sort by best latest
Susan Reid says
The difference in time was Obama +5 minutes of actual debate time. That is nearly 10% more, if Lehrer's portion of the 90 minutes counts.
My Esoteric says
Thanks for that interesting debate analysis. Interesting that you listened to the debate instead of watching it. The first Nixon/Kennedy debate had dramatically different opinions regarding who won based on if it was viewed or listened to.
Excellent analysis and I think you're right. I too felt Obama was more truthful.
I seem to recall other debates having a bell which went off when given times had expired. It could have helped in the first 2012 debate.
That would be a good idea; a loud, persistant bell, lol.
- See all 4 commentsHide extra comments
Rod Martin Jr says
Ouch! Why so negative? "That junk" may have its frustrations, but it is every American's opportunity to make him- or herself informed about who they're putting into office. As bad as it gets, I can't afford to be jaded about it. Too much at stake.
Warren Samu says
Here's a thought... after their time is up, cut off their mics. It's not like they don't know when the clock is winding down o.O
John Coviello says
Graham Gifford says
What a great idea, having Bill Clinton Stand in.
That sounds about right.
My father always said "rules are made for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools." And that's what he taught me. Isn't it also called "thinking outside the box"?
How can anyone be expected to follow laws when those who created them are exempt? It's not 'thinking outside the box' and it's not right. Laws that congress enacts frequently have language in them that exempts congress from those same laws. BAD.
- See all 2 commentsHide extra comments
I will guarantee he considered him a threat the day after the first debate!