Instagram / Politics

Presidential Debates – Must Be Fair

debate

If any amusement is left in politics, it must be sheer irony. This week we learned the Republican National Committee (RNC) may boycott 2024 presidential debates by the “Commission” for not being “fair and nonpartisan.” The case is real, based on leaks and bias. Yet, Democrats are livid.

Unpacking this story, one must see both sides and laugh. The GOP argues, with evidence, that the forum’s recent debates tipped Democrats, no policing bias, and leaks to and from moderators.

Facts are hard to dispute and are rather one-sided. Beyond that, the process is controversial, some candidates summarily excluded, live mics muted by grand authority as if the Wizard of Oz was in charge. See, e.g., Commission on Presidential Debates.

Meantime, as a result of confusion, errors, and half-truths, candidates have filed lawsuits, moderators have been fired, debates canceled, formats shifted. Some consistency might help.

But the irony is – how Democrats responded. At a time when leftists around the country, on college campuses, in the media, in a host of public forums regularly “cancel” Republicans and conservatives, we see Democrats objecting to a request for “fair” 2024 debates.

In other words, when Republicans ask for a fair and open exchange of views on matters of public concern, including a presidential election, the comeback is an objection that this is “canceling.”

Is there not something ironic in seeing those who dare to exclude viewpoints with which they disagree, threatening forums like the Supreme Court and traditional Senate procedures with cancellation – or “packing,” “revolution,” and “repeal” – and now saying they cannot stomach a request for fairness? See, e.g., Liberal media panics about no debates in 2024 as RNC feuds with Commission on Presidential Debates; Sen. Jeanne Shaheen predicts ‘revolution’ if Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; THE DEMOCRATS’ PLAN TO PACK THE SUPREME COURT.

Is there not something precious about a stand taken for a tainted forum – unless changes assuring fairness happen – from those who pressed unfairness to the point of wanting to pack the Supreme Court and eliminate a 150-year-old filibuster, even pressing a Justices to retire?

Yes, America is a great country – in part because we have a First Amendment, which assures we can speak our minds, whatever is on them. That includes objecting to bias, cancellation, intimidation, and disingenuous nonsense – and insisting on fair and open presidential debates.

Should we have a fair forum for presidential debates, allowing all a fair shot at physical presence, articulation of views, time to speak? Accommodation of styles? Yes, we should.

The Commission has a rich history, but bias is not and should not be a proud part of any forum that aims at non-partisanship, fairness, and honest debate. What the RNC is saying, in so many words, is stop the circus, be fair. Is that so much to ask? Politics has become more heat than light, blather, and overtalk than listening and evaluation, but unbiased debates is a fair ask.


We hope you've enjoyed this article. While you're here, we have a small favor to ask...

Support AMAC Action. Our 501 (C)(4) advances initiatives on Capitol Hill, in the state legislatures, and at the local level to protect American values, free speech, the exercise of religion, equality of opportunity, sanctity of life, and the rule of law.

Donate Now

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!


Subscribe
Notify of
17 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Karen
3 months ago

Fairness is good. How about having two different people from different TV stations leading the debate instead of having that idiot Mike at the last debate who didn’t give Trump a chance. Fairness is great. LET’S GO BRANDON!

Bob Rich
3 months ago

Presidential debates should be abolished. The Executive Branch should be dissolved, along with the Legislative and Judiclal Branches. They are corrupt and have failed completely. We need to stop this nightmare and start over — with new management.

Tom
3 months ago

The last set of debates was a joke. All moderated by liberals who gave every break they could to the one who eventually became the illegitimate president. Pathetically one-sided. Until that changes who needs them? I don’t

Sharon Ormsby
3 months ago

Yes it should be fair. Completely fair. Absolutely no one should have the questions or an inkling to the questions prior to them. Perhaps, they shouldn’t be from journalists but from their actual constituents!

PaulE
3 months ago
Reply to  Sharon Ormsby

You mean like the staged CNN town hall meetings with Joe Biden? Where 90 percent of the audience members selected are registered Democrats who voted for Biden and the questions were all softballs? Yeah, that would be real impartial. The problem with trying to engineer truly fair and impartial debates today is getting both sides to agree to a series of topics and questions well in advance. I guarantee you the Democrats would NOT want a debate on subjects like:

Why have we intentionally sabotaged our own energy independence to make ourselves completely dependent again on OPEC and foreign nations hostile to the United States?

Why did we decide to abandon hundreds of Americans still trapped in Afghanistan today and $80 billion dollars in state of the art military equipment, that will be used by terrorist organzations around the world for decades, all in order for Joe Biden to give a speech before the anniversary of 9/11?

Why we are rushing to embrace the green new deal and become even more dependent on China, when China stands to be the biggest financial and political beneficiary since they own 75 to 90 percent of all the world’s total resources associated with green technology and processing capabilities related to EVs, solar panels and wind mills?

None of these are the type of touchy-feely, feel good subjects any Democrat want to have a substantial debate about.

Max
3 months ago
Reply to  PaulE

Nice one, Paul E.

PaulE
3 months ago
Reply to  Max

I just thought I would give some sample questions about what a real debate should include, instead of everyone dancing around the issue. Debates done honestly should include hard-hitting, honest questions on both sides or they are merely theater to divert the masses. We need less theater and lot more reality injected into the whole process. Think of the process being like more of a mini interrogation than a Democrat love fest.

Judy
3 months ago
Reply to  PaulE

Even if those questions were posed to them, they’d just diverge to something else.

Just Saying
3 months ago

I don’t understand why we should expect a “fair unbiased” debate when it is hosted by a liberal and biased media. Most Americans get their information from biased advertising and the results are evident.
Debates, if to be fair, need to remove any moderator and simply let candidates speek, and respond in a given time frame. Determined in advance with the candidate asking question of each other. This could be done easly with a computerized moderator over a number of debates over a period of time.

It’ll never happen, because there is no way to game the system.

PaulE
3 months ago

That is why Wallace was supposedly celebrating with champaign in the executive suites at FOX News with the Murdock sons afterwards.

PaulE
3 months ago

When I first saw this news, I said to myself it is about time the RNC finally showed a little spine and stood up for themselves and the American people they supposedly support. It has been a constant embarrassment to watch virtually every presidential debate being hosted by obviously liberal Democrat members of the media for decades. With the questions posed and topics selected always designed to favor the Democrat candidate. Where the moderator’s job was always to cut off and stop the Republican candidate, if he was making too many successful points.

What the people want and should be getting is an honest debate covering all the issues between the candidates of the two parties. Not simply a carefully crafted show where the moderator acts as backup to the Democrat candidate and selects topics only favorable to the Democrat candidate. The 2020 debates being the most obvious, where each debate focused on the exact same limited set of topics that just happened to be ones Democrats favor. I only hope the RNC stands its ground on this issue and that this isn’t just some sort of publicity stunt, where the RNC caves at last minute.

As for the commission itself, its creation was literally another mistake made in the name of bipartisanship, that ended up being weaponized over time by the Democrats to serve them. Presidential debates were held quite successfully before this commission was ever created and they would be held quite successfully again, should this commission simply go away.

Steven
3 months ago
Reply to  PaulE

We can only hope the Republican party grows a spine. I agree with you 100% on what you have to say about the liberal media and the job they’ve played. It’s always been so obvious that the moderators job was to keep control of the Republican candidate and to aid the Democrat…yet it’s always been allowed.

Max
3 months ago
Reply to  PaulE

Will the RNC grow that spine? Lack of confidence right now.

PaulE
3 months ago
Reply to  Max

That’s why I stated I hope the RNC doesn’t simply cave like they usually do. If they do, then the debates will simply continue be a forum where the Democrat candidate is handed softball questions and where the moderator shuts down the Republican candidate to protect the Democrat candidate. What we saw in 2020 was essentially two Presidential debates and one V.P. debate on the exact same Democrat friendly topics, with all three moderators all openly covering for the Democrat candidates. There is no reason the RNC should have gone along with this nonsense for more almost four decades. Yet being spineless seems to be a pre-requisite for being in RNC leadership.

Max
3 months ago
Reply to  PaulE

Yea, I know and understand.

Rosemary
3 months ago
Reply to  PaulE

Well said.

Stephen Russell
3 months ago

Have Indie National Comm for debates
From voters.
Done

2 mods: One Leftist, One conservative
Questions from media & or audience
Live Feed
On topics

17
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x