Confucius: “Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without.”
The results are in. Michael Bloomberg will not be president. He, the pundits agreed, is a lousy debater and perforce, will be rejected in his campaign to be the nominee of the Democrat party. We’ll see.
The real loser last Wednesday evening was NBC/MSNBC. They produced a terrible debate. I was reminded of a cockfight (which is outlawed). According to Wikipedia “Being a spectator at a cockfight is prohibited in 43 states and the District of Columbia.” I wish I had known—several hours would have been saved.
The only way to have a real debate is with rules and enforced order. Talking over others should be ruled out of order. As should distracting hand-waving; I thought Elizabeth Warren might take flight. And there should be a timekeeper who muted microphones when time is up. But, not intending to write a handbook on debate rules, give me a minute of your time on questions.
The question of the night seemed to be asked of Senator Amy Klobuchar. She was asked why she could not remember the name of the Mexican president. She said and I paraphrase: I forgot it and want to apologize and went on to talk admiringly of her work in the United States Senate on matters pertaining to Mexico. Self-admiration is not in short supply in the debates. After she was asked a second time about her failure Senator Warren admonished the questioner. Perhaps the questioner forgot she had answered.
In lieu of questions intended to provoke the verbal equivalent of a cockfight, let me suggest a few alternatives.
First, Senator Sanders we live in a federalist system, please tell me which State programs you believe are making measurable progress in reducing poverty?
The next question is for Senator Warren. What steps would you take to resolve the nuclear crisis with North Korea?
Mayor Buttigieg, climate change threats will require the central government to issue command and control regulations. What do you favor?
Vice President Biden. What would you do as President that you couldn’t talk President Obama in to doing when you were his Vice-President?
Senator Klobuchar, are there steps we should take in post-secondary education that would provide a less disruptive career path for young adults?
And finally to Mayor Bloomberg. You have been an active philanthropist. Have you gained any insights on what works that would cause you to change the government’s approach to intractable problems?
Finally, I thought Mayor Bloomberg made a telling point when he asked of his debate contestants whether any had started a business. Doing things is often more instructive than talking about things.
And, NBC/MSNBC should now understand that voters do not choose saints. The election of Donald Trump was instructive. Probe for the sinners choices—for how they would lead our government.
Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books.
DeirdreLaMotte says
Excellent piece! And I will remind people that Hillary “won” the debates against Trump. I am sick of the candidates attacking each other…
Mike was the only one to point out that DJT is the one that needs defeating.
I like Mike more and more.
George Hardy says
Ditto, ditto, ditto to Deirdre LaMotte’s comment.
Beverly Jones says
The debates have little substance. This wasn’t so when The League of Women Voters ran them. They had real questions and their non-partisan stance was unquestioned. Their lack of involvement is a loss to us all as a nation.
I found the following article which finally explained to me why the League discontinued it’s support:
League Refuses to “Help Perpetrate a Fraud”
10/3/1988
NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
October 3, 1988
LEAGUE REFUSES TO “HELP PERPETRATE A FRAUD”
WITHDRAWS SUPPORT FROM FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE
WASHINGTON, DC —”The League of Women Voters is withdrawing its sponsorship of the presidential debate scheduled for mid-October because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter,” League President Nancy M. Neuman said today.
“It has become clear to us that the candidates’ organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and honest answers to tough questions,” Neuman said. “The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.”
Neuman said that the campaigns presented the League with their debate agreement on
September 28, two weeks before the scheduled debate. The campaigns’ agreement was negotiated “behind closed doors” and vas presented to the League as “a done deal,” she said, its 16 pages of conditions not subject to negotiation.
Most objectionable to the League, Neuman said, were conditions in the agreement that gave the campaigns unprecedented control over the proceedings. Neuman called “outrageous” the campaigns’ demands that they control the selection of questioners, the composition of the audience, hall access for the press and other issues.
“The campaigns’ agreement is a closed-door masterpiece,” Neuman said. “Never in the history of the League of Women Voters have two candidates’ organizations come to us with such stringent, unyielding and self-serving demands.”
Neuman said she and the League regretted that the American people have had no real opportunities to judge the presidential nominees outside of campaign-controlled environments.
“On the threshold of a new millenium, this country remains the brightest hope for all who cherish free speech and open debate,” Neuman said. “Americans deserve to see and hear the men who would be president face each other in a debate on the hard and complex issues critical to our progress into the next century.”
Neuman issued a final challenge to both Vice President Bush and Governor Dukakis to “rise above your handlers and agree to join us in presenting the fair and full discussion the American public expects of a League of Women Voters debate.”
Lolli Sherry says
Thank you Beverly for posting this piece. It was enlightening.
Alexander says
You could just rename the producers at CBS for the Tuesday’s Democratic Debate and rerun this story for it all continues to be true.
If only some grownup could cut the microphone to all the contenders that should be listening, we could actually hear some informed statements.