Speed Debating ?
Posted by Erin Cox
on June 4th, 2007 at 01:57:38 pm , 1841 views
People here in Manchester, New Hampshire sure love and know their politics. I just finished up having breakfast and a cup of coffee when the couple at the next table asked me “ What did you really think about the debate?” So I gave them an honest answer – “I thought it was a little bit like speed dating” I said.
So maybe I’ve come up with a new term -we can call it speed debating. You can find your perfect candidate by just listening to a few short answers. Sunday night’s debate featured all eight democrats running for President. There are a lot of fish in this political sea.
It was tough for Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd to distinguish himself. He is polling in low single digits and is considered a second tier candidate. In the first hour of the debate he only had the opportunity to speak four times. While the high profile, front runners got much more time to talk. For Example, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama got the first, second and even third questions. So they, along with former Senator John Edwards, really dominated the first and even the second hour of the debate.
I have to admit I didn’t really like the portion of the debate where candidates were asked to raise their hands to show if they supported a certain issue. It seemed to contradict the whole idea of a debate. Candidates are supposed to state a position and explain it. The New Hampshire couple I met this morning – they didn’t like the hand raising either. In fact the woman told me – she doesn’t like Senator Clinton but was pleased when Mrs. Clinton took the moderator to task for asking candidates to show their positions by the raising of hands.
That woman’s husband was wearing a Boston Red Sox cap. He said he didn’t know much about Senator Dodd – except he was the one with the white hair and that he had a presidential-look. The couple plans to keep track of all the candidates and make a decision closer to the primary in January 2008.
While speed dating may be a fast way to meet someone and move on– there is that old song that says “You Can’t Hurry Love”.
Why are we in such a hurry to pick a candidate?
Raise your hand if you agree.
11 comments
Why can't we have an honest full length debate occur between candidates eh? Are they afraid of looking like idiots or do the folks organizing them consider the public to idiots that lack an attention span?
They produced a clever bar chart graphic showing how much time in minutes Clinton and Obama got to speak (even more than CNN host Wolf Blitzer) compared to the other canddiates.
The blog post is at http://www.chrisdodd.com/node/1377
That is it in a "nutshell".
The fact there are soooo many hopefuls is
a bit too much.
I don't much care for the debates anyway.
Say one thing do another.....
Who-Ha
most money in it gets to speak.......
Just an added thought.
Nothing was added, they were just telling clever lies. Obama did sound the most believable and even Dodd sounded very professional and not weak. Clinton sounded her usual phony, sneaky self. I hate the fact that she keeps calling herself a New Yorker when she is not even from there! She only moved there to run for Senate in an attention getting state to set up the run fro president. Let's not forget that she lied many times and said that she would never run for president, but any fool knew that was the reason why she ran for Senate in NY! She avoids answering questions or she tells people what they want to hear. I don't like people like that. I like people to tell me what they feel regardless of it's popularity. I know with a job like president, people will lie. Most politicians were lawyers and all layers are professional liars, so this is what we get.
I have to agree with you about Hillary Clinton. I've never been a fan of the Clintons, even back when Bill was seeking the Democratic nomination. I do think that they lack honesty, and are too focused on the spin instead of the content. I'm a liberal Democrat, as you know, and I do not think that they have helped my party. I'm sorry, but I'm one of those "old-fashioned" types who think that character matters. I'm not saying that Clinton was a bad president, or that Hillary Clinton would be a bad president. But silly me, I'm searching for greatness. Know what I mean, James? The kind of greatness that Ronald Reagan had, only in a liberal package. Whatever I disagreed with Reagan about, and it was just about everything in terms of policy, I do recognize that he was a visionary and he had greatness, and was able to unite a very divided country. I think of all the candidates in both parties, Barack Obama looks to have those qualities.
Which would be funny if true, considering she is so worried about folks using their true identity on these blogs!
:o)
Comment feed for this postThe short version -- be nice and be respectful of other's opinions, even if they don't agree with yours, or your comment may be deleted.
Leave a comment
| « Is baring it all for you? | "Kiddie Couture" » |