2007-09-27 16:38:09 · 21 answers · asked by Tland 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Perhaps because the networks don't know what a presedential debate is?
2007-09-27 16:44:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
"momatad" has it so RIGHT. The media has it so wrong. It is suppose to be about the NEWS.
No wonder people have created "NEWS" blogs on the internet which, by the way, are much more informative and accurate.
Who the heck wants to listen and watch this senseless drama about these celebrities? It pains me and is a waste of my precious time.
The average American idiot who needs to become more educated.....I guess.
To answer your question: Countdown with Keith Olbermann always lets his audience know when the Debates are scheduled---both Republican and Democratic.
So....watch his nightly program on MSNBC at 8:00p.
Good Night and Good Luck !! :)))
2007-10-05 22:46:54 · answer #2 · answered by krissyderic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There was one tonight on PBS with 6 of the Republican
candidates attending. I found it very informative and
interesting as they answered questions about photo ID's
for voting, should DC citizens be allowed to vote, how to
handle illegal immigration, should we be allowed to buy
drugs from Canada, death penalty, socialized medicine
(Hillary's new health plan idea), how to handle deep racial
divide in America and of course the Iraq war and how to
get out of it or reasons to stay in it. If you missed it, you
missed a good one. When I hear them say there will be a
debate on such and such a night, I write it on my calendar
so I don't forget to catch it because it isn't heavily advertised.
2007-09-27 23:50:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Because it is early in the campaign and it cost a lot of money to advertise. As the election day gets closer the debates will be advertised a lot more to the point that you will get tired of them.
2007-09-27 23:42:36 · answer #4 · answered by BOYD H 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Cause Boobus Americanus is only interested if Titney Spears is giving crotch shots from the dias and Paris is saying the candidates are 'hot' and that she scrogged one of them, whose name she never knew so she can't forget it. The majority is so apathetic they could care less what the topics are up for debate and how it could affect them. But, if they debated the race/ethnicity of Brad and Angelina's next adopted baby, AC Nielsen would be smoking.....
2007-09-28 00:56:03 · answer #5 · answered by momatad 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
only time they must give candidates that don't agree with the democratic/neocon agendas any airtime at all. do you think they want the public to hear ron paul expose the government for its flawed policies.
the last democratic debate featured the iraq war for the first time. and we finally got to see where the big 3 dem candidates stand on iraq. all 3 could not promise to have all troops out by the end of their first term. that is 5 1/2 years from today. are you kidding me? here we are with the vast majority in the country sick of the iraq war and want the troops out, yet unless ron paul gets nominated from the republican party, we won't have an anti war candidate. is that not amazing or what. the dems were voted in congress and the senate to end the war last november. this time, they won't even give us that option. if the people don't wake up to what is going on, we will be in serious trouble.
we haven't had a candidate in 40 years like we have in ron paul. if we miss this opportunity, we may not ever have one quite like this again. this election cycle has exposed how powerful the establishment and their media is. we must break their backs starting in january by getting ron paul nominated.
the military agrees with ron paul by donating to his campaign more than all other presidential candidates, republican and democrat, COMBINED.
the cia head of bin laden unit, michael sheurer, agrees with ron paul saying his view on islamic terrorism is the only one that is correct among those running for president.
the people of america agree with ron paul by giving him the most presidential campaign volunteers in american history with 47,000!!!
2007-09-27 23:57:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
the debates are ridiculous...all it is proves is who is better at pretending to have the best answers under pressure, who can "sound" the best, who can "look" the best, who can get off the best one liners, and who looks best on television. A president presides...presides over the government. But we use on camera performances, both staged and not, to decide who will govern best?
2007-09-28 00:17:14 · answer #7 · answered by dagiffy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
there are too many candidates now and such a divergnce of opinion that I am confused who stands for what. After the conventions next year when the actual party nominees are known, I will watch debates before making up my mind who to vote for, but I can say now with certainty, if HILLARIOUS ROTTEN gets nominated, my vote is easy as A...B...C--Anyone But Clinton
2007-09-27 23:52:34 · answer #8 · answered by Mike 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
They are being advertised. Just go to politics.msnbc.com and click on Political Calendar.
2007-09-28 01:26:45 · answer #9 · answered by Dale B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its all a circus show. The powers that be all ready have their people in place to win one way or another.
2007-10-04 01:58:18 · answer #10 · answered by Mogollon Dude 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋