I’m a Republican, but this guy just cannot follow the debate rules. THE OPPONENT IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO TALK *UNINTERRUPTED*.
Is that so hard to do? Plus he goes on way past his allotted time.
Harris is better, has broken each rule a few times, but not nearly as often nor as long.
Father is speaking, Susan.
shareThe moderator did a good job, but she also made a big mistake trying to cram way too many topics into 90 minutes. The two candidates deserve plenty of rebuttal time in a debate, and shouldn't be bound by silly arbitrary cut-off points. Some questions simply require more than two minutes to answer.
shareI think there needs to some allowance on interrupting. For instance, if someone is asked a question and they go to reply with something that is completely irrelevant and doesn't remotely address the question and the moderator allows it, the question asker has the right to say "hold up, I asked X, you are not answering this". You can't just respond with "Hey, don't interrupt me" and then continue with a nonsense answer. After one interruption, I suppose let them carry on but at the next opportunity to speak, reply with "they have clearly not addressed my question, would you like to try again or shall we agree you are being deliberately evasive of the question?"
shareIn the UK interviewers try to get the politicians to answer the actual questions - but often they simply won't. All the interviewer can do is say something like, ' well we're clearly not going to get an answer so let's move on ...'. Which seems to be regarded as a successful result by the politicians.
shareYeah. Sad state of affairs.
shareThose rules are silly. Let them talk.
share