Did a 2008 Rule Change Ruin Presidential Debates? | NYT Opinion
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 11. 2023
- Sophomoric insults. Rudeness. Personal attacks. Cross talk.
These have become defining features of American political debates these days. But things haven’t always been this way. As the Opinion Video above reminds us, civility once had a place in the political forum.
So, what happened? Hint: It’s not all Donald Trump’s fault.
Subscribe: bit.ly/U8Ys7n
More from The New York Times Video: nytimes.com/video
----------
Whether it's reporting on conflicts abroad and political divisions at home, or covering the latest style trends and scientific developments, New York Times video journalists provide a revealing and unforgettable view of the world. It's all the news that's fit to watch.
There is no point to these debates. It's just a shouting match. Just get candidates one-on-one and ask them specific questions and then ask follow-up questions.
WITH FACT-CHECKING!
stop blacks and muslims refugees and migrants to the UK and europe !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or you and your childrens will regret!
Unfortunately we absolutely need to have these debates. The only way we'll find out what Trump really knows or whether Biden is actually mentally sound is if we put them on stage together without editing and without their teams being able to pick the interviewer. I do actually think that the insanity and childishness came largely from Trump, but democrats, who were just running corrupt and vacuous candidates, responded by losing their minds and getting just as crazy.
Someone needs to sort through what they are saying. Rambling isn't a debate.
This seems like Donald trump just bullied his way to presidency....
It's a reflection of our society, people are more interested in seeing a spectacle than actually listening to serious important things.
So we don't blame the politicians but the people. So what will stop their complaining so they can get better candidates if they are so tired?
The people elect the politicians. Since the 2000 election the better candidates lost handily in almost every primary due to being yacked over by noisier goats. The people are electing those who talk dominantly even though actual executive work requires talking diplomatically.
@henryvalentino-hernandez6235this is what all debates devolve into without rules. It has more to do with the human condition than individual moral fiber and it's especially not unique to politicians.
R they serious important things? It’s bs getting the respect it deserves
That's partially true, @@chamuuemura5314. It's certainly true of the Republicans post-2012. But I disagree that it's generally true since 2000. McCain and Romney were absolutely among the sanest and most reasonable Republicans in 2008 and 2012, and it doesn't get less bombastic than Gore and Kerry. Meanwhile, though I didn't vote for either in the primary, Clinton and Biden are both decorum snobs who have to be ruder to not appear like wimps against a strongman.
Why can't they just cut off the mics if the candidates' time runs out to or if the candidates start to derail the debate? IMO, I blame the moderator and the organizers for not putting their foot down when things start to go unhinged. But hey, people now would rather watch grown children argue than watch boring politicians talk about what's best for our future in this country.
I think they started doing that in 2020, not 100% certain though.
@@brockturner3112 Pretty sure they muted Trump in the second debate.
That's the problem...most people have only saw that little snippet of everyone arguing at the debate. It's good content, unfortunately.
@@kelseydalziel3514i’ve watched every debate since the 60s and it’s quite clear when debates were better.
Because then candidates won't show up.
There's a lot more behind this than a simple rule change. Our cultural fixation on entertainment and drama drives out rational discourse. Also, the virtues of trying to understand alternate viewpoints are not being taught.
It’s the money. The organisers want the views, they let anything go
I couldn't agree more. You are right on target sister. It's really sad to see smh.
So true, spot on, rational discourse is increasingly seen by many as "weakness" and shouting as "strength"
No, ma’am. Respectfully, That’s not correct. Or at least not completely. Don’t put it on the people. At the end of the day, like everyone else, these career politicians and pundits are responsible for their own actions.
Well said
They should bring that rule back! Like watching the moderator tell Obama to address the McCain, they both seemed so uncomfortable, and the moderator was just smiling. You know I used to watch British parliament on C-Span in the early morning. The Prime Minister has to go in front of parliament and get asked questions from parliament. One thing I noticed about the back and forth questioning and answering is that they all had to refer to each other in the third person. I remember a politician saying something like, "The Prime Minister promised this, but as of now he has not delivered. Will the Prime minister admit that he has failed in his promise?!" and the Prime Minister was like, "I am sorry that MP feels that way, but I think if he bothered to look at the data publicly available, he would in fact realize that I am delivering on my promise!"
You need something to separate politics from becoming personal. It's a work place after all, and most people can't yell at each other about a problem at their job and not have the company be completely dysfunctional. They need to rescind that 2008 rule. Had no idea there was a rule change 😬
To be absolutely fair, as a Brit I can tell you that our Parliament quite frequently descends into chaos as well XD
@@_beulah well I am sure the UK has its problems but you have not had a failed coup yet so this good. Although I do have a question about free speech, like how far does it go? Like in the US, if you ask me as an African American can the KKK march in my city, it's like I don't care, first amendment idiots can do what they want. But it seems with the war in Gaza, there may or may not be limits on free speech in the UK, I can't tell from the British news. It's fair either way in the UK wants to do it, was just whether free speech is the same in the UK.
@@_beulah your politicians absolutely eat each other alive. Like the time Margaret Thatcher was asked if she would consider. Becoming governor of the United Kingdom..
@@_beulah it's a total disaster no wonder the UK is heading towards failure. I wonder how Brits keep listening and getting answers from their parliament
@@jmhorange Ooh as a Black British person this is interesting. AFAIK we don’t really have many organisations as overtly racist as the KKK, but there is the English Defence League, which is a group that is very English nationalist (and there is a lot of racism in that movement). There have been protests supporting either side (Israel and Palestine) in London and elsewhere and from what I know, people have been able to protest about whatever they want. There have been some arrests for hate speech (anti-semitism, islamophobia etc.) but one of the reasons you’ll see the news being biased towards one side is that a lot of it here is state funded, so they usually follow the government line on difficult issues.
Debates are worthless now.
I found the 2016 republican primary debates pretty funny. Trump is hilarious as long as he's not in charge of anything.
@@neckenwiler It is cathartic to watch Trump insult other Republican clowns like Jeb! and Ted Cruz. Trump should be nowhere near power but it is entertaining to see him talk smack motivated solely by ego.
stop blacks and muslims refugees and migrants to the UK and europe !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or you and your childrens will regret!
@@neckenwileronly when you get to watch the 13 minute highlight reel. The other hour and a half is worthless.
US presidential debates are slowly turning into South Asian parliamentary debates. It's quite something.
I would hate to be the transcriber for one of these debates.
> No, you said [unintelligible]
> Time for a commercial break.
Vivek: I’m the only one not bought and paid for so I can say this…
Christie: Whoa ho ho….
Pence: Now Vivek, listen here, I -
DeSantis: (unintelligible)
Haley: If there’s one person here Vivek tha-
Christie: Ho Ho whoa there buddy boy-
(somebody can’t tell who): your Chinese investments Viv-
Vivek: The simple fact of the matter is this: climate change is a hoax.
Christie: Put your stupid hand down, Vivek…
“We have to take a commercial break”
@@user-fn2gw3uu1n Ron DeSantis doesn't talk anymore
It would be like transcribing the Scatman ten times and all are five times fast
It’s not just the politicians.
The whole world slowly changed to this…
We used to watch debates to see what the candidates' positions were on issues & to determine who we wanted to vote for. Now it's a spectator sport where we watch to see if our "side" is going to win or not.
Nowadays with both candidates and most voters being committed to ideologies there's not much doubt about where they stand on most issues though there should be some more effort to still appeal to moderates.
Kinda funny how they ignore the moderators but not the commercial break
Their mic won't get cut off if they ignore the moderators
Gotta help the network make that $$.😂
Forget debates. Let a group of voters from each party give the candidates a list a priories before the debate and let them prepare a five minute presentation on how they’d tackle it. After each gives their position open it up to a panel of voters and let them defend it like a doctoral thesis
of course the voters are going to choose topics that make their own candidate seem amazing and the other evil
Rule makers in 2008: "Just a little change to shake this up a little bit, this doesn't have horrific ramifications in 7 years from now."
I am from France and the exact same thing has happened over a similar time frame. I think it is also that society is more divided now than before.
You serious, Like in last century europe fought two world wars and french republic changed thrice. AND NOW WE ARE MORE DIVIDED :)
@@studies-tb1ql Well you said yourself 2 "world wars," not civil wars...
The topic of the video is politness in debates and respect between the coutry's politicians, not world peace. Thus I say the coutry'ssociety within the coutry is getting more devided.
Since 1958 France has had the 5th republic. It has been almost 70 years. I was not alive to see the world before that so obviously I am not talking about the world wars, dark ages or the roman empire...
It is nice to disagree for disagreeing but I don't see how you could possibly ague that since 1958, debates between politicians did not lose in politeness and respect. I am not saying that the world is worse now than ever before, but it is easy to watch any past presidential debate and watch the ones of today to see that this is true. Before politicians calmly criticized their opponent's ideas and projects, now they call each other crooked rotten liars that should be sent to jail. Not hard to see the difference.
@@benoitb.m6461 same humans brother, just the changing priority. we have always and we will always treat each other like S**T
“This guys a choke artist… and this guys a liar” made me burst out laughing
How soon we forget.
Debates should be in a room with no audience. Candidates shouldn’t be playing for an applause
It's been ruined since at least the 80s. It's not been a debate since forever. There's no fact checking, and no point or scoring system. They don't even honor time slots and for some reason they leave all mics hot and refuse to cut mics.
There is fact checking. It’s just that some candidates now don’t acknowledge the facts.
You can not have fair fact checking because those hosting the debates are compromised politically. Take 2020 for example. Any number of things said about covid could have been “fact checked” as false and now many of these things will have turned out to be true.
It just needs to be respectable again.
Hasn't even been ruined in the 80's you're tripping.
Fact checking in a debate is a bad idea because then whoever decides which facts to correct on-air and which to let go has undue power. This was demonstrated in one of the several 2020 debates where the moderators kept fact-checking Trump but not Biden, supposedly because Trump’s lies were “bigger”. It should be up to the voters, not a moderator, to determine if a candidate is lying when they say the moon is made of green cheese. Their opponent can also call them on their lies if they so choose. It is simply not a moderator’s place to inject themselves into the debate.
Crazy how the debates for most powerful and most important job in the country end up being some of the worst
They're often presented through cable television outlets even when simulcast on network television and moderated by network reporters/anchors. The name of the game on cable tv is to entertain even with the news.
I wouldn't be surprised if in the near future instant-replay and slow-mo is part of the immediate post debate analysis.
A couple of points. None of the older clips seemed to be from primaries where there are more candidates and it is harder to get your voice heard. People will hear you in a 1 on 1 but not necessarily when there are ten people on stage. Second, social media and media coverage of debates has also had an effect on the way debates are run. It is much easier now to clip and share “takedowns” meanwhile the media only focuses on short moments like these in their coverage. Finally, in 1 on 1 debates there should definitely be a debate where it is just the two candidates talking to each other with no questions from the audience and very little input from the moderator only to introduce a new topic every fifteen minutes or so. In this form candidates will get a chance to explain, attack, and defend their positions
If you watch any republican primary debate prior to 2016, they are incredibly civil and substantive. 1% the number of personal attacks you get now. The 2012 republican primary debates are a breath of fresh air in comparison to what we get now. It just goes to show, it is possible to talk substance even on a crowded stage.
please reply event manager phone relays
They should play this video for the candidates, before every debate. Excellent context for expectations of respect!
That's a really good idea actually. Good point.
Problem is, the "bad" example won that election
They should change the rules back first, otherwise why would the behavior change?
imagine if they only had 1 microphone and they all had to share it and they all got the same time to talk and reply!
I'd stumbled upon those black and white debates in the past, but didn't know why they were so pleasant compared to today.
Think this Pandora's box could ever be closed?
Sometimes I feel like the grown ups are all dead, even as far as back in the 1970s
Modern debating is a sham, it’s about yelling and “winning”, not about a passionate but opposing discussion on important topics. There’s little to no reason to watch them anymore.
I remember a couple years ago looking up old debates on my own just out of curiosity and was shocked how chill they were. Especially the 2004 debates with Kerry and Bush 43. I swear we were a better people back then. We all watched The West Wing back then now everyone watches Tik-Tok.
The other problem is that the moderators always try to squeeze in too many topics each debate. The first modern presidential debate (Dewey vs. Stassen in 1948) was an entire hour devoted to one question ("should Communist Party USA be outlawed"). If you only have 2 minutes to speak on each topic, instead of contributing meaningfully to the conversation why not throw in some zingers that ensure you'll be remembered?
The actual length of 15 minutes per topic (in order to get to, do 6 topics) may be a bit too rushed/simple but not really unreasonable amount of time for amount of topics.
NPR should set it up like they used to with Harvard style debates
Is that the platform of a.school debate? Cause arent those like designed to never actually try to solve a problem but to just vomit points out at light speed?
Donald trump was basically a cool guy in the wrong profession.
Many and many hyped him up as a potential president for decades, Oprah and others asked him if he will ever run, at first he didn't see the need; until Romney lost. Also the political apparatus favors big money and donors for the longest time and since the mid 2000s the parties stifle any 'problematic' or 'outside' voices during their primaries. Trump was the one who broke through that because he didn't need donors to fund and had enough name recognition and attracted attention.
"Debate." LOL!
A parallel to reflect on: before 2002, before the Oxley 2002 law was created, honor and honesty were a competitive disadvantage in some markets because some companies altered their financial statements to appear more stable and thus attract more investors. This has changed since this law was created; now those who do so lose credibility and, with it, the trust of their stakeholders, causing their shares to plummet. A smart law.
Maybe we can do something similar with debates, where it seems that respect and civility are competitive disadvantages. Not necessarily a law, just a measure to discourage such behavior, such as counting the number of times a candidate interrupted his candidate and the moderator, or that the candidate be required to remain silent and listen to his opponent's response when he is called upon, discouraging him from doing so unless he really knows what he is going to say.
Wouldn't work. The public would side with their favorite candidates against the moderators.
The first debates were genius, utilize a new widespread tech (TV) to influence more people to be informed on policy when voting. Shame what it turned into on both sides.
So true! I didn’t realize it until just now.
West Wing, Season 7, Episode 7, the debate American deserves. Issues and policy, not attacks about character and size of shoes.
It's a real shame. I can hardly sleep at night with the state of things.
A presidential debate used to allow for decorum and polite discussion between people of essentially the same view. Nowadays I have to count sheep. Its terrible.
I’m one of those that whenever I wanted to improve my oratory in English I would go and watch old debates and speeches by e.g: Bobby Kennedy or Reagan and enjoy them. Now this debates are hard to watch, regardless of the party. But the opinion analysis here was very good, I hadn’t thought about it.
The ending was a headache!
Seems an apt representation of the breakdown of our society as well. Everyone just wants to get their opinion or last word in these days, whether in person or social media. Civil discourse seems to be a thing of the past. They need to bring these rules back & set a good example.
Not to mention it's hard to actually hear what candidates think when they're all talking over each other or just throwing insults.
"It's only on yellow here, wait a minute." 💀
why he kinda 💀
The November 8 debate was actually pretty calm and normal
At one point they were great at hiding, now they’re just out in the open.
Can we please get an extended supercut of presidential candidates being polite to each other and the moderator?
We in Italy are used to this trash for 30 years... Welcome to the club, Americans.
I think once news outlets start to realize how little amount of people actually watch these on their channels, they’ll start to question why…
this came about precisely because people watch it... what are you talking about?
Half the comments seem to miss the point… the rules of the debate format changed. Thats when the slide began.
I don’t understand the point of the rule change. I mean, candidates still addressed and rebutted each others’ points before the change
TV wanted more drama
Reminds me of The Newsroom, where they wanted to change the debating format.
More so because politicians have reached celebrity status due to how prevalent social media is.
so true!
This leaves out a lot of detail. Namely, that general election debates are run by the Commission on Presidential Debates (previously the League of Woman Voters), which did change its rules in 2008, but has nothing to do with primary debates. Primary debates are run by the DNC/RNC and whichever network they are airing on, and have never had rules about not addressing fellow candidates directly. Jerry Brown and Bill Clinton had a nasty personal spat in 1992 during a Democratic primary debate where they addressed each other directly.
Well said this is an overly simplistic video. It’s largely up to the moderators as well, in the current election cycle look at the Fox Business debate shown here and compare it to the other three debates (Fox News, NewsNation, and CNN), all of which were very well run.
I like debates when candidates are sitting down at a table instead of standing at a podium. It seems more calm and policy oriented to me.
Debates were ruined by both parties failing to bring forward anyone of value...as candidates or as people!
Sound like a fish market when they all shouted over each other! 🙄
We will always support this channel. They're truly one of the best.
LMAO.
Drama is the only way to get attention nowadays
I think I now realise why MPs aren't allowed to address each other in Parliamentary debates in the UK...
We've been screwed ever since Newt Gingrich's style of combative politics took hold as a new normal. FU, Newt.
Now a days debates are like dramas and I am loving every bit of it🍿🍿🍿😂😂😂 and Donald is the star in this😂😂😂
This is so funny. How times have changed!
This is a reflection of a major change in media over the years. There is more and more media available to us, and anyone who wants to stay relevant needs to compete for people's attention. The former president is master of that.
It’s not the problem of the moderators or shows, it’s what Americans want to watch, so they get it. It’s a big social problem sadly…
The only element respected is “The Commercial Break”.
even tho theres a lack of direction in any of these debates, we still get one helluva show every 4 years.
My brain hurts 🧠
Disgusting! Common guys, you have the most powerful nation in history!
How can such things happen in a PRESIDENTIAL debat?!
It's about making the networks money via clicks or turning to a tv station, since most people don't care to watch politicians acting civil and respectful.
Not sure if they changed it to get more attention from people resignating in politics (and (not) going to vote) or what's behind that. - Here in Germany you can see tendencies going in that direction as well. And this really scares me. Not discussing about important topics but only personal attacks. - And "your" former president Trump makes all this even worse. When voting for this guy think about what our joungest learn from that man!
0:17 "is an effective leader of his pah'ry" 😂
I think it’s actually because politics became more entertaining, and more theater. Not because they can now address themselves lol
The dumbing of America
Blaming Trump when it clearly shows the moderator forcing Obama to argue directly. 🤣. Media can’t even get their own propaganda right.
I think candidates who talk over others or out of turn should get muted.
Thats why its called a debate, they debate their ideas and they need to talk to eachother to get their views out
czcams.com/video/rODJhXytWc0/video.htmlsi=56EZolMrKDYRV9am. People were respectful during the state of the union address as well.
I want out of this "Idiocracy"-timeline.
Remove this rule to regain sanity back in these debates.
I’m guessing they don’t change the rules back because ratings are higher this way $$$
😂😂 it’s funny but sad. Omg I hope there’s a better way to tackle issues.
It was boring before, and now entertaining!
To be fair, in the old days there was the occasional barb or insult toward another candidate. Remember the "You're no Jack Kennedy" moment in '88? Or when Bob Dole was Ford's running mate in '76, and in a debate he claimed that all four major U.S. wars of the 20th century to that date were "Democratic wars" started by Democrats? That being said, in those days there was none of the crosstalk, bickering, and petty insults on a level that would have embarrassed the commentators of "The McLaughlin Group." One more symptom of a broken political system.
Thank you for adding some nuances!
Exactly when did American politics get so polarized???
Unfortunately, debates are not longer debates and are not longer worth watching.
That was painful to watch. Donald should be in prison and it should be taught in schools how dangerous he was to society. A cautionary tale.
And yet he has a better than 50% chance of being re-elected President once again...
What is wrong with people?
Old times ✨
They just get them to debate online in a forum rolling stream so we can actually read everything they say instead of hearing random different percentages of 2 different parts.
A true illustration of the lunacy the world has descended into in the 21st century
It all boils down to mannerisms. Back then mannerisms were given much importance. Now anything goes in a data driven world. Back then anything one did and said sticks. Now in an oversaturated market of information people move on quickly and it all becomes old news and everyone always running for the next new big thing. The impact of social media on people's mind!!😮
Donald Trump made debates so much more fun. That’s my President. TRUMP 2024 🇺🇸 🍊
Most of those flashbacks were for the main president debates not the primary ones
czcams.com/video/rODJhXytWc0/video.htmlsi=56EZolMrKDYRV9am? He was a great man
From 2008 onwards debate became a debate
This is crazy
Trump wont debate, either in the primary or the general.
Debates are just reality tv now.
One mic on at a time, chess clocks, genuine interviewers not hacks
JFK sounds like Bill Burr on downers
Yesterdays debate became a rant on china
Are you going to mention the 2008 rule that "ruined" everything or?
All I saw was a bunch of clips of people cutting eachother off with no mention of the catalyst
That candidates can ask each other questions
We need to change the rule back.
Sad
I remember people criticized the pre-2008 format for not being a true debate, but more of a joint press conference. The montage glosses over a lot of instances of personal attacks. The 88 Bush-Dukakis debates got quite personal at some points and contained a number of negative snipes.
If there had to be a choice I would rather have a little too much heat than candidates getting to ignore the criticism of the opponent.
Literally politicians being politicians. See what they said outside of debates
I mean these fools wanna run for President? Why before thinking of becoming one atleast read the biography or learn some manners from past Presidents? Like how to make policies how to speak and how to present yourself.
Now this is same for every countries' debates it's sad and pathetic and uncivilized tradition