DEBATES-----Oh Yeah!

"No issues were really covered until the candidates practically had to be dragged to a debate. These debates were probably one of the only good things that the media did in this election." KY

"The debates . . . are the best way to see first-hand how a candidate stands on issues like the homeless, economy, and running the country. The candidates can compete with their opponents instead of having the media do it for them. This way the American people can choose the candidates without the help of the media." PA

"Around the United States, millions of voters turned to see the presidential candidates go head-to-head, live and unrehearsed, in a series of debates. Candidates that have done extensive research are, hopefully, able to make knowledgeable comments about the issues being discussed. In these debates the voters can see if their candidate appears young, exciting and decisive, or tired, unattractive and uncertain." FL

"Abortion, welfare, schooling, deficit and taxes, were only some of the issues brought up finally in the debates. The debates helped Clinton get his message across and it helped to balance out the negative earlier coverage. Bush, in the meanwhile, was right by Clinton (side by side) at the debate, but Clinton appeared to fare better than Bush. (The media caught him looking at his watch three times.) Perot appeared to have the best speech and use of words in my opinion, but I still feel Clinton won the debates at the end. The visual images from the television screen always helped, but it was especially important when the people themselves could ask the questions, rather than have to respond to members of the media. Television, however, did host the debates and. . . successfully informed the public. The candidates had an excellent chance to let Americans see and hear their viewpoints on the issues in the campaign." TX

"I think a little more pressure wouldn't hurt the candidates, if they can answer hot topic questions off the top of their head in a debate, that lets the public know we could have a president who can think fast in time of need." NE

"Maybe our debates should be on black and white television. It could take away emphasis on clothing. This move would help shadow each of the candidate's new suits and power ties. With the de-emphasis on appearance, it would open new waves of thought toward our candidates. Voters would no longer be distracted by such material things, and would be more open to focus on pertinent issues." WI

"One of the most unbiased way of informing the voters is by controlled, organized debates. Each major network would be required to hold two free debates during prime air time (including) all presidential candidates in the three months preceding the election. This way, there (would) be no discriminatory reporting on the part of the media . . . and only issues (could) be discussed. This method (would) eliminate the influence of private money, which has become the 'central source of political corruption, ' according to Arthur Schlesinger." VA

"I think debates, which aren't always seen in state elections, are a good way to meet the candidates and hear what they think about certain issues." PA

"The debates. . . add action to the whole political scene as the candidates disagree and have different viewpoints on many of the major issues concerning this nation today: taxes, the economy, unemployment, social security, medicare, abortion, and education." CA

"We need mandatory actual debating. Presidential candidates should participate in at least three debates spaced equidistant throughout the campaign. There should be only on moderator to state the issue the candidates are debating upon. After making their opening statements, the candidates should debate the issue until they have nothing else to say - not until time runs out...An additional element to the presidential campaigns would have each candidate address a single issue in each of the final six-eight weeks. Each candidate would make a statement and then be questioned by a panel of experts. This way the public could really compare the candidates' policies and views on the issues." KY

"As a voter you don't really get to know the candidates' stance on the issues until the debates." WI

"Most voters watch the debates to see how the candidate stacks up on each issue. The debates give everyone a chance to see their candidate and hear him or her answer question from either a moderator or from a selected group of common people." OH

DEBATES-----Are You Kidding ?

"In the 1992 presidential election, again the media presented the candidates through political debates on television. To test the professional capacities of the candidates, television journalists posed questions concerning important issues affecting the country. This question-and-answer type of debates did not give the American people a total picture of the candidates. The candidates were presented to the public as television actors, coached on what to say, how to talk, and how to act. The candidates were not themselves. They were later judged on how they performed on television, not on what they have done as public servants, not on who they really were, and not on their future plans for the country. With this political "quiz show," the media failed to give the American public a relevant basis in choosing the candidates." CA

"The debates also provided an interesting way for the press to influence the election. After closely examining the process upon which the debate format was decided, that story dominated the news for over a week. Rather than talking about the candidates' focus on the issues, the press devoted its time to which candidate wanted which format. The candidates' views on debate formats rarely demonstrates their abilities as President of the United States. Yet this was the focus of the campaign news for over a week. Then, once the debates actually began, the press concentrated on who won the debate and why George Bush couldn't land his knockout punch on Bill Clinton. They never bothered to devote a significant amount of time to the actual text of the debate." MD

"The original Lincoln/Douglas debates lasted seven hours. The audience listened to point-by-point logical presentations and refutations of issues. The election debates of today are reduced to who blinks the least." KS

"Current debates have the candidates' goal as avoiding mistakes rather than letting the viewers know how they think and feel about the stated issues." KY

"Mass media hinders the lesser candidates by keeping them out of the debates. In order to meet the eligibility requirements to be involved in the debates, the aspirant must first meet the standards of "national newsworthiness" and "competitiveness and indications of national public enthusiasm as shown by polls. . .". It is the media that create public polls, and minor candidates never appear in them. By neglecting minor parties in the polls the media prevent minor candidates from meeting the second standard." OH

"Were Marrou, Hagelin and Fulani ever invited to a debate that was televised? No they were not and this is not fair, equal treatment." SD

"Media-covered debates should be open to all candidates. In this election year, 1992, there were eleven candidates on the ballot for President and only three participated in televised debates." MN

"Take a look at the Presidential debates. Who made the decision to let in Ross Perot, the Independent ticket candidate? He wasn't Republican or Democrat. He was put on that Independent ticket because of his money. Ross Perot sponsored himself. Where were the other candidates, such as Lenora Fulani and Lyndon Larouche, Jr.? They should have had equal representation as did Ross Perot on those debates." OH

"Unfortunately, after the debates the networks insisted on analyzing everything the candidates said and telling the viewers, who "won" and who "lost". Indeed even televised debates can cause false "images" of candidates. This is obvious in the now famous Nixon-Kennedy Debate." MD

"Even after every debate on television, we would have these newspeople interpret for us who won that debate. They would pick apart the comments of the candidates. It was obvious that they wanted us to believe that Clinton won every debate. It was as if we didn't even watch the debate, we had to be told how they thought it went. The media wanted to spoon feed us all of the information, and then tell us how it went." NY

"During the three Presidential debates, viewers should have been listening to the issues being discussed, not the opinionated remarks of the commentator." IL

"This election year allowed for various debate styles. The media managed to make a joke about the discrepancy in the color chosen for the backdrop for the debates, making the candidates look like bickering four year old siblings." MI

"Sadly, much of the candidates' debate ends up as pointless argument, name-calling and playground-like retorts, dry repetition of their main political objectives 'if elected,' and even more repetition of rehearsed rhetoric in retaliation regarding a rehearsed rejoinder respecting a rumor! Most viewers are left with a lesser-of-two-evils choice and a hopeless feeling of not having learned anything good about the candidates. Lucky for them, the News Wrap-Up, complete with winners and losers is sure to follow the debate, so please stand by!" OR

"The candidates argued, bickered, and quibbled on national television, not once, but three times in three different places and formats. If one of them could not speak with utmost eloquence and sincerity, a professional was hired to make sure the candidate was flawless on television. The art of making on intelligent, but not too smart; experienced, but not taken in by the corruption; reliable, but not obviously fake; became the job of a few lucky people. They not only had to teach the candidate how (to) speak, but prepare him for a virtual war. . . By having public debates, the candidates opened themselves to humiliation and disgrace, but also gave themselves the perfect chance to show their outstanding talents to the people--talents such as concise and respectable answers to controversial questions, strict adherence to topics of national concern, and the ability to have a discussion with a fellow candidate, without any childish name-calling or finger-pointing. Of course, their concise answers often ran over the allotted time and were often irrelevant to the question; the topics of national concern were Clinton's wife and the famous phrase, 'Read my lips...'; and politicians can never resist the opportunity to badger an opponent on national television. They leaped at the chance to point out the mistakes of their opponent's past, or explain why the proposed plans would never work." OH

"The press even sways the debating process by picking a winner for the viewers instead of letting the voters decide." IL

"Television and radio time was monopolized by commentary on the debates and general campaign process for weeks prior to the actual election. Everything that was said by the candidates that was of any significance was not only rehashed but also altered." OK

"Should the viewers of the debates form their own opinion or listen to those supposedly more educated?" MO

"In short, the supreme effect of television on politics has been to make our party system useless, to make appearance more important than character, to raise the power of money in political choice, and to eliminate the reason for debates." IL