Tonight's debate pop quiz...

Currently we are about 10 minutes into the debate.

Trump is confidently stating lie after lie after lie, basically the condensed version of his recent speeches main lies.

Biden on the other hand is saying things that are far closer to true, but he is mumbling and has already trailed off and forgot what he was talking about.

We are doomed.

Are you serious? Biden couldn't keep his shit together for one fucking debate?
- They are both much too old
- I think it was his third time speaking... he was answering one question on one topic and basically accidentally started talking about something else and then was visibly confused as he realized he was making no sense.
  
  I am legitimately going to need to read a transcript of this to figure out wtf he was talking about half the time.
  
  Like... Biden was just asked if his age would impact his presidency.
  
  His response was to mumble about being the youngest person in politics originally, and uh we are building more chip fab plants, and America is awesome.
  
  Trump is now answering the same question and is actually staying on topic for his entire answer though he's lying a bit.
  
  And Joe just went back to mumbling about how Trump is actually 6 foot 4, or 6 foot 5, or well anyway he couldnt carry his bag while golfing.
  
  Yeah... Biden is very much coming across as a near senile grandpa and Trump is coming across far more well composed.
- The democrats have truly fucked us all. Thanks assholes.
- They both were bad. Biden with the stumbling of words, Trump with the lying and going off on tangent. Both kept losing focus, too.
- The adderal or whatever they were giving him for the 2020 debates would kill him now.
Trump is confidently stating lie after lie after lie, basically the condensed version of his recent speeches main lies.

I think it's time to change the name of the Gish Gallop into a Trump Torrent... Or maybe not, that would feed into the orange troll's narcisism
;(

I'm old enough to remember when the League of Women Voters ran these debates, and candidates had more than two minutes to answer a complex question.

You best start believing in failing empires: You're in one.

The League of Women Voters was an anomaly. They only ran debates in three campaign seasons - '76, '80, and '84 - and pulled out in '88 when the RNC and DNC leadership attempted to set the terms of the debate behind the LWV debate organizers' backs.

Now debates are about as unscripted as any other reality based TV show, with campaigns knowing everything that will be asked well in advance of the event and getting to dictate everything from the time of questions to the lighting of the stage.

You best start believing in failing empires: You’re in one.

American democracy has always been a shitshow. Go back to the real time coverage of older debates - from Nixon v Kennedy to Bush v Dukakis to Bush v Gore - and you'll have people saying all the same shit about the campaigns being superficial and the candidates being too heavily coached and staged and the analysis being too vapid.

This is how liberal democracies function. If you're just now noticing the kabuki nature of the show, it isn't because things have gotten worse. Its because you've become more experienced and less naive.
- I'm not just noticing it now. I'm just reminded of it every four years and it makes me sad.

How much does a loaf of bread cost? Rent in NYC? Having your appendix removed? Those are the questions we should be asking them. Because I can guarantee you they have no fucking idea.

The modern debate format is pretty much useless. It's too bad that the TV networks need the debate more than the candidates need it. Otherwise, the TV networks could impose restrictions like real-time fact checking, moderators who could (and would) mute candidates, tough questions that candidates didn't like, following up and asking a question again if a candidate dodged a question, and so-on.

I can't bring myself to watch it, but that candidates can flat out tell blatant, easily disputed, lies blows my mind.

I'm not talking "I was a good president" lies that could be classified as subjective, I mean lies like "when I was president no one died of any disease" type lies that are just contrary to all reality. real-time fact-checking (of that magnitude) and insta-mutes should absolutely be a thing.

I realize "fact-checking" itself can be a slippery slope, so that's why I try to clarify the black/white nature instead.
- The slippery slope thing is definitely an issue. If you have a dishonest, biased moderator (say someone from Fox News) they could really twist things. Even if you have a moderator who is trying as hard as possible to be unbiased, they're bound to have some unconscious biases. On the other hand, fact checking is a pretty solved problem in reputable media. Not everything can be fact-checked, but even when facts are in dispute, they can often say what the source of the claim is. The problem is that they're not used to doing it in real time. Proper fact checking often takes hours, not seconds.
  
  Maybe one idea would be to have a rule at the debate saying that if you were planning to cite any statistic at all, you had to provide a source ahead of time to the moderator. They could then pre-emptively fact check all those statistics, and if they came up during the debate, the moderator could instantly fact-check them. If the candidate used a statistic they hadn't had pre-approved the moderator would interrupt them, just like a judge in a case where a lawyer was trying to talk about something they hadn't entered into evidence.
- crazy all the fact checking has to be done after and will almost by definition be biased at that point.
- Facts are not a slippery slope. That statement is part of the distorted reality that trump has created.
It disgusts me that they air the debate like a sporting event.
- Was coverage CNN exclusive or what? How does that make any sense? Put all the media companies in there with cameras. How do we have better media presence on an Apple keynote than the presidential debate
This debate in the lead up to the republican primary for Colorado's fourth district was so refreshing to watch, there was some actual journalistic integrity like you described. Moderators need to have a true contempt for sophistry. https://www.youtube.com/live/kD2rET3e5Ts

God I wish they asked some basic constitutional questions at debates.

C'mon, give Trump a chance.

Repeat after me: person, woman, man, camera, TV.
- Well this debate it seemed like Biden might actually struggle more with repeating a sentence. The polls have been too close for this big of a failure by Biden. There is no good reason he shouldn't step aside for a stronger candidate.

For Final Jeopardy, I want to see each of them try to draw a clock.

My ‘favorite’ silly Trump bit was when asked about the environment, clean air, water, etc., he said “we had H2O”. Wow sounds so science-ey!? 🙄 (It was like a Ralph Wiggum ‘I’m learnding’ moment)

I'm old enough to remember Trump gutting the EPA, approving oil drilling permits, and reducing national park land and that those are considered all negatives for the environment :/
- Remember the last debate when they were arguing over who loves fracking more? FFS!
It has electrolytes! It's what plants crave.
I DEMAND THE CLEANEST WATER AND THE CLEANEST AIR!

Asking the two presidential contenders to explain what the acronym "FBI" stands for. Neither of them can do it. Pundits spend the next week arguing why their candidate got closer to the right answer so that means they won the debate. Economy sags 3% in October, nobody remembers what happened in the debates, and the incumbent loses.

I would actually watch it if this was the case.

No fair! That would be cheating. Trump was just a bad business man and reality tv star, how could he possibly know about government when Biden has been in government his entire adult life?

I'll bet one of the two candidates could easily answer both of those questions

I’ll take that bet.