Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Technosoul · Sep 27, 2004, 03:18 pm

This Thursday we get to tune into the first Presidential debate.

Both sides have agreed to the rules for the debate.

The following link is someone an example of what we might expect.

However Woody might roll over in his grave.

Please don't Butterface this post.

http://atomfilms.shockwave.com/contentPlay...1&ratingBar=off

technosoul.

Extant · Sep 27, 2004, 06:07 pm

That was absolutely friggin' hilarious! And probably somewhat of a truthful prediction.

Evil Baby · Sep 27, 2004, 06:24 pm

What is the point to having the debates if it is just going to be totally scripted? Shouldn't people be up in arms about this?

Scribbler1 · Sep 27, 2004, 07:55 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Evil Baby,
What is the point to having the debates if it is just going to be totally scripted? Shouldn't people be up in arms about this?

People are, but not nearly enough. With a script and a 100 page agreement as to the "ground rules", this so-called "debate" will be just what the sheep want, a useless exercise in snowing the public.

It mkes me sick, but hey, what do I know?

(edit) I just saw the Atom Films short. I laughed out loud ( I don't do that often) and sent it to a few people. Thanks, Tech.

Evil Baby · Sep 27, 2004, 10:31 pm

and if I was American it would drive me nuts. Personally I think this is a horrible thing for the American public and it is a wonder why it is ever allowed.

Compugasm · Sep 27, 2004, 11:00 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Evil Baby,
and if I was American it would drive me nuts. Personally I think this is a horrible thing for the American public and it is a wonder why it is ever allowed.

Kind of like the conventions.

Technosoul · Sep 27, 2004, 11:04 pm

I would assume the canidates were told about each and every question in advance so they can prepare their nice-sounding bumper sticker answers.

One of the new rules this time is that when one canidate is making his statement or answering a question we will not be able to see the other canadate (as he will be off screen) - that way no one can make faces to distract from what the one speaking is saying, I am not sure if they will also kill the mike of the non speaker to avoid interuptions from the other side. The other rule they agreed upon is that no canadate will be permitted to ask any question of another canidate. The only questions will be those of the host of the debate.

The debate will be about each canadate trying his best to repeat word for word the answers he has memorized when preparing for the debate, they both will try not to be candid or to ad-lib or to stray from the carefully prepared answers.

This will give us great insite into how a good speech writer can prepare a canidate but will not give us any look at what they are really like off camera or when they really speak for their self.

About that cartoon song on the link I should also mention that the owner of the original song by Woody Guntrie is sueing that webpage for violating copyrights they hold, as not permission was granted them but the case is pending, I thought that humor could make fun of a song (most of the words were changed) without it being branded as stealing. But that is another topic. Also the cartoon makes fun of both canadates and so it is not a partisan attack.

I sort of makes fun of me too, and some of you people. Ha.

Technosoul.

Scribbler1 · Sep 27, 2004, 11:13 pm

From what I heard on radio the "town meeting" debate (third, I believe) has been redone from "undecided" participants to "soft supporters" of the candidates. Whatever the hell THAT means!

It almost looks like they want to make sure neither candidate gets too large a "bump" from the debates. If my rigged election theory is correct, it would seem that if the fix is truly in, the inclusion of undecided voters with some HARD and unexpected questions might make the pre selected president look SO bad and sway TOO many voters to the other guy it would be TOO difficult to sell the chosen one as the actual "winner".

Just a theory, mind you, but one of my personal favorites of all my conspiracy theories. :rolleyes:

Technosoul · Sep 28, 2004, 12:12 am

I still no not think Bush won the popular vote in Fla. last election, but they soon conducted a radio show talk host concept that Gore was just being a cry baby and that he tried to use the "race card" (which became taboo after the OJ trial in white Amreica).

Even the TV news media was shocked by those Fla results because they did exit polling and saw Gore as the victor, even announced Gore as winning Fla. Then suddenly the offical count was way different. Howver all the other exit polls (down to a science) were correct predictions of the outcomes announded later. That sounded very fishy but the TV guys just passed on smelling something fishy and reported that they had made a big misstake. I do not think they did, it was just fixed by brother Bush and the Supreme court then backed the "local" counts by the Brother Bush system.

With the new touch machines that leave no paper record such recounts would be impossible even it it got down to a few votes in a close election.

Not so sure the election is even neck to neck. But if it is that is bad news of Bush because it breaks a common trend, nearly every standing Pesident is re-elected unless he did something real bad in the public perspective, that is especally true if we are in the middle of a on-going war. Had Bush stuck with only Afganistan and the war on terror he would win the next election with a sweeping victory, but his Iraq policy generated a whole bunch of anit-Bush protestors and the weakening economy in a smaller way added to the the very fast growing population of voters who now hope for any alternative to Bush that has a chance of winning. It is hard to predict if that growing number can tip the scales in Kerry's favor or not.

Most of the people who never made up thier mind are in two groups.

The ones who never pay attention to anything political but feel they have a duty to vote anyway.

and the ones who are starting to flip flop about the reasons behind the Iraq war as they start to awaken to the truths and are now entertaining doubts about their past support of Bush.

The media casts them all together as being on the fense, but they are not the same because the 2nd section are paying attention to all the news and also the hype. No sure how many people fall into which half of the un-determined group and so it is hard to say what effect they might have.

That is my opinion and/or personal observation.

Technosoul.

Ken Carman · Sep 28, 2004, 08:58 am

I agree, the election won't be close. It will be a blow out for one side or another. Considering how hard they are trying to make sure nothing bad is revealed about Bush but every nutso doubt about Kerry is, I would guess Bush. If it is, then the fix was in. Any honest person would admit that the hatred for Bush, always a motivating factor, is pretty strong in this country. Bush isn't going to get much more than his rather large base he already has, unless Kerry does something really stupid, or they succeed in convincing people he did: given the partisan skew to the coverage... a distinct possibliity.

A Kerry landslide is a possibility IF it motivates that much. Otherwise it's gonna be a close one.

I have a suspicion that if black-box voting and attempts to suppress the vote do the dirty, it will be a W landslide. Eventually we will be under the control of whomever can commit the most electorial graft or just one party. That, essentially, is a dictatorship.

"Things would be a lot easier if this were a dictatorship, and I were the dictator."- GWB, ad nauseum... lotsa nauseum.

http://www.politicalpuzzle.org/scribe
http://www.politicalpuzzle.org/inspection
http://www.slantleft.com (Look for the "Inspection" and "Scribe" blocks.)

Sep 27, 2004, 11:13 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
Scribbler1 Skeptical Patriot Posts: 7,836	From what I heard on radio the "town meeting" debate (third, I believe) has been redone from "undecided" participants to "soft supporters" of the candidates. Whatever the hell THAT means! It almost looks like they want to make sure neither candidate gets too large a "bump" from the debates. If my rigged election theory is correct, it would seem that if the fix is truly in, the inclusion of undecided voters with some HARD and unexpected questions might make the pre selected president look SO bad and sway TOO many voters to the other guy it would be TOO difficult to sell the chosen one as the actual "winner". Just a theory, mind you, but one of my personal favorites of all my conspiracy theories. :rolleyes: Not a day goes by that I don't see something that reinforces my belief that people are idiots.

Sep 28, 2004, 08:58 am	#10 (permalink) (top)
Ken Carman Just plain WEIRD Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 1,827	I agree, the election won't be close. It will be a blow out for one side or another. Considering how hard they are trying to make sure nothing bad is revealed about Bush but every nutso doubt about Kerry is, I would guess Bush. If it is, then the fix was in. Any honest person would admit that the hatred for Bush, always a motivating factor, is pretty strong in this country. Bush isn't going to get much more than his rather large base he already has, unless Kerry does something really stupid, or they succeed in convincing people he did: given the partisan skew to the coverage... a distinct possibliity. A Kerry landslide is a possibility IF it motivates that much. Otherwise it's gonna be a close one. I have a suspicion that if black-box voting and attempts to suppress the vote do the dirty, it will be a W landslide. Eventually we will be under the control of whomever can commit the most electorial graft or just one party. That, essentially, is a dictatorship. "Things would be a lot easier if this were a dictatorship, and I were the dictator."- GWB, ad nauseum... lotsa nauseum. http://www.politicalpuzzle.org/scribe http://www.politicalpuzzle.org/inspection http://www.slantleft.com (Look for the "Inspection" and "Scribe" blocks.) Ken's weekly column... Inspection... on site Inspection... off site.

Sep 27, 2004, 03:18 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
Technosoul Volcanic Erupter Posts: 8,936	This Thursday we get to tune into the first Presidential debate. Both sides have agreed to the rules for the debate. The following link is someone an example of what we might expect. However Woody might roll over in his grave. Please don't Butterface this post. http://atomfilms.shockwave.com/contentPlay...1&ratingBar=off technosoul.

Sep 27, 2004, 06:07 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Extant Molten Ash Posts: 34	That was absolutely friggin' hilarious! And probably somewhat of a truthful prediction.

Sep 27, 2004, 06:24 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
Evil Baby Igneous Magma Posts: 313	What is the point to having the debates if it is just going to be totally scripted? Shouldn't people be up in arms about this?

Sep 27, 2004, 10:31 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
Evil Baby Igneous Magma Posts: 313	and if I was American it would drive me nuts. Personally I think this is a horrible thing for the American public and it is a wonder why it is ever allowed.

Sep 27, 2004, 11:04 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
Technosoul Volcanic Erupter Posts: 8,936	I would assume the canidates were told about each and every question in advance so they can prepare their nice-sounding bumper sticker answers. One of the new rules this time is that when one canidate is making his statement or answering a question we will not be able to see the other canadate (as he will be off screen) - that way no one can make faces to distract from what the one speaking is saying, I am not sure if they will also kill the mike of the non speaker to avoid interuptions from the other side. The other rule they agreed upon is that no canadate will be permitted to ask any question of another canidate. The only questions will be those of the host of the debate. The debate will be about each canadate trying his best to repeat word for word the answers he has memorized when preparing for the debate, they both will try not to be candid or to ad-lib or to stray from the carefully prepared answers. This will give us great insite into how a good speech writer can prepare a canidate but will not give us any look at what they are really like off camera or when they really speak for their self. About that cartoon song on the link I should also mention that the owner of the original song by Woody Guntrie is sueing that webpage for violating copyrights they hold, as not permission was granted them but the case is pending, I thought that humor could make fun of a song (most of the words were changed) without it being branded as stealing. But that is another topic. Also the cartoon makes fun of both canadates and so it is not a partisan attack. I sort of makes fun of me too, and some of you people. Ha. Technosoul.

Sep 28, 2004, 12:12 am	#9 (permalink) (top)
Technosoul Volcanic Erupter Posts: 8,936	I still no not think Bush won the popular vote in Fla. last election, but they soon conducted a radio show talk host concept that Gore was just being a cry baby and that he tried to use the "race card" (which became taboo after the OJ trial in white Amreica). Even the TV news media was shocked by those Fla results because they did exit polling and saw Gore as the victor, even announced Gore as winning Fla. Then suddenly the offical count was way different. Howver all the other exit polls (down to a science) were correct predictions of the outcomes announded later. That sounded very fishy but the TV guys just passed on smelling something fishy and reported that they had made a big misstake. I do not think they did, it was just fixed by brother Bush and the Supreme court then backed the "local" counts by the Brother Bush system. With the new touch machines that leave no paper record such recounts would be impossible even it it got down to a few votes in a close election. Not so sure the election is even neck to neck. But if it is that is bad news of Bush because it breaks a common trend, nearly every standing Pesident is re-elected unless he did something real bad in the public perspective, that is especally true if we are in the middle of a on-going war. Had Bush stuck with only Afganistan and the war on terror he would win the next election with a sweeping victory, but his Iraq policy generated a whole bunch of anit-Bush protestors and the weakening economy in a smaller way added to the the very fast growing population of voters who now hope for any alternative to Bush that has a chance of winning. It is hard to predict if that growing number can tip the scales in Kerry's favor or not. Most of the people who never made up thier mind are in two groups. The ones who never pay attention to anything political but feel they have a duty to vote anyway. and the ones who are starting to flip flop about the reasons behind the Iraq war as they start to awaken to the truths and are now entertaining doubts about their past support of Bush. The media casts them all together as being on the fense, but they are not the same because the 2nd section are paying attention to all the news and also the hype. No sure how many people fall into which half of the un-determined group and so it is hard to say what effect they might have. That is my opinion and/or personal observation. Technosoul.