Should The President Refuse To Debate, Unless The Process Is Fair?

[Kathianne]

I don't know that this will matter in the long run, but think it's a very good idea. Both sides should be able to choose moderators, which have been anything but unbiased for years now:

https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-sha...tes-next-year/

[STTAB]

I don't know that this will matter in the long run, but think it's a very good idea. Both sides should be able to choose moderators, which have been anything but unbiased for years now:

https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-sha...tes-next-year/

Simply untrue to say as a blanket statement "all debate moderators have been biased for years now", in 2016 Fox's moderators were very unbiased and professional.

However I actually go furtehr, I think that Trump should have already ex communicated CNN. Meaning sure their reporters can sit there but they get no questions answered, and no one does any interviews on their network.

Trump, of course, simply doesn't have the self control to do that but if he did you can bet they would change their treatment of him.

[Kathianne]

Simply untrue to say as a blanket statement "all debate moderators have been biased for years now", in 2016 Fox's moderators were very unbiased and professional.

However I actually go furtehr, I think that Trump should have already ex communicated CNN. Meaning sure their reporters can sit there but they get no questions answered, and no one does any interviews on their network.

Trump, of course, simply doesn't have the self control to do that but if he did you can bet they would change their treatment of him.

The left moderators have been biased, the few 'right' moderators' aka FOX, like Megan Kelly, (whom I like), were tough on all. I think the two debaters should go 1/2 and 1/2 on their choices. Like SCOTUS judges, you never know what you'll get, but at least the playing field would be level.

[STTAB]

The left moderators have been biased, the few 'right' moderators' aka FOX, like Megan Kelly, (whom I like), were tough on all. I think the two debaters should go 1/2 and 1/2 on their choices. Like SCOTUS judges, you never know what you'll get, but at least the playing field would be level.

I wouldn't mind seeing the debates ran with a pool camera and a moderator from each network or whatever. Rather than each network holding its own debates.

[Kathianne]

I wouldn't mind seeing the debates ran with a pool camera and a moderator from each network or whatever. Rather than each network holding its own debates.

I wouldn't care if there were no debates at all. If they are going to hold them though, rather than the nonsense debate board or whatever they call it now, let the winners of each party round robin their choices. It wouldn't matter then which outlets hosted, just try to interject some fairness.

[STTAB]

I wouldn't care if there were no debates at all. If they are going to hold them though, rather than the nonsense debate board or whatever they call it now, let the winners of each party round robin their choices. It wouldn't matter then which outlets hosted, just try to interject some fairness.

I love the debates. I'll carry the memory of Trump trying to talk about policy while Hillary spent all night calling him names only to the next day watch Hillary supporters claim that she's a policy wonk and Trump was afraid to debate her on policy in my mind forever LOL

For real though , I think the debates are stupid. By the time they roll around, we all know based on who the moderators are what kind of questions are gonna be asked, and what answers will be given. As a tool for deciding who we ought elect, they are useless.

For the general election I mean. Now for primary voters,s I think it's useful to get to see the similarities yet the differences within one party.

[jimnyc]

After the past few years, if the moderators were to be unfair with Trump, it'll be noted at that very moment and not be beneficial to a good debate. They SHOULD be fair and honest, but they aren't. None of them can be trusted to do so.

They should try a new format. Perhaps have the 2 contenders release 20 questions apiece to their opponent, nothing hidden. Then have the general public ask a certain amount of questions as the debates come along. Something where the people are those in charge, followed with a process that guarantees to take the media out of it.