Reality show? Invite, The Donald, The Expert.
1
Trump didn't start this behavior, but he definitely capitalized on the worst of human nature identified by psychiatrist Eric Berne in one of his games, "Let's You and Him Fight." Family Feud? Geraldo Rivera? Hemingway and the bull fights?
Cable news and social media are Johnny-come-latelies to the game of wanting to watch violence. And the reality shows are just that. Whether it's physical or emotional violence, the thrill of the fight is there.
As a long-time Democrat, I'm appalled at the manner in which members of this party are now conducting themselves. And this time, with a critical election at stake, it's the Democrat's election to lose. Looks like they're well on the way to doing just that with their petty internal politics and inability understand the need to present a solid front in the face of the Republican disaster. We seem to be headed for an election determined by Instagram and Facebook.
Perhaps the chickens are indeed coming home to roost in America.
2
Is it the candidates who want to turn these debates into a reality show, or is it the writers of editorial commentary?
Too many writers are fond of story angles like this one that make themselves seem clever and the public silly. Epstein seems to buy into the notion that American politics has become Trump's crazy circus. For one party and for a minority of voters that may be the reality, but there is so much more going on right now that is significant in terms of Democratic candidates, voters, money, etc., so why this? NYT, please give us editorials that are actually prescient and say something illuminating.
4
I've done my due diligence on all the candidates and decided on Buttigieg. He's the best leader any country could ask for. I'd love to see his measured, reasoned intelligence go up against the crazy machine that is Donald Trump. I feel no need to watch this next Dem shouting match between 19 of the other Dem candidates. Hickenlooper, Williamson, Delaney, Gabbard, Gillibrand, Inslee, O'Rourke and Ryan should have been cut by now, IMO. Some have good ideas but they are not going to win the nomination, IMO.
3
The cynicism of this article offends me. What else can the public be offered to sort out this collection of wannabes? Like probably all the Democrats voting, I have a chosen group I would like to know more about.
Let the America's papers write in depth reviews and interviews of each candidate. Ask them specifically about health care, immigration, foreign policy, voter's rights, all the pertinent issues and when they finish, summarize the answers. Publish that. Consolidate.
For the next debate, let it be between a total of ten candidates and no more. The cream has already risen. Thin down the numbers and let's get serious.
8
“Audiences get off on watching narcissists go head to head.”
This article is a shining example of self-parody that demonstrates how Democrats will once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Not only does it reiterate ad absurdum everything we already know, it also predicts how our current Narcissist-In-Chief will coast to a second term by breaking all the rules and demolishing any and all of his opponents. America deserves better yet doesn’t seem to want it.
3
Get it? We are looking ahead to televised debates between Trump and whoever the Democrats nominate. Some of the candidates who ran against Trump in the GOP primaries were serious even if they were wrong or misinformed. He dispatched them with demeaning nicknames and flamboyant positions.
The Democrats are looking for someone who will out-Trump Trump. And let us not forget that the NYT, Fox, CNN, and MSNBC have had massive audience increases since Trump began his campaign.
Personally, I think it's a waste of time to watch these early "debates." There are too many candidates for much in the way of substance. What there is in real content can easily be read after the debate (or any day in the candidates' stump prattle or policy statements). That aside, it is a long time until primary day for most of us. When that day rolls around most of those candidates will be relegated to the "Oh, I forgot he/she ran" pile. I've had far too many experiences of liking one candidate, then having him/her drop out before the whole dog and pony show even got to my primary.
It's not that I'm not paying attention - I pay plenty of that and I always vote in primaries. That said, I'm not interested in antics, zingers, personalities or even who I "like." I want two things for 2020: beat Trump; move the country in the right direction on the core issues - economics, justice, health, immigration, foreign affairs, etc.
1
The reality is .... there are no good candidates...so far.
2
More like soap opera on MSNBC and CNN!
Totally ridiculous as if we don't have more than enough Political soap opera.
"The characters who do the best on reality shows often wind up being the ones audiences dislike the most." By that metric, Harris is the "winner" in the unlikeability contest. She was already that for me anyway. Who wants a finger-pointing "prosecutor in chief" anyway? And narcissm doesn't begin to describe the calculation in that whole confrontation with Biden.
Poor Joe, didn't see that coming and didn't help himself, for sure. I read that his son Beau and Harris had been friendly back when they were both State Attorneys General so perhaps he thought that would make attack off limits? Naive of him to say the least. As for Harris this time, I wonder which t-shirt she'll have ready to sell on her campaign website? Next up: The Anita Hill hearings? A photo of Harris from that era "I could have been this woman." Joe, you've got some "'splaining to do."
2
They feel like a reality show precisely because that’s what their are: the guests in turn all look uncomfortable, use colorful but unimaginative language, moderators with a well rehearsed script of banal questions and comments, predictable answers. The tv zombies, with the power of the vote , feel they are seeing and listening to honest opinions of the guests of the shows that validate their preconceived and uncritical opinions . Prime time shows full of Hollywood fantasy. Don’t forget Trump has more experience in doing reality shows.
4
I was concerned about the format in the first set of debates. Really gracious candidates who played by the rules were upstaged by those who interrupted the debate with their premeditated attacks and one-liners. Some tried to bully their way to more air time. I wish in the second debate, interruptions of other candidates or speaking out of turn not be allowed. Moderators, get tough and enforce the rules.
7
I’m interested to see how Bullock - coming in with no baggage from the first set of debates - will do. We need a good, solid centrist Democrat.
2
The Democrats are going to cannibalize themselves. I keep waiting for someone with substance to run. I’m not sure that’s going to happen.
3
There is zero chance any of their proposals will ever be enacted into laws even if any of them are elected President so why should the voters care except for the entertainment value! They each have more outlandish proposals than the other to draw media attention, but the reality is that the American political system is designed to maintain status quo.
2
@Rahul
And the outlandish proposals all seem to be the candidates' competition to see who can propose the most free benefits and programs, to be financed by taxpayers. For example, the candidates unanimously proposing to confer the benefits of Medicare to illegal immigrants immediately on their arrival to the US. Currently, wage earners work their entire careers to qualify for Medicare at age 65, but forget about that--let's just hand it out for free to individuals who haven't been employed in this country for even one day!
4
I for one would like to see Trump debate himself. No matter what he says he won't be able to refrain from insulting and mocking himself as only he can.
4
Maybe Harris will use her poor little girl on the bus story again. Too bad the moderator didn’t ask her what she did the following year - which was move to Montreal.
10
So, the best quipster “wins”? So that national media can all pander to limited brains. Ouch. Give me PBS. Please.
3
@Neil With a world of social media narcissism. PBS looks like Sesame Street.
1
The Democrats are having a copy-cat Chinese style Cultural Revolution. For instance Beto O’Rourke has issued endlessly series apologies for who he is─ and for what his ancestors were. Among the Democrats a contest is underway to describe themselves as a “disadvantaged” “victims.” Washington State’s Rep. Pramila Jayapal announced publically she had an abortion. And few weeks later, she publicized that her child going through a gender-identity crisis. The Democrats are fighting each other to prove who’s most victimized, most underprivileged ─ while all of them are “privileged” “advantaged” millionaires. And then in desperation, now beginning to throw those nasty rhetorical bombs like “racists” “sexists” once used to silence conservatives now being used to bludgeon each other. You saw how Senator Kamala Harris calling Vice President Biden, a racist and segregationist. These are nothing but pitiful passive-aggressive political games tailored to titillate the proclivities of their constituents. Yet─ there are no Democratic contenders, including the “America thrashing” "Israel hating" “Squad” members, and not even Ms. Pelosi who can articulate credible, and practical plans, proposals, or a platform aimed at solving real problems of real Americans ─without scheming to heist the American taxpayer─ Our Democratic candidates should learn from JFK, who put a man on the moon. He said, “ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country…”
7
@ChandraPrince "Our Democratic candidates should learn from JFK...“ask not what your country can do for you..."
I remember how inspiring that speech was. But it would be beyond impossible now.
Only about 30% of the population is white male, and a lot of those are Repubs. So, only perhaps half of the white males would respond to an unselfish call to the common good.
The other 70% of the population is made up of aggrieved victims who want to be told that the candidate will do more for Me, Me, Me. The last thing they'll want to hear is a call to sacrifice, to give up something in order to favor others.
So, perhaps 15% of the population would respond to JFK's speech now.
5
'saw the first debates - heard their positions - what more is there to know? #trainwreck
3
This story makes me feel sick.
4
@lee113
'made me want to uncork a bottle of champagne : )
Now we have a comparaison: Trump.
Most of us in the NYT pages clearly find reality TV politics to be distasteful, simplistic and corporate.
But, part of me hopes there is a silver lining: maybe democrats can win back some of those voters who are attracted to spectacle over substance. And I fear there are many.
2
The Dems are getting closer to getting the stage right but they need to tweak it a bit more.
First, only 8 candidates per night. Next, put them all in boxes stacked on top and side by side with one opening in the middle. Get two audience contestant members. Let the contestant choose which candidate to pick and have Alex Trebek read an answer to a question. The candidate must respond in the form of a question. Then, let Alex ask the contestant if the candidate answered correctly. If the contestant gets it right, Vanna White will walk across the stage to reveal either an X or an O.
The last opening in the middle needs a real Joan Rivers or Paul Lynde personality maybe someone like Dave Chappelle.
And finally, if the contestant manages to get three correct answers in a row, Oprah runs out and shouts "You get a car, and you, and you, and you! And we're all going to Australia!!!!!!". All while Simon Cowell hits the golden buzzer.
6
Watch Kamala tear Joe Biden a new one in the next debates....pulling out her "Mansplaining" card.
He best be prepared to interject something along the lines of "Kamala, last time we were on this stage you attempted to hijack a cultural divisive issue that didn't belong to you in order to gain moral standing that you don't deserve. If you're prepared to tell the American people right now and right here that you support forced bussing..which you inferred in our last debate...I'll cede the microphone. Only this time, you can't change your position tomorrow."
Zing!
Pow!
Bang!
15
@Erica Smythe There you go. Right on point! Or, Kamala may pull out the gender card. And, dig up Anita Hill, with t-shirts already for sale. For certain, her ego will find a way to deflect.
5
I’m disappointed that Kamala isn’s going to be on the same stage as Bernie. He wouldn’t wilt in the face of whatever she threw at him.
8
Why not? Everything else is.
1
Gimmicks and one liners work with a populace that is now provenly short of attention span.
5
Simple solution - shut off the microphones of everyone who isn’t supposed to be speaking. Screaming into a dead mic to try interrupting will make them look so impotent that they will soon stop. Give them a light that is the equivalent of raising your hand if they want to interject.
10
@Steve Gallup We should demand it, and demand that the candidates insist on it. If a candidate doesn't insist on it, that's a big negative to me.
2
I am not sure Trump is even a Carbon based life form, or a con-alien sent to destroy the planet. But after watching the Democratic circular firing squad "debate?", I'm debating if I will even vote.
5
@Le JeuneYou cannot VOTE in my American political system. Whether you vote for your French elections is up to you.
1
CNN is a joke. Not for the reasons Trump thinks it is. They’re a joke because they have senior producers on staff who actually thought that that show was a good idea.
8
This format is ridiculous. We need multiple nights of multiple in-depth discussion topics. We don't need sound bites written by comedians months in advance of the debates.
6
When the President can commandeer an entire week's news cycle with four unfounded, misogynistic, racist tweets... to the point where little to nothing else is discussed... I say, yes, let the Democrats hold a televised lottery to determine their lineup.
2
The debates are a joke! A few minutes from each is waste of time!
3
Oh good, Swalwell’s gone. He was in fact the only candidate I really hated from the 1st 2 debates. Kamala Harris, though—big dislike.
9
American politics is the best reality TV show now
3
From former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack: “To me it’s, ‘Have you hired and fired? Have you managed? Do you understand how to get things done?’”
Does this guy even know what politics is? Uninspiring technocrats like Vilsack managed the midwestern working class right into the ground. Now their voting fascist.
.....
“Have you even managed, bro?” asked the technocrat. But the question was drowned-out by chants of “send her back.”
1
Welcome to the New Improved Democratic Debate, now known as the Chopping Block, brought to you by this network and the Cooking Channel. Here briefly are the new rules: At the end of tonight's debate our judges will "chop" or eliminate one candidate while the survivors will move on to the next debate. The chopped candidate will be ineligible to participate in any future debates. But that's not all. The chopped candidate also will be required to drop out of the Presidential race altogether. So who's ready to play?
5
League of Women Voters used to run the debates for televised audiences and in every state race.
Those were honest debates with full use of Roberts Rules Of Order.
Now it certainly is a reality show for cable ratings and advertising K Street dollars flowing.
Surreal is the current status of human existence when I compare it to my full life of 67 years.
The dystopian novels I read those distant summers ago as a youngster
Then sat with dread that the narratives never occur have current fruition in reality here on earth.
I am beginning to envy ignorance cuz of the bliss involved.
Wish I had a crystal ball.
Now that we watched our government in labor with full contractions and subsequent birth of a Nephilim in office we won’t see a representative democracy here ever again in my grandchildren’s lifetime for sure. And I thank Gaia for none so far. What a worrisome burden that would be when we have trump cultivated youth training for violence against pragmatic realism.
5
Most of the candidates have little specifics on their web sites (Warren is the exception). Aside from personal campaigning and the so called debates with a few seconds to answer vague questions and argue without moderation, there is no way to understand and differentiate them objectively. That's why the debates boil down to a spectacle. Kamala Harris's takedown of Biden was the best example of such a disingenuous spectacle. And the media pundits are it up.
10
Given the age we're living through, this crop of candidates, and what passes for journalism these days, this was all predictable. And it's pretty awful to watch. though watch we must.
We've been working up to this point for decades now. The only question is whether we're going to continue along this trajectory or if the process can somehow be made more relevant to the legitimate needs of all of the American people.
4
DO NOT blame the candidates.
"...the goal of debates has always been to create a lasting moment borne out of interpersonal conflict."
Are the debates "Starting to Feel Like a Reality Show?" The answer is yes. And that's because the candidates, most of whom are serious about their campaign, are pawns in the media's grotesque insatiable anticipation of conflict, misstatements or otherwise "viral moments" to splash across their headlines the following day.
This article is an excellent example of a "reality show" symptom.
10
"candidates ... are forced to choose between adopting [Trump's] modern media tactics or being left behind as others do."
Yes, exactly, all of this is going in the wrong direction.
While some may score "points" by attacking others, I simply cross anyone who has a pre-packaged sound-bite attack on another Democrat off the list of people I would consider voting for.
To make this into a more adult discussion of policy, we could start by emphasizing what ALL Democrats on the stage agree with (and Republicans and Trump disagree with) starting with universal access to health care, support for workers that includes raising the minimum wage and fair overtime rules, humane treatment of refugees, a fair tax structure, investing in sustainable energy jobs and infrastructure.....the list is so long, the disagreement among Democrats is only on how to achieve shared goals.
Why don't the moderators ask about the package of excellent bills that have passed the House under Nancy Pelosi's leadership, starting with the campaign finance and election protections in HR-1, protecting the Dreamers in HR-6 and going through universal background checks in HR-8, to protections for people with pre-existing conditions, to retirement security
https://www.vox.com/2019/5/24/18637163/trump-pelosi-democrats-bills-congress
Why not ask whether under any Democrats at the debate these bills (now blocked by the Republican Senate and Trump) would become law? Wouldn't all Democrats sign these bills?
5
I'm going to get really drunk, because I am drinking every time any candidate says "free."
Fun times. Bring out the popcorn.
7
NBC/MSNBC and CNN are as fully in the Democratic camp as Fox is in the Republican camp. Most daily broadcasts seem to start with "Here's today's reason why Trump is bad and we hate him". First debate had nothing but softball questions (i.e., questions everyone knew the candidates had prepared for.) Second debate will too.
But have no illusions. The media (regardless of which side) is fundamentally composed of businesses. They operate to make money. And it is the gotcha moments - not the minutiae of policy ideas - that drives ratings.
The Biden/Harris dust-up, while really only a few minutes long, almost overwhelmingly dominated the post-debate news cycles.
Complaining about this is, unfortunately, a waste of energy. It just is what it is in 21st century politics. And if anything, it is likely to get even more extreme as the years go by.
Personally, I want to be an educated, rational voter, so I go to the websites of candidates and read the materials they each provide. With three criteria: 1) as President, what do you want to do, 2) how, in practice, do you intend to do it, and 3) how do you intend to pay for it.
I do watch the debates, because I enjoy the theater, but I don't even remotely expect to get any data useful in my decision making process, nor is it really the intent of the networks to give that to me.
The article is spot on. The debates are mostly just an episode of "Naked and Afraid", except that (fortunately) everyone keeps their clothes on.
11
One commenter pleads:
"Let the front-runners debate each other. Stop wasting our time with the joke candidates ..."
Another commenter says she likes Amy Klobuchar and thinks she would make a good President. But should Ms. Klobuchar be excluded from future debates because she's not a "front-runner?" Do you suppose Ms. Klobuchar thinks of herself as a "joke candidate?" Should all candidates who are not in the top 5 (or should it be "top 3") withdraw?
2
Whether it looks like a reality show or not, how else can you get to know well over 20 presidential candidates and pick your favorite(s). In a democracy, any U.S. born person over 35 can legally run for the U.S. presidency. Unlike in the past this time around far too many threw in their hats in the ring. And all should have a chance to be heard. It may look silly. But there may not be another way. Perhaps, the third debate would be more decent.
Many as I do, wish at least half of the 25 or 26 hadn't chosen to run. But they did. Only one dropped out so far. Before they're pushed out of the third debate, I hope, several of them like Marianne Williamson, Kirsten Gillibrand, Julian Castro, Andrew Yang, Gov. Hickenlooper, Tulsi Gabbard, Michael Bennett, Jay Inslee, Bill DeBlasio, Rep Ryan and others who poll very low dropped out. It would also be great if the great senator Bernie Sanders dropped out before he shamed himself with low poll numbers in Iowa.
3
@A.G.
Really?
Sanders STILL sits in 2nd as he's done since Biden entered.
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/caucus/2019/06/09/iowa-poll-biden-leads-democrats-bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-pete-buttigieg-caucus-2020/1360801001/
This poll has Sanders and Biden Tied.
https://iowastartingline.com/2019/05/20/starting-line-change-research-poll-biden-sanders-locked-in-iowa-tie/
Think your dislike is coloring your comments just a bit?!
3
@Dobbys sock
I have been and still am an admirer of Bernie Sanders. That doesn't mean I should believe he has a chance to become our next president. He doesn't. It's extremely unlikely that he wins the nomination. That's why I wrote that. By the way, I am very mad still at Hillary Clinton for not picking Bernie as her running mate, and we got Trump!
Despite Biden is consistently polling highest, I seriously doubt he has a chance to get the nomination or becoming the next president.
Mayor Pete has a good chance. Steve Bullock & John Delaney also have chances. Amy Klobuchar may have a chance. Elizabeth Warren is not electable. Kamala Harris may not win at the top of the ticket. But she maybe a good running mate to energize minority voters and women.
1
I really can not be lectured again and again...they actually make HRC look charismatic!
3
I have to wash my cat next week during the Democrat’s debates.
6
In all honesty, America's political landscape has become nothing more than a reality show since a reality TV star stepped into the White House.
6
Does someone have a better idea how to have 20 candidates debate? The debates are just part of a campaign with ground game in early states being just as important. The better candidates will eventually rise to the top.Having a televised draw just adds a little fun, which is certainly better than a nitpicky pointless article such as this one.
1
Shame on the NYT for putting Democratic candidates in Trumpian terms and reference points. A Reality Show? T is playing games, not the candidates who are intelligently working hard for so many of us. Why is the reference point a T thing? Either/or headlines infuriate me too. I totally agree with D. A. Oh. in these comments. "Stop making the Dems look bad for the problems and trends that begin with Trump." Quit typing people, lumping people into
'them' categories..the mid west is a huge part of this country and I know many who abhor T. I think Dems that are quieter, less likely to get on bandwagons to compete with T foolishness will overwhelm him when the time comes to do something that matters.
2
“People who are truly unhinged are the best reality stars you can find,” said Sarah Gertrude Shapiro, who was a producer for “The Bachelor.” ... And now we have one as our president.
2
@Danielle Along with 20 'want to be' Progressive Democrats candidates fighting for our oval office. Liberal Progressives are an extreme minority in our Democracy. Unfortunately with social media, they are the most "liked".
It appears the Democratic face of the future is:
1 open and decriminalized borders
2 free healthcare for illegal immigrants
3 tacit support for AOC and her leftist's squad
I voted for Barrack and Hillary but I cannot support this agenda now or in 2020.
5
This "draw" doesn't just feel like a reality show, it is one. The DNC shouldn't be encouraging candidates to have a breakout moment with a "zinger" comment in hand. Nor should CNN on Thursday hold a one hour special on picking the candidates for the 2 night debate. Both strike me as totally unprofessional and pandering to Trump, the original reality show candidate that cheapens the whole electroal process. Forgotten in this political melodrama, is the fact that we are electing the next President of the United States. Do we as a nation need this? I certainly don't and I'm appalled that the networks and the DNC are encouraging the most puerile behavior for the most important office in the country.
10
The issues you are referring to are another added concern to the candidates who already have plenty on their plates. It’s unfortunate they have no precedent other than trump’s blueprint. One would hope for future debates when the crowd is narrowed, that this reality show style will give way to less show and more content. It forces them to interrupt each other, rudely, at times, to gain some attention. Not the best way to show intellectual acumen, which plays into trump’s game plan, since he has none.
What really annoyed me was the spectacle CNN made out of this stupid drawing that should have taken five minutes. I couldn’t help feeling bad for Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo and especially, Don Lemon, as they were uncomfortably made into game show hosts. I watch and enjoy them most nights and cringed along with them last evening as they attempted to sell the hype. I know Fox gets the ratings for stupidity but these guys deserve better from CNN. Please don’t stoop to that level in the future. With the awful atmosphere that is trump, we need far more thoughtful debate and ideas. Leave the reality shows to entertainment.
4
It's a farce. Shame on the Democratic Party for allowing this to happen.
I hadn't heard about "the draw" before this, but I am sickened by it. The reality TV show angle works for Trump because he is not appealing to anyone's morality. And more importantly, because he was the only one playing.
We are not going to beat him at his own game, and it is immoral to even try. The responsible thing would be for the Democratic Party to implement rigor -- restrict the number of candidates in the debates. Let the front-runners debate each other. Stop wasting our time with the joke candidates only using this to enhance their own profile.
The Democratic Party is the party of adults. The faster we coalesce behind a leading candidate, the more chance we will have of attracting voters who take the presidency seriously -- as most Americans, Trump-supporters excluded, do.
10
I agree CNN, Fox, MSNBC have had a great run but, now it’s time for all to find another profession. I mean once you start the day with one of these programs it’s pretty much of just rehashing at the end of the day. Kind of like watching soaps “ as the world turns” it just turns in tedious slow talking walking nonsense, and local news has turned into reruns of one person robbing another, one major car pile up, extreme weather, a killing, and then a feel good story at the end. There is just to much happening in the US without these same run in place news stories.
4
"...it’s starting to look like Democrats have been drawn into the reality TV genre that President Trump, who first entered most homes as a character on “The Apprentice,” started spreading in American politics."
Oh, come on, now, Mr. Epstein. Your own language in this article describing debate tactics like boxing moves, CNN's coverage of debates with cameras following candidates through the tunnels of arenas: the media are as much responsible for the reality show and sports vibe nonsense as the candidates. Let's not kid ourselves. News media gladly went down that path hand-in-hand with politicians well before Trump; you were not dragged down it, kicking and screaming.
5
If the idea is that the Dem debates are taking on reality show attributes as an answer to Donald Trump's reality show presidency, then put THAT in the title.
Stop making the Dems look bad for the problems and trends that begin with Trump.
6
The presidential debates are, right now, looking very much like the interview portion of Miss America. Many (including myself) laughed at Ms Teen South Carolina's "I personally believe that all US Americans in places like such..." moment but there's no way a person can explain how to solve Isis or education crises or climate change in two minutes. I read "On The Clock" by Emily Guendelsberger in one sitting yesterday and in the final chapter she writes, "President Trump isn't a fluke; strongman us vs. them leaders emerge when the population of a country is under incredible stress. Chronic stress drains people's empathy, patience, and tolerance for new things."
I don't even 100% blame the candidates for stooping to behavior that is beneath them. In this format the only way they get coverage is in an explosive moment like the Biden/Harris exchange and/or by taking a hard left stance on controversial issues (raise your hand for immigration healthcare? no follow up? really?). The media (both right and left) is replicating the toxicity of 2016 election in a worrying way.
We deserve better as voters than the soundbytes editors feel fit to dole out to us. Cap debates at 4 or 5 candidates who are selected at random. Draw questions at random. Actually at random. Find more neutral moderators. It is absurd that Bachelor producers are being interviewed about the presidential debates! Voters don't want more reality tv. We want information. We want policies, not soundbytes.
5
The CNN program to assign the 20 candidates to their slots in the debates was like a bad reality show, certainly not as raucous or riveting as a Trump rally, which is the ultimate reality show these days. Trump's rallies have willing, attractive, young participants positioned by his staff directly behind him in camera range. If they don't clap and yell at his every move they are removed and replaced with other attractive persons who will. The audience comes, I think, not so much out of adoration of Trump as out of an opportunity to participate in the ultimate reality TV show.
I think the Democratic debates serve very little useful purpose other than for the audience to see which candidates have television charisma and which don't. That's not a valid criterion for supporting a candidate. Imagine how a mild-mannered Dwight Eisenhower would have fared, or a no-nonsense Midwesterner like Harry Truman, against a ranter and railer like some of today's candidates. Yet they are generally conceded to be among the best Presidents of the twentieth century.
What tricks will Kamala Harris have at her next opportunity to undercut Joe Biden? Will Kirsten Gillibrand and Bill De Blasio interrupt others and shout them down? Will Jay Inslee, who has accomplished great things in his state, continue to appear wooden? Tune in next week!
2
Can anyone point to research showing that "winning" a debate correlates to winning an election? Or is it just sound and fury, signifying nothing?
1
"Why the Democratic Debates Are Starting to Feel Like a Reality Show"?
Because that's the way that THE MEDIA is presenting them and "reporting" on them! And on politics and government in general with all your breathless, "Trump says..." or Trumt tweets..." headlines. Look in the mirror! Happy with the political climate of sideshow reality TV you've helped create?
What ever happened to the quanit idea of reporting on candidates' positions on actual issues, not ten-second soundbites? And on reporting on actual ISSUES at all? Remember them?
Looking at some old footage of Walter Cronkite reporting on the various moon- and space-related stories in recent weeks brought home to me again just how far our news media (no longer newspapers and independent broadcast news divisions) have fallen from their mission of sevring the nation by reporting on news and education us, not entertaining or inflaming opinion!
Cronkite would weep at the state of things in "news" reporting today.
8
Comparing the Democratic debates to a game or reality TV show is a cheap shot and not particularly insightful. It's the kind of comparison that makes the most sense to media types who themselves long ceased to recognize any other reality than what appears on tv, because they already make their living or aim to make their living on it. The competitive aspects of the last debate were plain enough, but the overall impression was not of cut-throat competition and name-calling. Do we forget the last two Republican debate cycles so soon? "999" and hand size! Overall, the first Democratic debates did a good job of showcasing the depth and breadth of the Democratic party. They were informative to average voters who don't watch cable TV 24/7. Media professionals denigrating the debates as reality TV are doing the nation no service. What they are doing is trivializing our politics and our democracy, which are decidedly not a game.
@RRI "Comparing the Democratic debates to a game or reality TV show is a cheap shot ... the overall impression was not of cut-throat competition and name-calling..."
I disagree. What got the most attention were the instances of candidates interrupting each other, and of the debate degenerating into street-fight contests of crude dominance.
Of course, this generates excitement, which means profit for the media companies (which of course exist precisely for profit). And so, our political dialog literally becomes a circus: A display of the spectacular and unexpected, designed to get us excited, for profit.
They COULD shut off the mikes of every candidate who isn't answering a question, then allow responses, in turn, with only one mike turned on at a time. Then, we would hear their answers and thoughts, just like in a courtroom, where one person speaks at a time. Isn't this how our most important national decisions should be approached? Shouldn't we demand it? And shouldn't we insist that the candidates demand it?
3
I like Amy Klobuchar a lot.
She'd make a good President.
7
@Barbara T
Yes! I agree.
I only formed that opinion after the first round of “debates”. So that was useful.
2
I wish it weren’t so that people love to see scripted conflict presented as reality, but sadly they do. I hate it and I don’t want to see it. I admire Kampala Harris and I’m glad she’s my senator, but I cringed at her planned takedown of Joe Biden. Joe has to answer for his record, but it was so obviously planned and delivered. Most candidates don’t really answer debate questions, they use their time to pivot to their talking points. One reason I have been so impressed with Mayor Pete is that when he is interviewed he actually responds to questions in a thoughtful, articulate manner that does not sound scripted. I urge CNN and all the Democratic candidates to try to have a real conversation about real issues rather than set a stage for viral moments. Please.
6
These debates are destroying our party. All the anger at each other and there past dealings in government. We should be angry at the GOP for the way they are destroying our climate with coal and fossil fuel use. We are experiencing 110 plus heat waves and it is from there policies bringing coal back. I won’t watch these debates as we are angry at the wrong people in these debates. Very sad.
I for one am feeling like it's an unreality show, with the leading candidates so out of step with the majority of Americans that they don't have a prayer of a chance of winning a national election with the cunning likes of Trump. As long as the economy keeps chugging along, as much as I can't stand the guy, I'm almost as repulsed by the top five democratic party candidates -- they clearly have more individual integrity (except Harris, who will stop at nothing and stoop to new lows to win), they are just too out of step with most ordinary folks, sad to say. (and I know this assertion makes their fanatical disciples reallllly mad)
2
Can we all take a big step back and look at how ridiculous the American Presidential election process is? Two years long, incredibly expensive and time consuming, allowing for all sorts of often inconsequential events to be amplified by the media and then influence the voting public over 24 months. It is a beauty pageant, horse race and reality show all in one, and we know how much Americans love a competition or contest.
Contrast our process with every other Western democracy, where the election cycle for President or Prime Minister is measured in months or even weeks. I don’t presume to analyze here why our process is so much longer, but one element does stand out: money.
3
I don't like this format, but since I can't change it, might I suggest you have the two debates on two different Fridays so they are the topic of the talking heads all weekend long.
This is all nonsense. The country is and has always been Center! Absent winning the Senate and keeping the House, there is not a chance of getting some of Bernie's ideas passed. We need good schools. We need good infrastructure. We need accessible health care combining the private sector and the govt. to administer. We need a president, and the leaders of the House and Senate, and the minority leaders to come together and solve problems. WE NEED CIVILITY!
4
This group of candidates should have been reduced by half already. This is not entertainment. The future of America should not be sold for TV ratings. Personally, I will not tune in to 20 Dems yelling over each other for another 4 hours. It's foolish and embarrassing.
The DNC need to step up, start consolidating candidates and messaging. I keep hearing that the election is SO far away that it doesn't matter, but Dems need every second of this time to convey a simple message to America in a cohesive, thoughtful, effective way over the constant screeching of the other side, (which currently seems to always win the day).
40% of American citizens are struggling to pay their bills each month. They are one small emergency away from losing their home or bankruptcy. They want to know how Dems will make their lives better. Rightly so, that is all they care about.
1
Says Brett O'Donnell, who coached John McCain to look like a buffoon in his debate against Obama:
"It has become more and more like a game show".
As if he's bemoaning this.
And Karen Dunn, who helped Barack Obama prepare for his debate against McCain, says the goal of debates has always been to create a lasting moment borne out of interpersonal conflict.
I'm glad Obama ignored her advice, and acted like a sane, intelligent, straightforward person.
“One of the salient questions in this election is who is going to be able to go toe to toe with the president and not back down,” Ms. Dunn said. “Voters could be looking for a calm, steady presence, but that is not going to distinguish you in a debate.”
I'm really, really glad Obama ignored her advice. He wasn't just calm and steady all the time, he was calm and steady in his debate against a otherwise dignified person masquerading as a buffoon.
I'm not here to be "entertained" by politicians.
4
The live draw event reminded me of the annual draw for post positions in the Kentucky Derby. It is quite a tradition there and sets up the racing press and the in the know gamblers for breathless speculation before the draw. “Will the favorite get a good post?” followed by intense analysis after the draw as to whether the favorite did or did not get a good post and what it all means.
Now horse racing of course is a sport in which large small-brained creatures run around in circles guided by midgets all for the amusement of their wealthy owners. Any resemblance to a presidential primary is purely coincidental. But the event and the press reaction to it are alarmingly similar.
Mind you I’m looking forward to the debate. My favorite longshot, Governor Bullock will be on the stage. We’ll get to see Biden vs Harris part two and whether or not Sanders and Warren will go at each other or team up to defend Medicare for All against all its critics.
One thing I would like to see would be candidates standing up for their dignity as serious people with serious ideas. No more bad Spanish please guys and any moderator who proposes a show of hands question should be given a smack on the side of the Head by Bernie Sanders doing his best Larry David imitation—or maybe Amy Klobuchar’s comb.
It’s not too much for a voter to ask for, is it?
5
It’s because Jeff Zucker - President of cnn, ( former head of nbc) who helped create Trump as reality host. Sadly these men of privilege, both boarding school - wealthy families - are playing games for ratings because the results of their “genius” won’t touch their lives.
4
This field of candidates should have been reduced by half already. I won't watch 20 candidates screaming over one another again. It's foolish and embarrassing. This election is about the future of our country - not entertainment. The head of the DNC, Tom Perez, is making huge mistakes, which I fear are going to hand all 3 branches of government to the frighteningly authoritarian Republican Party in 2020.
The candidates who were not rude, overly dramatic, and disrespectful got less time and attention both during and after the debates. The actors in the media are putting their fingers on the scales again, and it infuriates me.
4
Reality show? Really? It's more like lemmings on the loose. God, they should just raise their hands to all questions. They mostly agree on major issues.
1
The reality show of Democratic Party balances the reality show of the White House. What's to be alarmed about.
Stop it! Stop reproducing this old line. Leave us democratic voters alone. We need time to look over our options. This debate season is for the American people to decide. I'd frankly like to see a moderator let a few adorable dogs loose on stage and see which candidate they run to first. That to me would be in the line of a reality show I'd vote for.
3
@Terry Carr
I love that idea!
If it were my adorable dog he would run to the person who seemed to be in the most pain—so that’s a good sign, as that candidate is recognizing reality. Or else of course the one with meat in his or her pocket.
2
@New Mexico observational. like that pain=recognizing reality bit.
I wholeheartedly agree that this "debate" format is a joke. And, an unfortunate one at that. If this is the way the DNC wants this reality show to proceed, then it may as well invite audience participation by voting losers off. In a very short time, we would see at least half of these contestants voted off the show.
And we would all be the better for it.
1
God Bless America. I mean, someone better, and soon. What a disgrace our political process has become.
3
Why the debates feel like a reality show — because the media covers them like one? And tells us they are like one?
3
Some reality shows are more surreal than others.
It is ridiculous. I’m tired of looking at them already.
1
Yeah, I've cancelled my CNN cable package. What an embarrassment it's become. I've previously felt that I need to support CNN because of its good reporting, but that reporting is so drowned out by shameless self-promotion, mass-media hysteria, and annoyingly loud graphics that it's almost unrecognizable as straight journalism. News as entertainment? No thanks.
5
Reality TV gave us Trump. Trump gives us reality show politics. And now Democrats feel like they have to match that to win.
Public communication about politics is now all about sensationalism, blame, fake moments, close-mindedness, self-interests, gossips and arguments, explosive conflicts and personal attacks. There was a time when people did both reflect analytically about the past and look forward, five, ten, twenty, fifty years in the future to see where an entire nation should be heading to. Building something solid for the next generations. Respecting your allies and listening to them. Debating values, ideas and plans rather than characters and styles. Many find it boring, unexciting, time consuming, too serious. I find the current presidential circus show and entrenched one-sided party-politic puerile, immoral, destructive, irresponsible and tiresome. Those self-indulging in that sad spectacle and bending to evanescent media virality are just glitter dust lost in the vast history of humanity.
4
@Ariadne. The alternative is to have our politics reflect the local level where a full 15 percent of the electorate shows up to vote for a bond issue. Put everyone to sleep and let the aristocrats run everything.
Or, kick people in the seat of their pants and light a fire under them to get them out and vote and participate in the process.
Like him or love him, Trump seems to encourage the second approach.
Let it be, let it be. This "reality show" is at least based in honesty, facts, and the enormous problems facing our nation since Trump shoved his way into office. Heed what these folks are saying, forget the stage-craft and spot-lights. We have got to choose one of these for our nominee, and it is imperative that she or he wins. Our country can not sustain another four years under this administration. If we think it is an autocracy-in-waiting now, envision what another term of Trump, Barr, Mitch et al. would be like. Please do not sell our candidates short. Every single one of them is intelligent, with experience, and ethics. Yes, they have actual moral compasses. What more can we ask for or need? So get your wine, coffee, tea, cookies, and/or popcorn, enjoy and LISTEN....please.
5
There is no way a group that large can actually debate issues in the minutes and seconds they are allowed. There's barely time for the "zingers", but no way to evaluate positions and policies of serious candidates, or to see how they can effectively discuss and respond to an actual discussion of ideas. That was obvious the first time.
14
@Mary ... As always Mary. Just like it always works. The format is absurd, but what is the alternative?
@Mary
Yes, but some of the group can readily disqualify themselves, and a thinning of the herd is needed.
1
President Trump may have once been a TV reality star but his expertise in the Oval Office has had positive results. We are now experiencing one of the most robust economies we have seen in years. Minorities are seeing the positive gains which is the best they have ever experienced. Can any of the Democratic candidates do any better? Highly unlikely.
It is amusing to see the Democratic candidates go after one another. This is really all they have to go on at this moment. They are all trying to gain the spotlight just as President Trump did four years ago. The difference is that he made it look effortless. They are all straining and it looks false. President Trump will most likely win reelection as long as the country remains solidly strong.
18
@KMW
Such a robust economy, yet 43% can't come up with $400. in an emergency. 64% can't come up with $1000.
An est. 78% of 'merican's live pay check to pay check.
93% of all earnings have gone to the upper 10%.
Safe to assume your version of a robust econ. isn't what the majority of 'merican's are enjoying.
But yeah, keep believing that the Mango Madman walks away with a win in 2020.
4
@KMW
Yeah, very robust except Trump's own pick for Fed Reserve Head says workers have been left out, except for income inequalities not seen for 90 years, except for mushrooming national deficit due to Trumps 1.2 trillion dollar give away to the rich. And about that as long as economy is strong- The majority view of economists is that recession is likely in 2020.
2
@KMW
Trump made it all look like a fiasco until he got the help of Kellyanne Conway and of the Russians.
10 people yelling over each other and an inch-deep, mile wide approach to Q&A gives me absolutely nothing of substance. We need to stop making democracy fit the limitations of tv and start making tv serve the aspirations of democracy.
17
These debate structures do not allow for substantive discussion policies of major import. It’s not possible with 10 individuals in such a limited time.
The moderators (who I happen to like) do not have the depth or skill to facilitate such a ‘debate’. PBS or at some other forum would bring more gravitas. So too moderators more seasoned on the kitchen table issues we are about.
Another four years of Mr. Trump, brought to you (again) by CNN and those who truly questions how 2 million private insurance employees and 100 million with company health care plans are going to vote.
7
We have become addicted to hearing the same sensational news repeated day in and day out in a slightly different form… The election is long ways off. Why do we need all this sensationalism with pundits, panels, who’s up / down in the polls now. Like many other countries we should be starting the election cycle about two to four months in advance of voting with a spending mandate for each candidate. Let a President govern for the 4 years and do something useful rather than per-maturely start worrying about her/his re-election
13
@Nitin - Exactly. Right now Iran and the U.S. are on the brink of war. Where is Donald's attention? The next rally. All politicians do this which is why nothing gets done.
We should set a term limit of one term for any elected office. Get in, get the job done, and go back to the private sector. ALL of our politicians spend most of their time campaigning and voting on things the donors want so they can get reelected. If they weren't worried about a reelection, they might actually take a stand on something, anything.
And no more life time judges, period.
1
American politics itself is a reality show. That’s probably a big part of Trump’s victory in 2016.
The problem is that the show begins right after each election. American politics is a perpetual election machine that manifests itself as a daily reality show. There’s no time for any substantial policy, no time for serious governance. The show must go on! And oh how it has devolved.
5
I'm sorry, and maybe it's the glare of television, but the news media generally (tv much more so) treats elections like they do sports events of contestants on Survivor and its ilk. They are generally more interested in the "gotcha" moment or the sound bite than in the substance of the present and enormous issues. They pit one "contestant" against the other, score them, and announce a winner, when they should be looking at what a candidate can really do once in office. News has morphed into entertainment; not a good sign for democracy, as we learned in 2016.
12
@mk The movie "Broadcast News" came out in 1987 and showed that news was morphing into entertainment, much of it shallow, manipulative and for the benefit of the corporation.
And the NYT follows suit, too. The “Send her back” comment by Trump, while egregious, really needn’t occupy the vast majority of news and op ed pieces for days to come. I realize it has made for great click bait, but for Pete’s sakes move on to actual news, folks. Our president is insensitive; a large percentage of the country is hypersensitive; now let’s get back to what’s happening with healthcare, schools, crime — you do remember those issues, right?
3
No, the Democratic debates do NOT feel like a reality show, unless the name of that show is Democracy in Action.
Writing articles like this, trying to emphasize drama and encourage gossip and bad feelings is not helpful to the process.
Focus on policy and mature, factual reporting. This isn't TMZ.
3
This is a fiasco with serious consequences. Why are we feeding infighting among the democrats directly into the media? Winning these debates (whatever that mean?) is really irrelevant. We need a swing state strategy urgently.
11
Klobuchar and the other moderates aren’t flashy enough to attract enough big donors in a primary filled with big personalities. Many middle and working class families can’t afford to donate to a primary candidate and a general election candidate, so the big money goes to candidates who are generally further left or right and are aggressive in getting in the news cycle. After Trump, honestly, I’d rather have a less flashy president who gets things done than someone who is going to open the rift between parties even further.
6
Serious candidates should not participate in these corporate media cattle calls. There is no problem facing our nation that can be addressed in a minute or less, much less a "raise your hand" yes or no loaded question. It is demeaning to the office of the presidency and to the American voter's intelligence.
14
This is a democratic debacle which leads to our defeat in 2020. No one watches except for the extreme voters in both parties. The result is fodder for Trump to glide toward a win. Am done with all politicians and taking my checkbook with me.
10
Politics as entertainment is nothing new.
Political coverage is rarely about policy analysis anymore. It's about Power Rankings, which have nothing to do with what's good for the country.
As far as policy analysis is concerned, though, the NYT's is the best. Thank you, NYT.
2
@Barbara T. It’s the best as long as you agree with its bias.
2
It IS getting more than somewhat absurd. I mean, a televised selection? Oh well, good for transparency, anyway.
Having said that, Biden will have a fair chance to regain his footing relative to Ms. Harris' attacks. he needs to do so, too. It is clear that most of his folks are sticking with him for now, but he has to show more fight and spirit than he did last time.
That night will pretty much be Corey Booker's last chance to move out of the shadows.
Meanwhile, on the other night, Warren and Sanders go head-to-head. I am thinking that is a metaphorical shootout at the OK Corral.
I had to laugh that Mayor Pete was not included in the "...First Bin...". I am sure that irritated his supporters, all 5% of them. Top Man inj the Second Division is where Pete stands. He has to do better than that to keep being taken seriously. Having zero minority support is not helping him.
2
@Lefthalfbach - "Having zero minority support is not helping him."
Gays are a minority:)) And he has a lot of their support.
We're witnessing the impoverishment of our public political discourse - spearheaded by media conglomerates, whose sole interest is profit and protecting their investor's interests.
16
As a democratic voter I am entirely put off by this new “reality show” style political system. I am much more inclined to vote for a candidate who remains professional and respectful during a debate and shows calmness and rationality as leadership qualities (is: Buttigieg) than one who is going to take the hardest and loudest jabs (ie Harris), and (if they won the nomination) turn a campaign against trump into a full-on TV special of insults. The democrats need to pick a steady, likable leader if they’re going to win the election in 2020. Now is not the time to play the “who can be the loudest and most left” game.
13
@W Our media feels very out of touch with what people want. The bar is so low right now and yet....
Most of us have jobs that don't pay enough and don't have enough benefits. We have kids and other responsibilities. We don't have time or energy to sit down and read through every candidate's history when we get home. That's why it's so important for longer debates and less laser focus from the media on two candidates and whether or not they can win. I think our attention and intelligence is being underestimated--if the dems put on thoughtful forums that gave each candidate equal time to express her and his views and policy goals people would tune in and listen.
2
I’m guessing Mr. Grossman was referring to a healthy ability to empathize, not emphasize.
1
These debates have lost any utility they once had. Nixon Kennedy was OK. But debates are only there now for the quip and the gotta moment and forgetting what department of government you’d close down if you were elected President. Thanks Governor Perry of Texas. I don’t watch them. If I want to be informed of a candidates positions and how they’ve voted in the past it’s easy to look up. So let the primary voters decide who moved on with out the game show. Lastly to whoever becomes the democratic parties nominee ... do not debate Trump. He’s not worth it. He has nothing to tell us and it would be all lies and childish taunts.
8
The OJ Simpson trial was one of the first "reality show" moments where the media fueled the public's craving for real-life drama. The ratings were tremendous with 24/7 coverage of the chase and trial.
This presidency is the culmination of 20 years of live criminal trials, real housewives, love match-making shows, and produced television drama. It is the ultimate reality show led by a reality show star. The media and Trump feed each other and the public consumes this nonsense.
Imagine how boring a respectful president would be now. What would journalists on Twitter and on TV talk about? Real policy issues?
4
You can’t have a “debate” with 20 people...all you get is a mishmash of sound bites, “gotcha” zingers, posturing and imagery rather than real answers to real questions. How do they even pretend that these people are even remotely viable candidates? One look at the presence of DeBlasio is enough to show what a farce that is.
Our entire nomination process is a disaster, pandering to the extremes of both parties, fretting over Twitter feeds from hard core activists, relying on those same people to vote in primaries that demand candidates adhere to certain scripts, only to have to change back to reality for the general election. Enough.
6
As time goes on, I'm more and more thankful I cut the cable chord 14 years ago.
1
"As soon as you have a healthy ability to emphasize with another person’s point of view, you’re less likely to verbally insult that person,”
One thinks the word was 'empathize' here. Though that substance too is in short supply these days; never more so than at the 'debates.'
5
"Democrats have been drawn into the reality TV genre that President Trump, who first entered most homes as a character on 'The Apprentice,' started spreading in American politics."
If the Times has published an article at the top of its webpage with a title referring to Trump's "reality TV" Presidency, I missed it.
1
It is a show but I would suggest another word other than reality to describe it. If there’s a way to lose this thing in 20, the democrats will find three if them. It isn’t easy being blue...
1
It really does seem like reality tv, or as Kamala Harris said, “a food fight”.
It’s frightening to think that our hope for survival as s country is in the balance.
5
@Grove
re: food fight - Harris really knows how to sling some hash! #perfectpitch
1
It’s sad to see grown adults making fools of themselves in the name of narcissism and egotism. A good number of the 20 on the stage do not belong there but if Trump could make to to the White House then heck why can’t they?
The Democratic Party would do itself a huge favor by weeding out those running for TV face time, or to sell books or to get a talking head contract on CNN or MSNBC.
It is also of utmost importance that we have the most time possible to hear from the top five serious contenders. Their views on healthcare, the environment, our economy, foreign relations and the future of our democracy are what we need to hear about from them.
The Democratic Party needs to take the clown car off the road.
10
This makes me so sad. We could end up electing the same kind of ineffective populist Democrat that we have now in a Republican White House. Each day, I become more convinced that Trump is merely a symptom of a larger problem in our country.
The breakdown of education and lack of critical thinking skills in our general population has contributed to this mob rule style of politics. People know they are losing ground economically , but don't have the ability to understand why. They are looking for anyone who can give them hope, even if its just an empty slogan or a pure lie.
"What is to become of us?"
4
Trump has succeeded with the reality show model. Maybe it can work for the Dems as well.
We can hope.
I’m tired of listening to years of yelling, hollering, anger, spite, and vitriol.
Mayor Pete received little debate attention (as in this article), and yet he is calm, measured, thoughtful, respectful, and incredibly intelligent.
I really hope voters can look past this circus and vote for a candidate with the qualities our government is sorely lacking but desperately needs.
12
The Times writes: "... it’s starting to look like Democrats have been drawn into the reality TV genre..."
No, the Democratic candidates, each tremendously well credentialed and intelligent and experienced, are not reality show participants.
The media need to stop pretending this is about personalities and ratings, and start telling us about the issues, who stands where, and who is proposing what.
That's what Times readers want, not condescending comments about reality TV shows.
3
@Sean ... Amen to all that !!!!!
1
And by that we should all be disgusted. Thank god I have my tiny American flag to wave around instead of thinking about it.
Well, like you said, long before these antics there was Trump and “The Apprentice.” And before that there was Obama taking the primary nomination from Hillary via a pop culture media campaign.
The era of where thinking people shaped our democracy has officially ended.
1
I fell in love
in the summer of ‘74
with the electric feeling
that I was part of some whole,
part of a bigger conversation.
I remember sitting
shoulder-to-shoulder with my dad
in the front single-seat
of our Pontiac Lemans,
radio on,
car idling,
as we listened to
Nixon’s resignation speech.
I knew in the moment
that the moment was big,
that I was experiencing something
– history –
in tandem with others,
in real time,
that I was part of us,
the we of country.
I sometimes look back
on those days
with longing.
Those days when
the news came daily,
versus the all-day of today,
those ago days when
we read about yesterday
the next morning,
in the papers,
together,
giving us time
to process the news,
to view it more holistically,
wholly,
versus today,
when the parts
seem to take center stage,
existing outside of the whole,
too often drunk on frenzy,
exponential in attention,
until knocked off stage
by the next big part.
There is power
in the immediacy
of today.
And there is peril.
8
@Lisa Kraus. Fabulous, Lisa!
We just elected a President based on his being a reality show star, and the result wasn't pretty.
So, to remedy the problem, we're holding a reality show to decide whom we'll run against him.
Of course. What could go wrong?
33
@Joe ....The build up seems like preview of super duper football hype. l expect tail gate lead ups..........only in this country does election time last eternal............endless profit for viewed tv media corporations.........
1
Sanders has influenced Warren, and will continue to do so. Warren also influences Sanders. Eventually, Warren, Sanders and Harris must come together to unite progressive voters behind one or two of them.
Together, these three progressives poll way better than Biden. The progressive movement is the most popular.
11
@dr. c.c.
I find it really unfortunate that people refer to Harris as "progressive". Sure, compared to Biden she could be called progressive, but she is much more of a moderate than many people portray her. The progressive movement has been successful because of true progressives like Sanders, not fake ones like Harris.
31
@dr. c.c.
If anything, progressives and moderates have to come together in order to get every Democrat out there on board to get Trump out.
That's what really matters, isn't it?
3
@dr. c.c.
I don't think it's correct to call Harris progressive.
1
The primary question that needs to be asked is whether the ability to "win" a debate by hurling likely rehearsed zingers at your opponents has anything to do with who would make a good President. It seems that the only rationale for naming the "best" Democratic debater as the Democratic Presidential nominee is to pick someone who can hurl good zingers at President Trump during the next round of the debate "playoffs." But that just begs the question: Is there a legitimate purpose for having any of these debates, other than entertainment? That is debatable, at best.
79
@Jay Orchard
I see no purpose. I agree - how does debate performance equate to qualified to be president. It doesn't. In fact, it risks the opposite - that someone gains in public estimation even though he or she is really the least qualified.
Why not an interview format - each candidate for an hour with a good interviewer. It would be more informative.
57
@Cornflower Rhys
I agree, as long as the interviewer is not a professional softball pitcher.
2
@Jay Orchard I agree completely. I think though that democrats need to consider the possibility that a candidate most likely to throw those “zingers” at trump would just isolate the moderates and result in another outcome like the 2016 election. A real win over trump would likely come from those moderates feeling included and voting (as was shown when the democrats won back the house). A candidate to do that would probably need to be an “anti-trump” figure who doesn’t pre-rehearse insults and can react calmly to trump, this taking away his fuel and attention. What’s the best way to combat bullying? Ignore it and make everyone know you came to run a serious election. Let trump know his insults will not work against the democrats anymore. The Democratic Party are strong and experienced leaders and do not need to get down in the dirt with him to prove that.
5
The difference between news today and news when I was growing up is simple. The networks used to wait for something to, actually, happen before they "reported" on it. Now they "report" the anticipatory expectations of what might happen, speculate about the possible consequences of what might happen and then analyze all the repercussions of what did and didn't happen. Remember that Malaysian airline that crashed in the middle of no where, with not a trace of evidence of what occurred? CNN feasted on that speculative story line for months without any, verifiable, evidence to back them up. It's not fake news that worries me, it's hyped news that's slowly taking away it's credibility.
99
@Rick Gage
Spot on. The 24 hour news cycle means that if there is nothing to be reported, news media has to create something to fill the time. Better yet, create something for clicks.
4
That’s why I only watch PBS for news.
2
@Rick Gage That's now called "Monetizing the News."
Or..milking a dead cow (where I come from).
2
Americans do not have the attention span nor the intelligence to absorb serious debate. They need to be entertained 24/7 which is why we need to turn everything into 'reality television' and it is one of the real reasons Trump is president. He 'entertains' people. If Democrats want to win they need to put a celebrity up against him. That is what the electorate really wants.
26
@Mike
Exactly. A celebrity going against Trump would be so huge for ratings. A celebrity has more credibility with the general public, especially younger voters, than a politician. Oprah and MIchelle Obama already declined. Who else?
@blgreenie Deniro most likely. He would go after Trump and not back down. 'Yuge' ratings. Very 'Bigly'.
@Mike
I respectfully disagree. Americans have systematically been fed pablum by the media, with the willing participation of the leaders of both parties. The parties could insist on a minimum level of standards for the debates but don’t, seeming to prefer that the “ populace” stays dumbed down while the do the bidding of their corporate funders. Many Americans work hard to discern the truth behind the hype, sensationalism, and outright propaganda.
2
They feel like a reality show because the debates are run by giant corporations instead of the League of Women Voters.
You are letting corporations LITERALLY control the bounds of the debate. Only in America....
151
@KW
This may sound crazy to the "holier than thou" liberals, but there's absolutely no difference between this primary and the republican primaries & debates of 2016.
To a "non-echo bubble" dweller like me, both primaries were loaded with outlandish, over-the-top proposals and ideas.
But to biased NY Times and Fox News readers, that may not be apparent.
1
@KW
Absolutely! These "debates" are designed for maximum obfuscation of the issues, and should be boycotted by viewers.
1
What a shame that the Democratic Party endorses a game show format for what should be very serious debates. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get the dignified format that used to exist- when the debates were run by the League of Women Voters - back. What we get now cheapens what’s left of our democracy for what - ratings?
117
The entire trump/republican party is a reality show of unethical, immoral, and cruel behavior topped with unbridled power. The debates, so far, have been an introduction to Democrats who are intelligent, ethical, moral and empathetic. I’m interested in seeing how many voters care to make the USA regain respect around the world or if this is who we are now.
15
When I see headlines like this I realize it ain’t just Fox News undermining our nation.
The NYTimes needs a second Trump term just as much as the GOP because without it they won’t have the high sales they currently do with it.
63
@Fire Not just headlines either. None of the mainstream media will cover the important legislation Democrats in Congress pass or hold hearings on, leaving the impression on voters that "all Democrats do is investigate Trump." Not only does their legislative news blackout of Congressional Democrats help Trump win, it deprives citizens of their power to influence legislation. If they don't know the House just passed a $15 minimum wage raise, they won't call their senators to demand, "Pass the House bill." Democracy dies in the dark.
6
I was surprised when I heard that CNN was going to hold a live draw to determine the participants for each debate. There is no excuse for that. You can't even blame Trump! America, your politics are a circus, and Trump is a symptom of that, not the cause.
111
@Evelyn,
What do you mean "You can't even blame Trump!"
There's no such thing you can't blame Trump for. They actually already blame Trump for it: he's forced Reality TV onto us.
2
It is embarrassing to see this many candidates fall all over themselves to lose the election. A circus of clowns.
40
Welcome my son to the machine.
Waters, Gilmour
14
Now they would be worth as much time as they could get. If only...
@db2 To perhaps be pedantic:
"Welcome, my son, welcome to the machine."
@db2
I'm partial to the whole *Animals* album. Although it was about England's politics, it reflects America well also.
Pigs(three different ones)
Big man, pig man
Haha, charade you are
Wooh, you well heeled big wheel
Haha, charade you are
And when your hand is on your heart
You're nearly a good laugh, almost a joker
With your head down in the pig bin
Sayin', "Keep on digging"
Pig stain on your fat chin, what do you hope to find
Down in the pig mine?
1
This country is a joke. Full stop.
23
Is it just me, or are things getting dumber and dumber?
88
@Ethan Oh, they definitely are. 24 hour "news" was the start (thanks Ted Turner for CNN) and reality shows don't help.
The "news" is all about ratings, click-bait and web hits now.
1
@Ethan,
Not only things.
@Ethan
Probably but then where's the measuring stick?