Please Rate my question up (youtube townhall)

[blahface]

So, I asked the following question on the youtube town hall.

Internet message boards have been out for a while; why doesn't congress have its own official message board for its members in which they can debate point-by-point in public view?

I'd appreciate it if anyone here would rate it up.

[Gandalf]

[blahface]

So, do you think congress should just debate by taking turns giving 5 minute speeches? Do you have something against organized debate?

[Gandalf]

So, do you think congress should just debate by taking turns giving 5 minute speeches? Do you have something against organized debate?

Cease your attempt at righteous indignation. You're a total moron trying to look like a lesser moron, and it's unbecoming of you.

You think a congressional webforum will lead to actual debate, when the existing means for debate is misused already? The problem is a lack of standards. Treat that problem.

[blahface]

So, do you think congress should just debate by taking turns giving 5 minute speeches? Do you have something against organized debate?

Cease your attempt at righteous indignation. You're a total moron trying to look like a lesser moron, and it's unbecoming of you.

You think a congressional webforum will lead to actual debate, when the existing means for debate is misused already? The problem is a lack of standards. Treat that problem.

How would it hurt? Just because congress has a poor system of debate now, does that mean we should not try to fix it?

[Dominus Atheos]

Voted down.

[Gandalf]

How would it hurt? Just because congress has a poor system of debate now, does that mean we should not try to fix it?

Do you know why you can have politicians giving speeches in place of debates? Because the public lets them get away with it. The populace are the problem, not to politicians.

Until you fix that problem, the message board thing is useless.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

So, I asked the following question on the youtube town hall.

Internet message boards have been out for a while; why doesn't congress have its own official message board for its members in which they can debate point-by-point in public view?

I'd appreciate it if anyone here would rate it up.

It's a stupid question, so I voted appropriately (i.e. as down as possible.) If such a thing were to happen, what mechanism would prevent it from simply becoming a long wall of sound-bytes and talking points? Or huge walls of text that would be the internet equivalent of five minute long speeches?

[Alerik the Fortunate]

Personally I'd have all Congressional debates moderated by SDN staff, but I don't think anybody is really up for that.

[evilsoup]

That's a pretty good idea, but personally I'd just let Mr. Coffee have at them with his clue-by-four.

[blahface]

So, I asked the following question on the youtube town hall.

Internet message boards have been out for a while; why doesn't congress have its own official message board for its members in which they can debate point-by-point in public view?

I'd appreciate it if anyone here would rate it up.

It's a stupid question, so I voted appropriately (i.e. as down as possible.) If such a thing were to happen, what mechanism would prevent it from simply becoming a long wall of sound-bytes and talking points? Or huge walls of text that would be the internet equivalent of five minute long speeches?

Sound-bytes and talking points would be more easily countered as soon as it becomes posted. And if it did become a long wall of ramblings – so what? At least it will have some semblance of a debate. It allows congressmen the opportunity to challenge and expose each other. What exactly is the downside?

Also, the problem with the 5 minute speeches is that it could be organized much more efficiently. If I had to choose between the 5 minute speeches or no debating at all, I'd choose the 5 minute speeches.

[madd0ct0r]

sound-bytes and talking points would only be countered if the opposition has an intrest in doing so, instead of just replying with their own talking points.

much like the televised debates, aren't we looking at a long advert to your own base, then actually trying to win?

[Stofsk]

I voted down

Personally I'd have all Congressional debates moderated by SDN staff, but I don't think anybody is really up for that.

HAHAHAHAHA

[weemadando]

This idea is hilarious.

Can you imagine the kind of Dorothy Dixer bullshit that it would allow.

Not to mention giving politicians the ability to literally have staff write their material for them.

If you think for a moment that a politician would get involved in this and it wouldn't be some policy staffer with a speechwriter or two staring over their shoulder pretending to be them...

Wait, we know how that question ends and the answer already.

Preemptively rhetoricalised.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Voted down. Incredibly stupid, impractical idea. If you want to watch the process, watch CSPAN.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Enjoy my downvote. You're lucky I didn't report your post on here for spamming.

[blahface]

sound-bytes and talking points would only be countered if the opposition has an intrest in doing so, instead of just replying with their own talking points.

Do you think that there wouldn't be any constructive rebuttals from anyone? Whatever you think of congress as a whole, there are SOME good senators and representatives that can make effective use out of the board. If the majority of posts are just rehashed talking points, that will just make the congressmen who make thoughtful and constructive arguments stand out even further.

I used to go to the Sherdog forums, but I quit because it was infested with too much spy-ware. This was the poster child for a bunch of idiots and trolls yelling at each other. Even on that forum, you would occasionally see a constructive argument between some of its members. I doubt that the congressional forums would be any worse than the Sherdog forums. Even if it is though, so what? All you have is a board for of congressmen exchanging soundbites.

much like the televised debates, aren't we looking at a long advert to your own base, then actually trying to win?

Even on the televised debates, Ron Paul will occasionally make a few good points. Do you think we should just do away with the television debates altogether? At least with the message board, you will get the soundbites of the opposing side as well.

This idea is hilarious.

Can you imagine the kind of Dorothy Dixer bullshit that it would allow.

Not to mention giving politicians the ability to literally have staff write their material for them.

If you think for a moment that a politician would get involved in this and it wouldn't be some policy staffer with a speechwriter or two staring over their shoulder pretending to be them...

Wait, we know how that question ends and the answer already.

Preemptively rhetoricalised.

What difference does it make if speechwriters or congressional aides write the material as long as the senator or the representative is responsible for what gets posted?

I cannot figure out why there is such a backlash against this. How is the current system of debating any better? Ideally, how do you guys think the debate system should be structured? Or, should there not be any form of debate whatsoever?

[Gandalf]

I cannot figure out why there is such a backlash against this.

That is why you fail.

How is the current system of debating any better?

The current system blows, but your idea does nothing to address the actual problem. Why do politicians make speeches instead of arguments? Because the public lets them. Think about it for a minute or two.

Or, should there not be any form of debate whatsoever?

Has anyone actually said that?

[blahface]

The current system blows, but your idea does nothing to address the actual problem. Why do politicians make speeches instead of arguments? Because the public lets them. Think about it for a minute or two.

Okay, fine, the public lets them get away with it. As the public, what should you and I do about it?

Or, should there not be any form of debate whatsoever?

Has anyone actually said that?

I didn't say anyone did. I'm just trying to understand the backlash.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

sound-bytes and talking points would only be countered if the opposition has an intrest in doing so, instead of just replying with their own talking points.

Do you think that there wouldn't be any constructive rebuttals from anyone? Whatever you think of congress as a whole, there are SOME good senators and representatives that can make effective use out of the board. If the majority of posts are just rehashed talking points, that will just make the congressmen who make thoughtful and constructive arguments stand out even further.

Not one member of Congress would actually post on such a board. They'd hire a team to do it for them. One guy to do the posting, a couple of guys to work with whatever rich white asshole is holding the Congresscritter's leash this week to "shape the message," and a few more guys to run the focus group and watch the polling data. Those Congresscritters that try to get more directly involved will invariably make some manner of stupid gaffe that will convince them to leave posting on the messageboard to their speechwriter.

I used to go to the Sherdog forums, but I quit because it was infested with too much spy-ware. This was the poster child for a bunch of idiots and trolls yelling at each other. Even on that forum, you would occasionally see a constructive argument between some of its members. I doubt that the congressional forums would be any worse than the Sherdog forums. Even if it is though, so what? All you have is a board for of congressmen exchanging soundbites.

Which makes your idea completely redundant, since thy already have a forum for exchanging soundbites. It's called the mainstream media. Having Congress create it's own webboard would only mean that they get to do this and waste taxpayer dollars at the same time. Brilliant!

What difference does it make if speechwriters or congressional aides write the material as long as the senator or the representative is responsible for what gets posted?

Once again, what's the fucking point of this message board? Congresscritters are already "responsible" for the stupid shit they say on TV. This includes whatever they say when they're live on CSPAN.

I cannot figure out why there is such a backlash against this. How is the current system of debating any better? Ideally, how do you guys think the debate system should be structured? Or, should there not be any form of debate whatsoever?

Because everyone but you grasps that this is a stupid idea that would only waste taxpayer dollars and do nothing to change the nature of American political discourse. You want to change the debate system? Stop electing sockpuppets of rich white assholes.

[Gandalf]

The current system blows, but your idea does nothing to address the actual problem. Why do politicians make speeches instead of arguments? Because the public lets them. Think about it for a minute or two.

Okay, fine, the public lets them get away with it. As the public, what should you and I do about it?

Demand better of your representatives. Why are the Tea Party so powerful in the GOP? Because they made loud and somewhat clear demands. Find others like yourself and join together.

[blahface]

Demand better of your representatives. Why are the Tea Party so powerful in the GOP? Because they made loud and somewhat clear demands. Find others like yourself and join together.

The Tea Party is so powerful because their interests are aligned with the big funders of the Republican party. It is a lot harder to put pressure on Democrats. They know that we know that the Republicans are worse and they can move as far as a hair's length away from the Republicans and we have to put up with them.

Would you at least agree with me that most pragmatic and effective thing we can do is get the voting system changed state by state so we can actually have competitive elections? You might think Campaign Finance Reform is more important, but that is going to take a constitutional amendment and it will be so much harder.

[blahface]

Once again, what's the fucking point of this message board? Congresscritters are already "responsible" for the stupid shit they say on TV. This includes whatever they say when they're live on CSPAN.

It is easier to archive and sift through information on a message board. Right now you can see some of the best highlights of the congressional speeches youtube, but wouldn't it be better if in addition to the original point of contention, you could very easily see the responses from his colleagues (or his aides) in one centralized place? Also, it is a time waster to load and watch all the videos. It is much faster to just read the text.

[Ziggy Stardust]

It is easier to archive and sift through information on a message board. Right now you can see some of the best highlights of the congressional speeches youtube, but wouldn't it be better if in addition to the original point of contention, you could very easily see the responses from his colleagues (or his aides) in one centralized place? Also, it is a time waster to load and watch all the videos. It is much faster to just read the text.

Why is a message board the solution to this, as opposed to just an archive? You know, like this one, that CSPAN has. Now, maybe you can argue that this library isn't extensive enough, or that there should be transcripts provided with the videos, but in no way, shape, or form is a message board going to be more efficient than what is already being done.

Hell, message boards also open up the problem with after-the-fact editing. People have been banned from this board for going back and editing out controversial/stupid statements from their posts. So now you want politicians to be able to retroactively delete anything they say that backfires?

Also, considering the low quality level of most internet debates, I really doubt adding politicians to the mix will solve the problem.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

I voted down

Personally I'd have all Congressional debates moderated by SDN staff, but I don't think anybody is really up for that.

HAHAHAHAHA

Hey, don't knock it until you've tried it. Look, assuming every congresscritter is a spherical mass of iron, subjecting them to the rigors of this intellectual crucible, this smartest board on the interne-*snort*

Okay, I can't do that with a straight face. Seriously, somehow this actually tops the OP in the bad-idea department. Let's get us, by and large a collection of poorly educated dweebs, many of which hold downright retarded positions and biases, who think social ineptitude and online-aggression problems is a sign of intelligence, to moderate a debate of actual import.