presented to the League as "a done deal," she said, its 16 pages of conditions not subject to negotiation.

Most objectionable to the League, Neuman said, were conditions in the agreement that gave the campaigns unprecedented control over the proceedings. Neuman called "outrageous" the campaigns' demands that they control the selection of questioners, the composition of the audience, hall access for the press and other issues.
...
https://www.lwv.org/newsroom/press-releases/league-refuses-help-perpetrate-fraud

[mahina]

39. Wow. Unintended consequences so heavily for all these years later

And then and in between

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

43. Media-led anything seems to be crap

these days.

[mysteryowl]

44. Yes, we need to contact the DNC and voice our opinion about it.

I did so today.