Would you watch a very heavily moderated debate with RW wingnuts ?

[steve2470]

Heavily moderated = no broad brushes, only facts allowed, no personal attacks, no Gish gallop, etc....

The thread about MSNBC got me thinking about this. The debate would have to be very heavily moderated to eliminate RW bullshit.

9 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	No way
	5 (56%)
	Yes, if it's done extremely well
	2 (22%)
	Other (see my post)
	1 (11%)
	42
	0 (0%)
	Kittens
	0 (0%)
	Beer
	0 (0%)
	Wine
	0 (0%)
	Weed
	1 (11%)
	Puppies
	0 (0%)
	I just like to vote!
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Where's the entertainment value in that?

They have nothing of substance to say, so why should we waste time watching them if they're not even going to get to make stuff up?

[steve2470]

2. it might be fun watching them sputter! nt

[TexasTowelie]

3. How dare you make me choose among kittens, weed and beer.

I'll have to pick weed since it probably offers the best way to keep my blood pressure down.

ETA: I'm going to have to change over to kittens since they need support.

[steve2470]

4. ha! nt

[House of Roberts]

26. I always go with kittens first and beer second.

I never needed weed to make me want to eat and drink beer.

[SheilaT]

5. I can't begin to imagine such a debate where those participating actually kept to the rules.

The only way to moderate it would be that the moderator could keep on cutting off the microphones of the participants every time they strayed. And if that happened, I bet the "debaters" would soon walk out.

[steve2470]

8. I think the RW wingnut would leave far sooner than his/her progressive counterpart

I do think actual verifiable facts are on our side. I think the rules could say, if you walk off, you lose automatically. Something like that.

[Arkansas Granny]

17. I can't imagine a debate where right wingers stuck to facts.

That, in itself, might be interesting to watch.

[BlueJazz]

6. I was going to pick "Yes" but although I don't particularly like Republicans or right-wingers,....

....I would not want them to be slaughtered either. I mean, with a forum only about Actual Facts, it would be like shooting little kittens or some other horrible act.

[HereSince1628]

7. A debate with heavily MEDICATED rwingers, yes.

[steve2470]

9. ha! nt

[JaneyVee]

10. Rightwingers and facts are mutually exclusive.

[Thinkingabout]

11. We need to know the crap between them. Expect SNL and others will feature

Some of the exchanges.

[steve2470]

12. the past history of the participants ? nt

[Thinkingabout]

15. Hope the have some new lines except OOPS

[Journeyman]

13. More importantly, would any of them participate in such a well-structured, no bullshit debate?. . .

[steve2470]

14. good question! nt

[leveymg]

16. Only if the Referee is allowed to pound the shit out of miscreants.

Now, that might be entertaining.

(Yes, I'm in one of THOSE moods)

[Jackpine Radical]

18. I'd maybe watch 3 minutes of the inevitable lowlights on YouTube.

Beyond that, I have to go get my fly rod ready for opening day.

And my wife has been nagging me about cleaning the basement.

[procon]

19. Non sequitur - no Republican would ever agree to such a format.

In reality, there probably aren't too many politicians from any party who would take that bait.

[truebluegreen]

20. I think something along the lines of the proposed "prosecutorial" debate

they had in The Newsroom would be priceless--and would never happen. Actually, I think all debates should be like that: no more infomercials.

[stuffmatters]

21. NO TO MOD ...left to run their mouths, the Repubs always make fools of themselves.

I'm for them being able to spew as much bullshit as they want...why protect them from themselves?

[valerief]

22. I don't believe in magic, and this scenario is totally unbelievable. nt

[DonCoquixote]

23. honestly

I would have an easier time beliving that Unicorns and Martians would appear live in London.

[JHB]

24. Except you can't make them stick to it, or none would agree to it

Whatever rules you put in place, there is no consequence to violating them that they or their fan-bases will care about afterward. They'll just point to it and say "Ha! I didn't jump through their hoops!" while their fans cheer.

[Tyrs WolfDaemon]

25. I say they use the 'trial by three shields' format

They could put it on Pay-per-view, with the proceeds going to help kids, the homeless, etc.















This was not a serious option. I would never suggest actually giving any of those wingnuts a real weapon (or a shield).