"What we really need is an honest debate with principled moderators on a network built on trust and seeking veracity of all claims: Fox News! Only the most Trustworthy™ will do, Sean Hannity and Laura Inbread... wait... Ingrate... No.... Ingram! Right right Ingram."
this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
533 points (97.7% liked)
News
22876 readers
3934 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Trump considers dropping out of having his dumb ass handed to him.
What an absolute coward. Isn't it the conservative maga "tough guy" crowd who calls everybody pussies? Is trump not being a total pussy?
Wait, Don Old is dropping out of a debate (again) with Harris? Weird
Great. Give Harris the time slot for a big town hall speech and Q&A. Every 15 minutes, read a reminder to everyone watching that Trump declined to debate.
Keep the two podiums and put a wax figure of Trump in a chicken suit behind the other one. Put the camera on it with dead air for a few seconds every time it's his turn to speak.
The chicken suit is too on the nose. And a cardboard cutout is probably way cheaper than a wax statue.
There's no such thing as "too" on the nose when it comes to needling Trump and his gaggle of dipshits.
I agree with the cardboard cutout part, though: half-assed shoddiness represents him more authentically and he deserves no better.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
I am betting that she will be there whether he is or not. No reason to miss an opportunity like that.
Just do the debate, give his time to a ticker that just says “trump was too scared to be here, I concede the rest of my time.” For every question.
Seems fair.
Christopher Hitchens once debated himself on religion when his debate opponent didn't show up. It was pretty brilliant.
I'm trying to find the YouTube video, but I can't find it.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
Bok Bok Bok
lol what a bitch
Make him afraid some more
St. Alia of the Knife
Fear is the mind killer, as they say. And trump doesn't have much mind so it shouldn't take much fear.
If he does drop out of the debate again, I bet they could get him to recommit by going all Biff Tannen on his ass:
"What's the matter McTrump? Chicken?"
He'll bristle, and say he's no chicken and agree to debate Kamala.
In all seriousness, I was surprised agreed to debate her at all, given that he has nothing to gain. Best cash scenario, he tries the same approach he used with Biden, turning his mouth into a fire hose of lies, and Biden couldn't keep up. With Kamala, she'd just laugh at his lies, and actually refute him with facts, he'd look just awful in comparison.
At this point I doubt he'll actually show up to the debate.
"I heard McDonalds has a new menu item now, they're calling them Chicken McTrumplets... Bawk... bawk... bawk... bawk"
I never thought he'd go through with it.
One of the issues he has is that ABC and the Dems want real time fact checking.
How would real-time fact checking even work? Would the moderators actually do their job for once and call it out, or would they just do little VH1/"Pop Up Video"-style graphics where they would highlight whether they would try to correct the record on certain things being said?
Here's my proposal.
During each candidate's first turn to speak, no fact checks are shown, but the fact checkers will use the other candidate's turn to come up with corrections. Then when it's the first candidate's turn again, the start of that their speaking time is used to read the corrections from their previous statement. If the corrections take the whole speaking slot, too bad so sad.
If corrections also rollover into the next speaking window, Donald could just do his first slot and then go golfing.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Hopefully both, and there's a Lie-O-Meter that determines how truthful a statement is as its being read, and then a counter of provably false statements made
Not like a here is a one in a billion outlier so the truth is a lie. If crime is down, but up in a small, specific area, the statement "crime is down" would be true.
It'd be nice if there was some sort of objective, quantitative "score" that could be attached to each candidate's performance (or as objective as it can be). Something at the end of the night you could point to and be like, "Yeah, they're a goddamn liar-mouth." Something either candidate could point to as a "win" without resorting to just soundbites that get blasted the whole week after and people are like, "Oh snap, they said that!" Like, an actual way to tell how honest either candidate seemed during their "performance". I'm sure Trump would lie his ass off and his base would be like, "Well of course ABC is going to say Trump lied, they're owned by woke Disney!", but at the very least we'd have some sort of tracking of how much they lied during a debate.
There is no objective measurement Repubs won't ignore if it becomes an obstacle to white supremacist fascism and shoveling money into the yachts of the wealthy.
Would the moderators actually do their job for once and call it out
That's actually not the job of moderators. This idea that moderators should do fact-checking only came about in 2016 because of Trump.
The network probably should have a team of fact-checkers. But fact checking in real time isn't easy.
I would like to have the moderators do anything at all, though, that would be nice. Like cut off a candidate who goes over time. Maybe force candidates to answer the question asked or forfeit their time.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Either would be better than what's happening now.
The nerve! Not allowing him to just stand there and lie without being challenged!
load more comments
(1 replies)