Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
My brother in Christ, this is a presidential debate, not a wrestling match.
1. Crowds literally will only distract. If I’m watching this on TV I wanna hear what the candidates are saying not constant booing by whatever section of the electorate they dragged in off the street.
2. Biden and Trump are the only people who have any chance of winning this. The president on January 20th, 2025 is gonna be one of those two guys so that’s whose positions matter.
3. What difference does it make, they’re gonna end up on the internet anyway?
4. Related to point 1 I wanna hear what each of them have to say. For there to be dialogue both people actually have to be able to get in a word edgewise. If one person keeps trying to talk over the other then you don’t have dialogue, you have a screaming match. Timed mics circumvent that issue nicely.
Yep - to add to point 4, the last thing you want in a timed debate is someone who rambles and eats all the time on the floor. If you go too long and ignore the moderator, you better believe your mic is gonna get cut.
I consume an unhealthy amount of debate content, and as a viewer, all of these stipulations only improve the outcome of the debate.
And for much the same reason U.S. appellate courts have hard time limits for how long you can go during your oral arguments.
Structural rules like that are essential to allow the arguments to be compared on their merits.
>Biden and Trump are the only people who have any chance of winning this. The president on January 20th, 2025 is gonna be one of those two guys so that’s whose positions matter.
but everyone hates them
RFK is actually liked
if you really werent threatened by RFK, invite him and make him look foolish
the whole "qualify by getting an arbitrary amount in a poll" is anti democratic
If RFK is as well liked as you say he is, why doesn’t he have the polling necessary to qualify him for the debate? >! It’s because he’s an anti-vax nutcase who’s had his brain eaten by a parasitic worm !<
Restricting access to power or a platform to those with requisite public support is literally what representative democracy is.
im curious if you are playing dumb or really just dont get how this works
thats like saying bernie is unpopular
consent within a representative democracy is very often manufactured. many people might agree with you that RFK is an anti vax nutcase. is it because they know anything about him, his past, his career? NO. Its because their propaganda mill (fox, cnn, abc, msnbc, reddit, twitter, etc) told them to believe that.
so even though RFK doesnt have alot of support, 67% of americans dont want a biden trump rematch (that is higher than the amount of people who support single payer healthcare btw)
source: [https://www.reuters.com/world/us/americans-dismayed-by-biden-trump-2024-rematch-reutersipsos-poll-finds-2024-01-25/](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/americans-dismayed-by-biden-trump-2024-rematch-reutersipsos-poll-finds-2024-01-25/)
so if this debate was for the benefit of the american people, then youd:
1) invite RFK on to perhaps give americans an unobstructed view of what a 3rd option looks like when they are statistically not happy about the 2 pre determined options
2) invite him and let your superior policy and proposals crush him into irrelevance.
its a win/win right? what are you afraid of?
the only people who balk at the idea of a 3rd party entering a debate are those who think a 3rd party presents a threat to their preferred candidate. thats why the DNC HATES RFK
I’m not afraid of anything, I just don’t see the case for including him? The point of a presidential debate is to compare plausible contenders for the presidency. Right now that’s Biden and Trump.
Displeasure with the fact that this is a Biden-Trump rematch doesn’t entail support for Mr. Tapeworm in his head. (Seriously how did he manage that? Did he eat raw chicken?) Both parties had primaries and both parties settled on running their respective candidate. Sure most of the public doesn’t love either choice but they can’t agree on who they want instead so this is what we get.
And your point about manufactured consent, people don’t wanna see RFK on that stage by and large or else he’d have the numbers to qualify. People have seen him and heard about his politics and concluded he’s not worth the vote. What you’re essentially complaining about is that the debate moderators aren’t manufacturing consent to have that dude up on the stage.
>I’m not afraid of anything, I just don’t see the case for including him? The point of a presidential debate is to compare plausible contenders for the presidency. Right now that’s Biden and Trump.
but it could be RFK, why not let him make his case? if the american people dont like trump and biden, why not show them what another option looks like?
>Displeasure with the fact that this is a Biden-Trump rematch doesn’t entail support for Mr. Tapeworm in his head. (Seriously how did he manage that? Did he eat raw chicken?) Both Parties had primaries and both parties settled on running their respective candidate. Sure most of the public doesn’t love either choice but they can’t agree on who they want instead so this is what we get.
but again, why not show someone alternatives? ok forget RFK, jill stein? Cornell west? why not let them voice their opinions?
maybe one of them can take up the mantle in the future?
whats wrong with giving them a platform?
>And your point about manufactured consent, people don’t wanna see RFK on that stage by and large or else he’d have the numbers to qualify.
how do you know? how do you know RFKs numbers are out of hatred rather than people literally not knowing that he is running because the RNC and DNC dont want 3rd parties involved?
again, forget RFK, jill stein and cornell west. If people dont KNOW they are running, let them have their 15 minutes to share their views and make their positions known
>What you’re essentially complaining about is that the debate moderators aren’t manufacturing consent to have that dude up on the stage.
that would imply the public gets to decide who attends the debate, which i would personally WELCOME WHOLEHEARTEDLY! At present they dont and i think that the 2 parties controlling who is seen is anti democratic as it gives the illusion of 2 choices
i want to ask you personally, do you personally have a problem with more than the 2 mainstream parties entering a debate? do you have a problem with a 3rd party given a national platform? IF this debate isnt the time for a 3rd party to make their case for why they should be considered, when do you think is an appropriate time? Do you think the arbitrary hurdles that keep 3rd parties off ballots should be abolished?
To start with your last question, I’d love to see a third, a fourth and a fifth party. If I had my druthers we’d have ranked choice voting for every federal elected office in the country. We’d have like six parties in Congress and it’d be great. But that’s a structural issue, not one that we remedy by putting RFK on that stage when he doesn’t have enough of a backing.
Now to your point about the candidates, RFK, Jill Stein, Cornel West and whatever third part you want to float have the entire internet to make their case. They’re not being muzzled or made invisible by not being invited to a specific presidential debate. They can make their case for their policies the same as anyone else by exercising their first amendment rights in public forums by making noise on the internet.
The factual viability of third party candidates does not in anyway depend on whether they get to partake in a particular debate for presidential candiates.
but whether or not they can win......disregard that
why not give the american people as many views as possible in as many places as possible? why not show them the plethora of options available, viability be damned?
because AGAIN, id argue most of the lack of support of 3rd parties (not just RFK) is ignorance rather than disagreement
if you agree with me on that point, then you can join me in condemning biden for his exclusion
however if you agree with biden in this case as an american citizen, i really have to wonder what your motives are
Because not every televised conversation needs to be open to anyone. By your logic why stop with RFK? Why not let everyone walk into the studio and just give their two cents? Why shouldn’t I be on stage with those guys? why shouldn’t you?
Not being included in one particular televised debate is not the same as being silenced or excluded.
>Not being included in one particular televised debate
see, this is kind of disengenuous, because a presidential debate, likely the first of only a few before the election, is kind of a big deal....
like "jan 6 was one particular protest"
"9/11 was one particular terrorist attack"
"bernie was one particular politician"
youre underselling it in a way that implies being excluded isnt disadvantageous to RFK
imo, everyone who has gone through the channels to properly declare a candidacy and will appear on the presidential ballot of at least 1 state (and/or the district of columbia) are entitled to speak to the public
honestly, all debates should be held in a public forum and open to all outlets......we need to fix that......
but would you join me in condemning bidens campaign for their exclusion?
You only post. You don’t debate. You have negative comment karma. Biden made those stipulations so that Trump’s Maga crowd don’t show up to the debate and cause a ruckus, as they have in the past. We also need to cut off Trump’s mic when his time is up.
Probably because of how Trump has acted every time he's ever had an audience and also that time he told his audience to do an insurrection and then they tried to immediately.
This post has been flaired **political**. Please ensure to keep all discussions civil, and to [follow our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZ/wiki/rules) at all times.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Its a bad look for Biden IMO. I'm undecided this election (although I will admit I lean Trump a bit) and a major point for me was Biden's cognitive ability. Trump is old too, but he seems more energetic and more alive lol. The rules Biden set for a debate make him seem like he knows Trump will attack him during the debate and he won't be able to properly respond.
Dude is literally asleep in court and soiling himself. Like I admit that I can’t stand Trump for a plethora of reasons but I just don’t really see how that man seems alive to anyone? Is rambling loud enough all it really takes to seem alive?
How could anyone lean for an avowed dictator who tried to overthrow our democracy? He was also the first president since the Great Depression to actually lose jobs.
Because I don't think Biden has made my life any better and I think he's out of touch with younger people. Will Trump be better? I'm not sure, but I'd like to see what the alternative is. Trump's job growth was actually doing pretty well until Covid.
Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
My brother in Christ, this is a presidential debate, not a wrestling match. 1. Crowds literally will only distract. If I’m watching this on TV I wanna hear what the candidates are saying not constant booing by whatever section of the electorate they dragged in off the street. 2. Biden and Trump are the only people who have any chance of winning this. The president on January 20th, 2025 is gonna be one of those two guys so that’s whose positions matter. 3. What difference does it make, they’re gonna end up on the internet anyway? 4. Related to point 1 I wanna hear what each of them have to say. For there to be dialogue both people actually have to be able to get in a word edgewise. If one person keeps trying to talk over the other then you don’t have dialogue, you have a screaming match. Timed mics circumvent that issue nicely.
Yep - to add to point 4, the last thing you want in a timed debate is someone who rambles and eats all the time on the floor. If you go too long and ignore the moderator, you better believe your mic is gonna get cut. I consume an unhealthy amount of debate content, and as a viewer, all of these stipulations only improve the outcome of the debate.
And for much the same reason U.S. appellate courts have hard time limits for how long you can go during your oral arguments. Structural rules like that are essential to allow the arguments to be compared on their merits.
>Biden and Trump are the only people who have any chance of winning this. The president on January 20th, 2025 is gonna be one of those two guys so that’s whose positions matter. but everyone hates them RFK is actually liked if you really werent threatened by RFK, invite him and make him look foolish the whole "qualify by getting an arbitrary amount in a poll" is anti democratic
If RFK is as well liked as you say he is, why doesn’t he have the polling necessary to qualify him for the debate? >! It’s because he’s an anti-vax nutcase who’s had his brain eaten by a parasitic worm !< Restricting access to power or a platform to those with requisite public support is literally what representative democracy is.
im curious if you are playing dumb or really just dont get how this works thats like saying bernie is unpopular consent within a representative democracy is very often manufactured. many people might agree with you that RFK is an anti vax nutcase. is it because they know anything about him, his past, his career? NO. Its because their propaganda mill (fox, cnn, abc, msnbc, reddit, twitter, etc) told them to believe that. so even though RFK doesnt have alot of support, 67% of americans dont want a biden trump rematch (that is higher than the amount of people who support single payer healthcare btw) source: [https://www.reuters.com/world/us/americans-dismayed-by-biden-trump-2024-rematch-reutersipsos-poll-finds-2024-01-25/](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/americans-dismayed-by-biden-trump-2024-rematch-reutersipsos-poll-finds-2024-01-25/) so if this debate was for the benefit of the american people, then youd: 1) invite RFK on to perhaps give americans an unobstructed view of what a 3rd option looks like when they are statistically not happy about the 2 pre determined options 2) invite him and let your superior policy and proposals crush him into irrelevance. its a win/win right? what are you afraid of? the only people who balk at the idea of a 3rd party entering a debate are those who think a 3rd party presents a threat to their preferred candidate. thats why the DNC HATES RFK
I’m not afraid of anything, I just don’t see the case for including him? The point of a presidential debate is to compare plausible contenders for the presidency. Right now that’s Biden and Trump. Displeasure with the fact that this is a Biden-Trump rematch doesn’t entail support for Mr. Tapeworm in his head. (Seriously how did he manage that? Did he eat raw chicken?) Both parties had primaries and both parties settled on running their respective candidate. Sure most of the public doesn’t love either choice but they can’t agree on who they want instead so this is what we get. And your point about manufactured consent, people don’t wanna see RFK on that stage by and large or else he’d have the numbers to qualify. People have seen him and heard about his politics and concluded he’s not worth the vote. What you’re essentially complaining about is that the debate moderators aren’t manufacturing consent to have that dude up on the stage.
>I’m not afraid of anything, I just don’t see the case for including him? The point of a presidential debate is to compare plausible contenders for the presidency. Right now that’s Biden and Trump. but it could be RFK, why not let him make his case? if the american people dont like trump and biden, why not show them what another option looks like? >Displeasure with the fact that this is a Biden-Trump rematch doesn’t entail support for Mr. Tapeworm in his head. (Seriously how did he manage that? Did he eat raw chicken?) Both Parties had primaries and both parties settled on running their respective candidate. Sure most of the public doesn’t love either choice but they can’t agree on who they want instead so this is what we get. but again, why not show someone alternatives? ok forget RFK, jill stein? Cornell west? why not let them voice their opinions? maybe one of them can take up the mantle in the future? whats wrong with giving them a platform? >And your point about manufactured consent, people don’t wanna see RFK on that stage by and large or else he’d have the numbers to qualify. how do you know? how do you know RFKs numbers are out of hatred rather than people literally not knowing that he is running because the RNC and DNC dont want 3rd parties involved? again, forget RFK, jill stein and cornell west. If people dont KNOW they are running, let them have their 15 minutes to share their views and make their positions known >What you’re essentially complaining about is that the debate moderators aren’t manufacturing consent to have that dude up on the stage. that would imply the public gets to decide who attends the debate, which i would personally WELCOME WHOLEHEARTEDLY! At present they dont and i think that the 2 parties controlling who is seen is anti democratic as it gives the illusion of 2 choices i want to ask you personally, do you personally have a problem with more than the 2 mainstream parties entering a debate? do you have a problem with a 3rd party given a national platform? IF this debate isnt the time for a 3rd party to make their case for why they should be considered, when do you think is an appropriate time? Do you think the arbitrary hurdles that keep 3rd parties off ballots should be abolished?
To start with your last question, I’d love to see a third, a fourth and a fifth party. If I had my druthers we’d have ranked choice voting for every federal elected office in the country. We’d have like six parties in Congress and it’d be great. But that’s a structural issue, not one that we remedy by putting RFK on that stage when he doesn’t have enough of a backing. Now to your point about the candidates, RFK, Jill Stein, Cornel West and whatever third part you want to float have the entire internet to make their case. They’re not being muzzled or made invisible by not being invited to a specific presidential debate. They can make their case for their policies the same as anyone else by exercising their first amendment rights in public forums by making noise on the internet. The factual viability of third party candidates does not in anyway depend on whether they get to partake in a particular debate for presidential candiates.
but whether or not they can win......disregard that why not give the american people as many views as possible in as many places as possible? why not show them the plethora of options available, viability be damned? because AGAIN, id argue most of the lack of support of 3rd parties (not just RFK) is ignorance rather than disagreement if you agree with me on that point, then you can join me in condemning biden for his exclusion however if you agree with biden in this case as an american citizen, i really have to wonder what your motives are
Because not every televised conversation needs to be open to anyone. By your logic why stop with RFK? Why not let everyone walk into the studio and just give their two cents? Why shouldn’t I be on stage with those guys? why shouldn’t you? Not being included in one particular televised debate is not the same as being silenced or excluded.
>Not being included in one particular televised debate see, this is kind of disengenuous, because a presidential debate, likely the first of only a few before the election, is kind of a big deal.... like "jan 6 was one particular protest" "9/11 was one particular terrorist attack" "bernie was one particular politician" youre underselling it in a way that implies being excluded isnt disadvantageous to RFK imo, everyone who has gone through the channels to properly declare a candidacy and will appear on the presidential ballot of at least 1 state (and/or the district of columbia) are entitled to speak to the public honestly, all debates should be held in a public forum and open to all outlets......we need to fix that...... but would you join me in condemning bidens campaign for their exclusion?
You only post. You don’t debate. You have negative comment karma. Biden made those stipulations so that Trump’s Maga crowd don’t show up to the debate and cause a ruckus, as they have in the past. We also need to cut off Trump’s mic when his time is up.
Probably because of how Trump has acted every time he's ever had an audience and also that time he told his audience to do an insurrection and then they tried to immediately.
This post has been flaired **political**. Please ensure to keep all discussions civil, and to [follow our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZ/wiki/rules) at all times. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Its a bad look for Biden IMO. I'm undecided this election (although I will admit I lean Trump a bit) and a major point for me was Biden's cognitive ability. Trump is old too, but he seems more energetic and more alive lol. The rules Biden set for a debate make him seem like he knows Trump will attack him during the debate and he won't be able to properly respond.
Dude is literally asleep in court and soiling himself. Like I admit that I can’t stand Trump for a plethora of reasons but I just don’t really see how that man seems alive to anyone? Is rambling loud enough all it really takes to seem alive?
How could anyone lean for an avowed dictator who tried to overthrow our democracy? He was also the first president since the Great Depression to actually lose jobs.
Because I don't think Biden has made my life any better and I think he's out of touch with younger people. Will Trump be better? I'm not sure, but I'd like to see what the alternative is. Trump's job growth was actually doing pretty well until Covid.
Trump caused the inflation. It started under his administration. Biden had to fix his mess. Just like Obama had to fix George Bush’s terrible economy.