Is debate performance relevant to democracy?
Yes
Side Score: 10
|
 |
No
Side Score: 19
|
|
|
|
|
See, I would have thought this was a no brainer, for several reasons. All those skills are relevant to the ability to lead. And the direct debate clash allows real time comparison of how two different candidates handle themselves. Ironically though another member of this site posted that you're ignorant if you base your decision on whom to vote for based on debate performance. And of course this person banned some or all from responding - maybe so his own debate performance can't be fully assessed. Wait, isn't this a debate website? Since when do we diminish the importance of debate ON A DEBATE WEBSITE? And finally, if that CreateDebate member's candidate had been considered the dominant winner in the debate then heck yeah they would be all gun ho about the value and importance of debate performance. If anything, creating a debate to say it didn't matter is a direct admission the candidate lost big time. Side: Yes
Dominant winner in a debate has nothing to do with the election of a president. That is what you so wish was the deciding factor but it isn't. If Hillary won the debate then why isn't the MSM and Democrats talking about Hillary's accomplishments ? Instead all the MSM can do is drag out a porn star criminal to the Hillary camp. No doubt Bill is going to enjoy banging that while Hillary is on the campaign trail. Side: No
1
point
1
point
Yes, debate performance is relevant to the institution of Democracy. To be more specific, it is a by-product of the democratic process. Of which, the debates per se are an integral part. Anybody who doubts this only need look at countries where they heave Totalitarian regimes running the show. Ya see any presidential debates happening there? LOL...nope. Not a lick. Debates serve as a sort of winnowing process. A forum from which the voter can--allegedly--obtain a keener grasp of the candidates' personal stances on the relevant issues. Sadly, as we saw in the recent debate between Hillary Dillary Dock and the Trumpster, those days are gone. Nowadays it's all soundbites and "gotchas" and "No I didn't say thats!" This fact is proven by the stat that shows that a full 72% of BOTH candidate's speaking time in that last debate was spent on defending themselves from accusations from their opponent. This is NOT how it is supposed to work, folks. And it makes the debate process seem less integral and useful in the democratic process. But still, we DO need them, I think. And they are part of the Democratic system. Which, for all it's flaws, is still the best form of government in the world. SS Side: Yes
|
3
points
No, well not necessarily. Debating skills need a quick mind,intelligence and a fighting spirit. These attributes are all useful but just as effective can be a calm disposition, mild and persuasive manners and an inclusive mindset. How often have we heard, ''he/she'' is a born leader? There are those, very few people who have some congenital characteristics which seem to naturally put them in a position where they're looked up to and accepted as a leader. I think Franklin Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower had these inherent qualities and expert debating skills did not form any part of their natural ''air of authority''. Figures from history who ''got things done'' included the aforementioned as well as General MacArthur, General Patton, Winston Churchill not to mention Genghis Khan ( whose debates tended to be somewhat one sided) and Angela Merkel. A popular European cartoon is to show a caricature of Angela Merkel in her usual ''mouth shut'' silent pose, with the caption, ''ve have vays of making you tock''. Merkel, woman of few words, very few words, yet under her leadership Germany has become the powerhouse of Europe and the third largest exporter in the world. So, I am of the opinion that too much importance is given to debating ability, ( that suits the media ratings which is good for increasing their advertising revenue ) and not enough attention to other character qualities such as honesty, integrity and fairness to mention but a few. Being a good debater reminds me of a variation on the old adage;- get the name of being an early riser and you can lie in bed until lunchtime. Impress the simple minded by giving a sparkling debate and, instead of attending to the ''business of the day'' you go to sleep, just like Obama,ZZZZZZZzzzzzzz. Side: No
4
points
Actually, no. Unlike you I say what I mean and mean what I say. Talkers never impressed me. Those who like the sound of their own voice are usually more interested in how they speak, rather than what they say. As part of a host of other personal attributes debating skills can be an asset, particularly in the world of politics, but as a desirable character trait it comes well down the priority list when leading the most powerful nation on earth. My honest opinion of the two candidates is that it's good only one of them can win. The difference is, Clinton, as Obama's sidekick has had 8 years to improve the lot of the American people, but she and her Democrat cohorts have failed miserably. All the smooth rhetoric and ''debating skills'' won't make her nor her ideologies the best choice for the American people, neither now or in the future. My only genuine interest is to see the United States regain it's former glory as the free world needs a strong America with a strong leader like John F. Kennedy. It's disappointing that out of a population of well over 300 million these two are the best that can be presented for election of President. Side: No
You should know everything about the person based on their party affiliation since everything in the party doctrine is a number 1 priority and will be handled exactly as expected for the affiliated party. There are only 2 types of people in the country: Democrats and Republicans. -FromWithin Side: No
Ha ha ha ha. First, thanks for pasting in on behalf of FromWithin. "You should know everything about the person based on their party affiliation" - The population in this country which is independent outnumbers either political party's own total. Need I paste in the Pew data for the 10th time? "since everything in the party doctrine is a number 1 priority and will be handled exactly as expected for the affiliated party." - I see. So is that why you have Republicans you disagree with so strongly you try to smear them as RINOs and kick them to the curb? Parties are not The Borg with one mandatory mindset for all. Many people deviate. "There are only 2 types of people in the country: Democrats and Republicans." - See my first point above. Then also consider there are communists, fascists, Green Party, Libertarian Party, and on and on. How do you sleep at night, FromWithin? It is literally impossible that you could believe some of the easily destroyed positions you trot out on this site. Side: Yes
Disclaimer: Still as FromWithin. The population in this country which is independent outnumbers either political party's own total. Need I paste in the Pew data for the 10th time? That is just a lie perpetuated by the liberal media. Pew is just a liberal tool. I see. So is that why you have Republicans you disagree with so strongly you try to smear them as RINOs and kick them to the curb? Parties are not The Borg with one mandatory mindset for all. Many people deviate. Well, they still at least recognize that human life is important even if it hasn't traveled through the birth canal. You sick Democrats want no fault abortion. The RINOs may spend, but they still stop the inhumanity of abortion. See my first point above. Then also consider there are communists, fascists, Green Party, Libertarian Party, and on and on. There the baby killers, and the Republicans. All you murderers vote Democrat. How do you sleep at night, FromWithin? I didn't vote for these baby killers. I am not responsible for the inhumanity of the Democrats. You should ask yourself how you sleep at night knowing you voted for late term abortion. It is literally impossible that you could believe some of the easily destroyed positions you trot out on this site. You are so hypocritical thinking someone who wants to save babies can't sleep at night. Side: No
As a point scoring, character building exercise for college students yes. But as an important element for successful leadership, no. The Clinton - Trump debate turned into a slagging match reminiscent of an emotionally charged verbal altercation over a disputed parking space. For me, the upshot of the debate was that, it would take the two of them to make a half wit. Side: No
That has nothing to do with whom one votes for. But it is understood that is your Democrat view of things. Popular vote does not elect the POTUS. It is the Electoral College. What are Hillary's accomplishments in 30 years of political life ? Not anything i can remember ! Side: No
|
