Debate rules

[Nym90]

(CNN) -- Here are highlights of some of the rules laid out in the 32-page agreement on the three presidential debates ahead of the November election.


No television camera shots from behind the candidates and no cutaway shots of candidates who are not answering questions.


Other than a handshake at the start of the debates, the candidates are not to approach each other.


No props, notes, charts, diagrams or other writings can be used by the candidates; however, they can take notes on the type of paper of their choosing.


The candidates cannot ask each other direct questions, but can ask rhetorical questions.


The candidates cannot address each other with proposed pledges.


Each candidate can use his own makeup artist.


No candidate is allowed to use risers or any other device to make them look taller.


The Coin Toss: At least 72 hours before the first debate, there will be a coin toss on the order of questioning and closing arguments. The winner gets to choose whether to take the first or second question, or whether to give the first or second closing statement. The coin-toss loser then chooses his preference of question order or closing statement order not exercised by the winner of the coin toss. For the next debate, the coin-toss loser gets to pick first. There will be a separate coin toss for the final debate.


Another coin toss will determine stage positions of the candidates.


There will be at least 16 questions. A candidate gets two minutes to respond to a question; the other candidate gets 1 1/2 minutes to comment on the question or to respond to his rival's answer. A moderator can use his/her discretion on whether to extend the discussion by 60 seconds.


For the second debate, which has a town-hall forum, the audience members submit questions to the moderator, who then approves which audience members get to participate. If audience members stray from their questions, the moderator is to cut them off.


Other than Secret Service personnel and the president's doctor and military aide, each candidate is allowed to have only one pre-designated staff member in the wings or the immediate backstage area.

[ATFFL]

In order, which side supported the idea.

(Shots frm behind and cutaway) Both.

(Approach) Bush, no opposition from Kerry.

(Props) Both

(No questions or pledges) Both.

(Makeup) Both

(No risers) Kerry

(Coin Toss) Neither, this looks like it was haggled over for hours.

(Time) Both

(town hall questions)  Bush.  This was probably negotiated in exchange for the riser.

(Advisors)  Kerry, no opposition from Bush.

[badnarikin04]

Debate Rules....

1. DO NOT AD-LIB OUTSIDE THE SCRIPT!!!!!!

2. Audience members who fail to show support for either side in attempt to dismantle the mighty Republicrat regime should be shot secretly and thrown in a mass grave in an undisclosed location.

3. The debates shall be played live BUT with a 30 second tape delay for editing purposes

4. Any attempt to divert from this years subject matter, "30 Years Ago", will result in suspension from the premises.

[Akno21]

Personally, I think there should a lot of debates, more like 10 than 3. Debates are crucial, and should not be limited.

I think candidates should not know the questions whatsoever, so they can't just be endlessly prepped.

[Keystone Phil]

As long as there is atleast one debate with podiums, I'm happy. It just seems more Presidential.

Also, I'm pleased to see that there will be no table debates with each candidate at a table with the moderator. In my opinion, the Bush-Gore sit down debate was the most boring debate of the 2000 election.

[TommyC1776]

personally I think one or two of the debates should include Nader, Cobb, Bardnarik and Peroutka

[TommyC1776]

personally I think one or two of the debates should include Nader, Cobb, Bardnarik and Peroutka

[A18]

I think you should have to poll at about 10% nationally to get invited.

[Keystone Phil]

personally I think one or two of the debates should include Nader, Cobb, Bardnarik and Peroutka

I'm sorry but if that was to happen, it would just be a joke.

[Posterity]

personally I think one or two of the debates should include Nader, Cobb, Bardnarik and Peroutka

I'm sorry but if that was to happen, it would just be a joke.

Yeah, the joke would be on the Republicans, Democrats, and the media.  Americans would quickly realize that Bush and Kerry really don't differ that much on the important issues.  Then people would be laughing all the way to the voting booth thinking how silly of them it was to think America had only a two-party system.

[A18]

The way we vote makes a two-party system the only realistic one. Anything else would throw minority governments into power left and right.

[YRABNNRM]

WHAT?!?! They can't even ask each other questions or address each other?!?!?!

They mine as well not even be in the same room with each other....this isn't a debate, this is two seperate speeches from two candidates in the same room!

[Lunar]

I would like to see Bush and Kerry competitively debate.  Instead of giving sound byte and sound byte, they should try to deconstruct their opponent's arguments and constantly ask each other questions during set periods to help clarify current positions.

Alas, the American public couldn't follow it and no one would ever agree to it.

[Nym90]

Yeah, that would be cool. A completely free flowing debate...the candidates ask each other all of the questions. The moderator does nothing unless it starts to get really bad, then he gets them to settle down or whatever, if they really start getting angry or some such. Just a knock down, drag out battle royale.

[Lunar]

Yeah, that would be cool. A completely free flowing debate...the candidates ask each other all of the questions. The moderator does nothing unless it starts to get really bad, then he gets them to settle down or whatever, if they really start getting angry or some such. Just a knock down, drag out battle royale.

They would have set times still, which the moderator would enforce by cutting off microphones.

[Nym90]

Yeah, that would be cool. A completely free flowing debate...the candidates ask each other all of the questions. The moderator does nothing unless it starts to get really bad, then he gets them to settle down or whatever, if they really start getting angry or some such. Just a knock down, drag out battle royale.

They would have set times still, which the moderator would enforce by cutting off microphones.

Yeah, otherwise one would just keep going.

But it would definitely be cool to see the candidates question each other directly.

[A18]

I think a better idea would be for the moderator to ask each campaign what questions they'd like asked of the other side.

[Lunar]

I think a better idea would be for the moderator to ask each campaign what questions they'd like asked of the other side.

You'll get a bunch of stupid spin questions with no "correct" answer or with talking points in the question itself.

Example: "Why do you hate babies?"

[freedomburns]

Debate Rules....

1. DO NOT AD-LIB OUTSIDE THE SCRIPT!!!!!!

2. Audience members who fail to show support for either side in attempt to dismantle the mighty Republicrat regime should be shot secretly and thrown in a mass grave in an undisclosed location.

3. The debates shall be played live BUT with a 30 second tape delay for editing purposes

4. Any attempt to divert from this years subject matter, "30 Years Ago", will result in suspension from the premises.

This is hillarious badnarik!  I love it.

[badnarikin04]

Debate Rules....

1. DO NOT AD-LIB OUTSIDE THE SCRIPT!!!!!!

2. Audience members who fail to show support for either side in attempt to dismantle the mighty Republicrat regime should be shot secretly and thrown in a mass grave in an undisclosed location.

3. The debates shall be played live BUT with a 30 second tape delay for editing purposes

4. Any attempt to divert from this years subject matter, "30 Years Ago", will result in suspension from the premises.

This is hillarious badnarik!  I love it.

The scary thing is, i'm not entirely sure I was joking:P:)

[badnarikin04]

personally I think one or two of the debates should include Nader, Cobb, Bardnarik and Peroutka

I'm sorry but if that was to happen, it would just be a joke.

I don't care how much you make sense or seem knowledgable. The second you dis third party candidates like that is the second you lose %150 of my respect.

The ONLY REASON these debates are predetermined is because they are funded by Republicrats so that it glorifies them and eliminates third parties from the mix.

Deep down inside, Bush and Kerry worry day in and day out about these people getting attention, because they know that they sound like baboons compared to the third parties.

They know that they are WAY, WAAAAAY inadequate for the job and are plodding through this election without a SLIGHT TINGE of being aware of what they're doing.

The sheer inferiority of these rich b@stards needs to be uncovered ASAP.

The joke is not Nader, Badnarik, Cobb, and Peroutka, it's Bush and Kerry. Get it right for once.

[Nym90]

Networks to Ignore Debate Camera Rules

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer

NEW YORK - With the first presidential debate Thursday, television networks plan to ignore an attempt by the Bush and Kerry campaigns to stage-manage the event by dictating which camera shots they can or cannot use.

   

The networks object to a provision in the debate agreement between the two candidates that says they cannot show a reaction shot of Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) when President Bush (news - web sites) is speaking, or vice versa.


"The campaigns have agreed to this," said Princell Hair, CNN general manager. "We haven't.


"We have access to these cameras and we're going to — as we would with any news event — decide which is the best way to broadcast this," he said. "A producer in the booth will make those determinations, not some people in the campaign."


Networks are also reluctant to agree to rules that restrict what kind of camera shots they can offer of the audience at the four upcoming debates, three for Kerry and Bush and one for the vice presidential candidates. The campaigns signed a detailed, 32-page agreement on how the debates are to be conducted.


The camera angles may seem like a small point, but campaigns know they offer potential embarrassing moments. Cameras caught President Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, checking his watch during one debate and Al Gore (news - web sites) sighing during answers given by George W. Bush during a 2000 debate.


As part of a pool for all the networks, Fox News Channel is operating the cameras at Thursday's debate, scheduled for the University of Miami campus.


"We're providing all the networks' coverage and we're not going to follow directions from outside sources," said Paul Schur, Fox News Channel spokesman.


Fox is expected to provide each network with feeds from several different cameras, giving them each discretion on which shots to air.


NBC News, which will show the debate on its broadcast network and on MSNBC, "will use pictures as we see fit," spokeswoman Barbara Levin said.


It's not clear whether the Commission on Presidential Debates will try to enforce these rules; a representative of the commission did not return a call Tuesday seeking comment. Presidential campaigns have the option of dropping out if the agreement isn't followed, but it might be tough to explain to voters that their candidate won't participate because he's worried about a camera.


The moderator of Thursday's debate is Jim Lehrer, host of PBS's "News Hour." ABC's Charlie Gibson and CBS's Bob Schieffer will host subsequent presidential debates, and PBS's Gwen Ifill will moderate the vice presidential debate between Dick Cheney (news - web sites) and John Edwards (news - web sites).


The four moderators were compelled to sign the agreement, signifying approval to all the conditions, or run the risk that they will be replaced.


It's unclear whether any of the moderators have done so. A PBS spokesman, Rob Flynn, refused to say whether Lehrer or Ifill would.


Some network executives believe that no one will sign the agreement, except for the campaigns.


"We don't enter into agreements with the people that we cover," said ABC News spokesman Jeffrey Schneider, adding that the network is looking forward to Gibson's participation and plans to cover all four events live.

[Nation]

What Andrew said. This is not a debate, these are two separate speeches.

If the presidential debates were formatted like the VP debates --- now that would be exciting.