Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Willravel · 11-07-2005, 01:33 PM

I watched the fictional debate last night on The West Wing between Democrat Matt Santos (played by Jimmy Smits), and Republican Arnold Vinick (played by Alan Alda). As I watched them go back and fourth, talking about everything from energy to campaign financing, I started to realize something...this debate was better than the real thing. Thinking back to the Kerry/Bush debates, I could remember them starting to clash, then hiding under their desks or simply smiling and shutting up. I remember non answers and question dodging. At the time, I figured it was normal, but now that I've seen what it can be I wonder if debates are even worth happening outside of fictional tv anymore.

I used to be on the debate team in high school, where we would debate on anything and everything. I know that if a debator tried to dodge a question, the opponent would eat him or her alive for it. In a particular debate, I was trying to show that the entertainment industry served often as a distraction from isues more important to those who are being entertained. I asked my opponent, "Why do you think that it's necesary for actors and actresses to try to maintain a persona for public view, and why do you think we we pay so much attention to this, despite the fact that it has little to do even with the movies they make?" (or something to that effect), to which my opponent replied something about the government being responsible for it's own publicity, whihc isn't true. I ripped him apart for not directly answering my question. I won the debate because he tried to dodge a question that he either wasn't able to answer or didn't want to answer.

"Republicans have tried to turn `liberal' into a bad word," said Santos (Smits) in the episode last night. "Well, liberals ended slavery in this country."

"A Republican president ended slavery," Vinick (Alda) retorted.

"Yes, a LIBERAL Republican, senator. What happened to THEM?"

Can you imagine W. Bush and Kerry or W. Bush and Gore saying something like that? Can you imaigne Daddy Bush and Clinton saying something like that? I certianally can't. Why is that? Would they lose at the polls or lose finaincing for saying something like that? Probably not. The only reason not to debate in a more aggrsssive mannor is insecurity.

After last night, I'd vote for Alda or Smits over Kerry or Bush, simply because you can tell by the debate exactly where they stand. Kudos to West Wing.

11-07-2005, 01:33 PM	#1 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	West Wing vs. Reality I watched the fictional debate last night on The West Wing between Democrat Matt Santos (played by Jimmy Smits), and Republican Arnold Vinick (played by Alan Alda). As I watched them go back and fourth, talking about everything from energy to campaign financing, I started to realize something...this debate was better than the real thing. Thinking back to the Kerry/Bush debates, I could remember them starting to clash, then hiding under their desks or simply smiling and shutting up. I remember non answers and question dodging. At the time, I figured it was normal, but now that I've seen what it can be I wonder if debates are even worth happening outside of fictional tv anymore. I used to be on the debate team in high school, where we would debate on anything and everything. I know that if a debator tried to dodge a question, the opponent would eat him or her alive for it. In a particular debate, I was trying to show that the entertainment industry served often as a distraction from isues more important to those who are being entertained. I asked my opponent, "Why do you think that it's necesary for actors and actresses to try to maintain a persona for public view, and why do you think we we pay so much attention to this, despite the fact that it has little to do even with the movies they make?" (or something to that effect), to which my opponent replied something about the government being responsible for it's own publicity, whihc isn't true. I ripped him apart for not directly answering my question. I won the debate because he tried to dodge a question that he either wasn't able to answer or didn't want to answer. "Republicans have tried to turn `liberal' into a bad word," said Santos (Smits) in the episode last night. "Well, liberals ended slavery in this country." "A Republican president ended slavery," Vinick (Alda) retorted. "Yes, a LIBERAL Republican, senator. What happened to THEM?" Can you imagine W. Bush and Kerry or W. Bush and Gore saying something like that? Can you imaigne Daddy Bush and Clinton saying something like that? I certianally can't. Why is that? Would they lose at the polls or lose finaincing for saying something like that? Probably not. The only reason not to debate in a more aggrsssive mannor is insecurity. After last night, I'd vote for Alda or Smits over Kerry or Bush, simply because you can tell by the debate exactly where they stand. Kudos to West Wing.