I watched the debate last night while sorting through my bedroom closet. It is a measure of the times that my closet is still mostly loaded up with winter clothes -- from last winter -- and an assortment of tops and skirts I won't part with but rarely wear. There were quite a few tops that were too small to begin with, or that are too small now (who barely rode her bicycle in the summer of 2020? Me.) It was crowded. None of my clothing was in any particular order. One sweater appeared to have been moth-eaten!
The debate was similar right down to the moth-holes, though with less decorum. If you liked President Trump going in, well, he wasn't any different to how he always is. If you preferred former Vice-President Biden before the debate, he was his usual self, too. If you were undecided about who to vote for before the debate, you're probably wondering now if you should vote at all.
You should vote. Even if neither of the Big Two candidates appeal to you, there are other ones on the ballot (or you could even vote against the one you like least). There are plenty of other offices up for election this time, too, and every one of them is someone lower down in the food chain and more likely to listen and respond to your concerns.
A commenter on a local TV station's web page suggested the next Presidential debate was, "...going to be a fistfight in a Chili's parking lot." And so what if it is? Those men are apparently the finest choices their Parties could dredge up; there's a lot of up-and-coming talent in the lower contests to vote for (or against) and if we don't cull 'em now, nothing's going to get any better. So vote.
Here's a little contrast: John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon debating in 1960. This is how it used to be. Since then, we have put men on the moon and put TV sets and computers in your shirt pocket. Imagine if we had made the same progress in the conduct of debates.
I'd like to put the candidates in soundproof glass quiz-show booths. When it's one participant's turn, the lights and microphone in their booth are on; when it's not their turn, they're off. A timer or two in front of each booth keeps track of how much time each one gets per question and in total. When there's an open discussion, both booths have lights and a live microphone; when the moderator speaks, both booths are dark and silent. You'll never see this. No Presidential candidate would ever agree to it.
Update
15 hours ago
4 comments:
The quiz show booth... what a great idea!
While I am a Trump supporter and fan-boy of his tactics, last night was just too hard to watch. I was hoping to be able to see the whole thing, anticipating a NASCAR style pile-up live. Being a little hard of hearing, and with multiple voices at once, if I can't hear anything except noise, I give up. I have had the same problem with Zoom meetings and interview shows where people are talking over one another because of technology delays.
I really like your thinking of the sound proof booth for each participant. Gives each the full opportunity of their full response and the listener to hear their answer and how it was answered or sincere. Two or three voices spoken simultaneously was much harder to gauge.
I vote both were sent to their bedroom with no dinner - BAD BOYZ !!
Witold Pilecki, I too have the same problem with multiple voices or voices in a noisy environment. I can't even pick out the lyrics when hearing a song I don't know, so I can appreciate your problem. That's one of the reasons I only lasted about five minutes last night.
Thank you Roberta, for taking one for the team.
And don't forget a Faraday cage for the isolation booths that covers DC to daylight.
I don't know about the Faraday cage. I wasn't sure what the big deal was about the candidates getting coached over an earpiece. I *want* a President who seeks out and considers good advice. I don't think of that as cheating.
Post a Comment