Election 2012 - What of Substance Can We Look For In Debate #2?
Will more than 70,000,000 Americans watch this one?
Americans expected Obama to win the 1st debate, but Romney won handily. How much better do Americans expect Obama to do this time?
Several major differences are in store for Election 2012's Debate #2: the locale, the moderator, the topic, and the format.
Locale: Hempstead, New York at Hofstra University
Moderator: Candy Crowley of CNN
Topic: Domestic & Foreign Policy
Format: This is a Town Hall Meeting format with questions selected from the questions submitted by those attending (persons claiming to be independent voters as chosen by the Gallup Organization) and from questions submitted online (which past debate experiences have shown to include attempts to manipulate the pool of predominant questions.)
In effect, only the two candidates debating have not changed as Americans await Debate #2.
After the ignoring of the rules in the first debate, and also in the VP Debate, it may not mean much to indicate that the rules for Debate #2 call for each candidate to have two minutes to respond to the questions, with a minute allotted to the moderator for whatever purpose she feels may further the purpose of the debate (presumably for her questioning to clarify the candidates' answers.).
It is notable that the audience for this second debate is said to be made up of independent voters most of whom are likely to have been drawn from current Hofstra students and other current residents of the State of New York. New York voters have been considered likely to award their majority of votes to candidate Obama, giving Obama all of the state's large number of 29 first ballot votes in the Electoral College. (Texas has 38, California has 55.)
If true, that means that the votes of New York's independent voters will not be a factor in Election 2012, but an exit polling of those attending Tuesday night's debate could very well show how independent voters in the "swing states" may be tending to cast their votes.
What subjects of interest have not been adequately discussed in the 1st Debate and the VP Debate?
Some Americans argue that none of the subjects of real concern have been adequately discussed! Readers here may agree. And to test that assertion ask yourself the following questions:
(a) Has either party explained how they will lower the National Debt?
(b) Has either party explained just how they will lower unemployment to below 6%?
(c) Has either party explained how and when they will provide a balanced budget?
(d) Has either party agreed to take up a comprehensive immigration policy?
(e) Has either party agreed to work in a bipartisan way to reform the tax code?
(f) Has either party explained how the nation can deal with its decaying infrastructure?
(g) Has either party explained in detail how they will approach education reforms?
(h) Has either party explained how they will deal with crime, especially gangs, in the USA?
(i) Has either party a realistic plan for dealing with the crisis in Syria, Iran's nuclear ambitions, or deadlock in the United Nations Security Council?
(j) Has either party explained a realistic plan for preserving Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and establishing a universal health coverage with enough of the participating doctors, nurses, hospitals, and other health professionals needed to manage one?
There are enough other topics of national concern to provide material for ten debates. These include banks that are still too big to fail, America's continuing import/export imbalance, patent and intellectual property protection, the upholding of states' rights, the proper management of federal lands, the needs of Native Americans, America's high poverty levels and homelessness, the massive military/industrial complex, coping with pork barrel politics, term limits, Super PACs, speeding judicial appointments to relieve the backlogs in the nation's court system, and terrorism.
How many of these issues will see clear policy statements in the remaining two presidential debates on 10/16/12 and 10/22/12 and the less-discussed "Minority Debate"?
And, lastly, how many of the critical items (a) to (j) will you be able to feel have been answered to your own satisfaction following the final two national, presidential debates?
© 2012 Demas W. Jasper All rights reserved.
Some poorly known facts about Governor Romney:
- Some things I know About Willard Mitt Romney Former Governor of Massachusetts
Willard Mitt Romney's membership and responsibilities in his church tell us a great deal about him which many people do not know. It is worth reading about these insights as background for his efforts to present himself as a worthy candidate.
The real outcome to watch from Election 2012 is to see what the 2013 House and Senate majorities will be. By rights there should be a lot of fresh, new faces w
- What is it you don't get, Congress?
What is it Congress doesn't get, when only 10% of Americans give Congress a good approval rating? Here are some of the challenges members of Congress should meet, or take their pink slips and go home.
Once elected always elected? Why we need term limits:
- How Long Do Representatives and Senators Usually Serve Once They Are Elected?
When a senator such as Utah's Senator Orin Hatch runs for a 7th term in the United States Senate, what can voters do? The answer is simple, but the outcome is in doubt!