Why don't the debates show the name of each person... - Page 5

Stray · ‎04-20-2013

I don't think any moderator was there. Their job is to educate the viewer re to policy and what each candidate stands for. Their questions were meant to provoke candidates into sparring with each other. The only thing we learned was who was thin skinned or not. The debates should not be entertaining and CNN wanted ratings and as a "serious" news outlet they fell short. Comedy Central would have done a better job. This election is probably more important than any before it as the world is a much more dangerous place and IMHO, our very existence as a Country is in jeopardy forget being a super power. The next President faces very grave situations and choices and so far a few candidates show me love of Country and dedicated to service and sadly, they are not exciting and rarely "show cased"

@Pearlee wrote:
I knew who everyone was up there at the debate. So personally, I'd rather they go back to announcing what dance each couple is dancing on DWTS like they used to.

As for the debate, the two supposed moderators other than Jake Tapper need not have been there.

Pearlee · ‎06-11-2011

@Greenhouse wrote:
Their questions were meant to provoke candidates into sparring with each other.

Yes of course, because it's all about RATINGS for CNN.

Also, did you know that the debate was supposed to be 2 hrs. long but CNN realized they could get advertising money for more time so two days before the show it was made into a three-hour debate? (This according to Donald Trump). It's all about ratings and dollars. So of course CNN was interested in instigating fights which would make for more viewer interest (to watch the entire show), good ratings, and more advertising dollars. Most of the questions posed were to Trump and Bush with Fiorina just butting in all the time interrupting to get air time; hardly any questions were asked of Huckabee, Walker (who is really boring), Cruz, or Kasich. Rand Paul a few more but not many. It's as if CNN didn't take the other candidates seriously. CNN knew what it was doing - exactly - and it worked.

AngusandBuddhasMom · ‎03-10-2010

I found it amusing anytime one of the candidates mentioned HC or the current Admins. the commentator would quickly say Thank you and try to cut them off.

CNN is as usual bias and obvious.

gmkb · ‎07-29-2012

I thought Marco Rubio managed to stay away from the arguing and concentrate on the issues. I agree that a buzzer or bell would work better than the moderator saying 'your time is up.'

Desertdi · ‎03-13-2010

For the same reason there are no pictures on the ballot

♥Surface of the Sun♥

Lila Belle · ‎01-24-2013

@Pearlee wrote:
@Greenhouse wrote:
Their questions were meant to provoke candidates into sparring with each other.
Yes of course, because it's all about RATINGS for CNN.
Also, did you know that the debate was supposed to be 2 hrs. long but CNN realized they could get advertising money for more time so two days before the show it was made into a three-hour debate? (This according to Donald Trump). It's all about ratings and dollars. So of course CNN was interesting in instigating fights which would make for more viewer interest (to watch the entire show), good ratings, and more advertising dollars. Most of the questions posed were to Trump and Bush with Fiorina just butting in all the time interrupting to get air time; hardly any questions were asked of Huckabee, Walker (who is really boring), Cruz, or Kasich. Rand Paul a few more but not many. It's as if CNN didn't take the other candidates seriously. CNN knew what it was doing - exactly - and it worked.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

In respect to just asking a few questions of the low polling candidates FNC did the same thing. It worked for them as well.

Lila Belle · ‎01-24-2013

@Mj12 wrote:
It was hard to watch at times. The JV debate was more interesting IMO.

.....................................................................

I agree. What little I saw of both debates the format of the earlier one was more conducive to seeing them in action.

Tinkrbl44 · ‎08-23-2010

@Pearlee wrote:
@Greenhouse wrote:
Their questions were meant to provoke candidates into sparring with each other.
Yes of course, because it's all about RATINGS for CNN.
Also, did you know that the debate was supposed to be 2 hrs. long but CNN realized they could get advertising money for more time so two days before the show it was made into a three-hour debate? (This according to Donald Trump). It's all about ratings and dollars. So of course CNN was interesting in instigating fights which would make for more viewer interest (to watch the entire show), good ratings, and more advertising dollars. Most of the questions posed were to Trump and Bush with Fiorina just butting in all the time interrupting to get air time; hardly any questions were asked of Huckabee, Walker (who is really boring), Cruz, or Kasich. Rand Paul a few more but not many. It's as if CNN didn't take the other candidates seriously. CNN knew what it was doing - exactly - and it worked.

Uh, sorry to have to point out the glaringly obvious .... but it's all about ratings for EVERY news station and network .... seriously, didn't you know that?

I don't know why DT would have some" inside information" about CNN, but you seem to think that if he says it, it must be true. Strange comment, IMO.

HappyDaze · ‎06-13-2012

I think this would be a great idea and we had said the same thing! I know the names of most of them but sometimes I get them confused. And like someone else said, it works for and against the candidates. There were some I liked what they said this time around but kept calling them by the wrong name.