Biden release 14 second challenge to debate Trump - takes 5 times to get it right

I can understand people partaking in competitive sports needing to take drug tests, and some people applying for certain jobs, but I've never heard of people being asked to take drug tests in order to debate.

durangodawood said:

Darn. I was hoping we'd get lucky and avoid "debates".

Click to expand...

You could always just not watch any of the debates.

stevil said:

You could always just not watch any of the debates.

Click to expand...

Im surprised that a country as thoughtful and serious as the USA hasn't taken up my debate proposal in which the candidates write their answers live in real time, and then the moderators read them aloud to us.

hislegacy said:

pssst - it was not an ad

Click to expand...

That's a silly hair to split. It was a promotional video intended to boost his campaign.

hislegacy said:

- it was 14 seconds - about the length of time it took me to type this.

Click to expand...

Lots of ads are that short.

Anyways, my point still stands: that pace of edits is entirely normal. As much as I dislike it, that style of editing is very common as well, especially on internet-only media. The only reason it's so jarring in the Biden video is because they did a poor job of selecting which clips to transition between.

It's pretty rich that Biden is acting like a tough guy ready to debate at a moment's notice when his campaign has refused traditional debates and stipulated a laundry list of otherwise abnormal restrictions, including not having an audience present. Hoo boy! He's a real tough guy alright! On top of that, some yutz in his campaign probably thought the jump cuts made the video more appealing to the younger demographic that mostly has the attention span of a flea.

durangodawood said:

Im surprised that a country as thoughtful and serious as the USA hasn't taken up my debate proposal in which the candidates write their answers live in real time, and then the moderators read them aloud to us.

Click to expand...

That would be silly

probinson said:

It's pretty rich that Biden is acting like a tough guy ready to debate at a moment's notice when his campaign has refused traditional debates and stipulated a laundry list of otherwise abnormal restrictions, including not having an audience present. Hoo boy! He's a real tough guy alright! On top of that, some yutz in his campaign probably thought the jump cuts made the video more appealing to the younger demographic that mostly has the attention span of a flea.

Click to expand...

Audience adds nothing, and typically detracts with time wasting fan applause.

And I really like the mic cutoff when times up, as Trump has demonstrated himself incapable of refraining from shouting over other people. If you cant behave like an adult, you dont deserve adult privileges.

Still, my real time written debate proposal is the best yet.

durangodawood said:

Audience adds nothing, and typically detracts with time wasting fan applause.

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? The Commission on Presidential Debate's rules expressly prohibit audience participation, including applauding. This isn't a Trump rally or a State of the Union address. Audiences at debates are instructed by the moderators to only applaud only at the beginning when the candidates take the stage and at the conclusion of the debate, and with very few exceptions, they have abided by these rules over the years.

durangodawood said:

And I really like the mic cutoff when times up, as Trump has demonstrated himself incapable of refraining from shouting over other people. If you cant behave like an adult, you dont deserve adult privileges.

Click to expand...

I have mixed feelings on this. If the mic cutoff is done equitably on both candidates, then I am all for it.

hislegacy said:

Why does it bother you? The primaries at this point are moot. Neither old white guy is going to be primaried because neither side has anyone else they think could win if the other guy is in

Click to expand...

I don't think of changes to how candidates are vetted as a one-time thing. I'm thinking of the future.

probinson said:

It's pretty rich that Biden is acting like a tough guy ready to debate at a moment's notice when his campaign has refused traditional debates and stipulated a laundry list of otherwise abnormal restrictions,

Click to expand...

At their last debate, Trump interrupted Biden 128 times. That's so annoying for viewers. He just can't control himself. So rules need to be made (like gag orders) to control the situation for the sake of the viewers and the moderators never mind the other debaters.

The ONLY drug test I would accept it is a hair test.

It's easy enough to bypass drug tests by going dry for a bit. Hair tests can measure a richer history.

And that's what we want right?

probinson said:

I have mixed feelings on this. If the mic cutoff is done equitably on both candidates, then I am all for it.

Click to expand...

Responses should be timed and mic cutoff. And then other mics should be OFF while other candidates are talking.

I think that's the ONLY way it can be done equitably in a way that doesn't allow for supporters to kvetch.

Demanding a crowd be present is just more evidence that some people don’t actually want a debate, they want WWE.

Yeah...Absolutely 0 reason for there to be a live audience.

probinson said:

It's pretty rich that Biden is acting like a tough guy ready to debate at a moment's notice when his campaign has refused traditional debates and stipulated a laundry list of otherwise abnormal restrictions, including not having an audience present. Hoo boy! He's a real tough guy alright! On top of that, some yutz in his campaign probably thought the jump cuts made the video more appealing to the younger demographic that mostly has the attention span of a flea.

Click to expand...

Biden has demands..."oh yeah...real tough guy".
Trump has demands "I love that Trump always gets what he wants".

This isn't you.....just a common refrain in comparing the two candidates.

rambot said:

Yeah...Absolutely 0 reason for there to be a live audience.

Click to expand...

The whole debate format is idiotic. Your best good-faith contender in a format like that is probably somebody like a Chris Christie or Mayor Pete who's smart enough and articulate enough and loose enough to be able to make some kind of a lucid point while being quick enough to fire off some good zingers. A bad-faith contender can just swamp the other person with nonsense.

But the best case isn't even a debate; it's just people restating their policy positions with a few wisecracks.

iluvatar5150 said:

The whole debate format is idiotic. Your best good-faith contender in a format like that is probably somebody like a Chris Christie or Mayor Pete who's smart enough and articulate enough and loose enough to be able to make some kind of a lucid point while being quick enough to fire off some good zingers. A bad-faith contender can just swamp the other person with nonsense.

But the best case isn't even a debate; it's just people restating their policy positions with a few wisecracks.

Click to expand...

That's why I think they should revert to a formal debate style with WAY more controls. I DO think that candidates should have an opportunity to spar face to face. But not as it is. The current format doesn't really work to sharing ideas and plans.

I'm not sure how the poll is in any way tied to the content of the OP, but I have to wonder, given Trump's reported history of perscription drug abuse, I'm not sure how a drug test is going to HELP him....