Forum Thread

Democrats Need To Seriously Rethink Their Presidential Debate Schedule

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 5 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    MSNBC wrote a fantastic article breaking down the difference in debate scheduling for Democrats vs their GOP counterparts. In a nutshell, the compliant and argument is that the DNC's scheduling of debates is terrible, and that the GOP is doing a much better job.

    Politics completely aside, I wholeheartedly agree. Here's why, and tell me if you agree and how you think it should be changed ---

    • The first Democratic Party debate for president doesn't even happen until October 13th. By that point, the GOP will be closing in on their 3rd debate.
    • 2 of the first 3 debates will be happening on a Saturday. On top of that, these are 11/14 and 12/19, both scheduled strangely close to holiday weekends. That's a recipe for low viewership. On top of that, Saturdays in general are a bad idea for debates on TV. They will have to compete with sports on TV like college football, pro baseball, etc. They should be moved to weekday nights, and also moved further away from holidays as well.
    • Your candidate is likely going to be locked down by mid-March. Especially in states that matter first most like Iowa, debates should be as close to those dates as possible. Currently the DNC has the last debate for Iowa caucus a solid 10 weeks apart! That is just not intelligent.

    Look, I could go on. And the article linked above certainly does. I recommend reading it and seeing if you can somehow voice your opinion on this issue to your Democratic congress members, or DNC debate leaders. But the fact of the matter is that it seems as though the Democrats aren't overly concerned with viewer engagement, or at least they aren't putting that value #1 on their priorities. And that is a big mistake. In contrast, that is ALL the GOP is doing right now.

    Want to get the country excited, interested and knowledgeable about YOUR candidate? Then you have to have them debating and on TV, a lot. As much as possible. They need to be practiced, poised and ready with a clear message to the American public. Several debates do this. Sparse scheduling with odd weekend choices on the calendar do not.

    Lastly, I wonder if they are doing all of this for one big reason: they believe and truly want this to be not much a race at all. They feel that Hilary is a lock, and they don't want to drag her through a huge thing before the main event. Give less ammo to the GOP for the main race, and to frankly spend less time, money and energy into landing a candidate when they feel they already have one.

    If that is their thinking, I think they are making a terrible, awful, misguided mistake. This country wants choice, variety, opposition to status quo, and actual debates on real issues with straight talk. I think we are hungry for it. If the Dems don't change their strategy, again politics aside, I fear they will easily lose the momentum of candidate buzz and could lead to them losing the entire election. Just from this mistake.

    What do you think?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    J.K.Logic Wrote: If that is their thinking, I think they are making a terrible, awful, misguided mistake. This country wants choice, variety, opposition to status quo, and actual debates on real issues with straight talk. I think we are hungry for it. If the Dems don't change their strategy, again politics aside, I fear they will easily lose the momentum of candidate buzz and could lead to them losing the entire election. Just from this mistake.

    What do you think?

    I have to say that I disagree. I'm of the opinion that we need less, not more, debates between the candidates.

    Instead of having a legitimate debate on policy proposals, these debates have turned into a ratings bonanza. That may make money for the companies hosting the debate, but it doesn't inform the American public who is tuning in to try to figure out who they want to vote for in the general election.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    We certainly need more debates than 6, but less than the 20-something that the Democratic Party had 8 years ago.

    Somewhere around 11 seems like a pretty healthy medium where there is enough time to address actual issues.

    But yeah, the Democratic debates seem very much geared to low viewership. Not good

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I have really begun to get quite dispirited about the debate structure of both political parties. There's something inherently wrong with having a never ending election season that is based more on promises that everyone knows aren't achievable than having legitimate policy discussions about the direction of the country.

    I'm all for quality debates, but debates have turned more into popularity contests and fundraisers for the channel hosting the debates than having an actual discussion about complex issues that effect all citizens of this country.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I can understand not wanting a lot of debates. After some consideration of these comments, I do agree the answer isn't necessarily more debates. But even still, the quality of debate scheduling for the DNC remains terrible. I would be fine with only a handful, if they were scheduled on days that made sense, where a vast majority would likely tune in and watch.