Skip to main content

Presidential Debates: Is it appropriate this time of the year?


As the 2024 presidential election draws nearer, the issue of whether or not candidates should be required to undergo charisma training for the debates has become a topic of discussion. Some argue that charisma is an essential quality for a successful president, and that candidates should be given the opportunity to enhance their communication skills. Others, however, believe that requiring charisma training is unnecessary and may even be unconstitutional.

On one hand, charisma can be a powerful tool in politics. Charismatic leaders have the ability to inspire and mobilize people, and they often enjoy high levels of popularity and support. In the context of debates, charisma can help candidates connect with voters, convey their messages clearly, and stand out from their opponents. By improving their communication skills, candidates may also be better equipped to handle unexpected questions or challenges during the debates.

On the other hand, requiring charisma training for presidential debates raises constitutional concerns. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech, and it is unclear whether requiring candidates to undergo charisma training would violate this right. Additionally, some argue that charisma is not a reliable indicator of a candidate's fitness for office. A candidate may be highly charismatic but lack the necessary experience or qualifications to serve as president.

Moreover, requiring charisma training may also be impractical and expensive. Debates are already highly structured events, and adding another layer of preparation could make them even more time-consuming and costly. It could also create an uneven playing field, as some candidates may have access to better resources or training than others.

In light of these considerations, it is unlikely that charisma training will become a requirement for presidential debates in 2024. While charisma is undoubtedly an important quality in politics, it should not be prioritized over other factors such as experience, qualifications, and policy positions. Ultimately, the most important thing is that candidates are given a fair and equal opportunity to present their views and engage in a meaningful dialogue with voters.


 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Trump: ‘Letters to Trump’

Well what has the title do to write a post on this topic? This is not a book review, but in case you’re interested you can buy it from book stores everywhere, Amazon.com , Hannity.com . The post is only to highlight how Trump is in the moment desperate to win in the 2024 elections. A reason why he has come with a book not about elections, his achievements, business and not even his first fours 2016-2020 as the United States President. But, for those or anyone interested in reading this book it’s available in the links given above so you can buy it there. The title of the book is the title and the topic of this post. Good luck! Get your copy first before it’s all sold out.

The Taliban

This isn't the time to talk of any investments. First and foremost you have to show leadership to attract any investments. Not just saying we welcome anybody. This isn't foreign policy. That means subtly saying in the future we will allow anyone to use our country as a base to carry out any terrorist activity. This will create instability in the region from drugs, weapons and equipment. Can you introduce us to the team probing into the killing of Ayman al-Zawahiri? It's almost one year completed you still act like a group. Can you call for a referendum because you say that the people must want education for girls and women. Can you bring your people to vote whether they want education for girls and women? Just saying that people must decide on women and girls education, who are these people? Are they people in your group or the afghan population? You are open to have any agreement with anyone, but for this region we need openness for anyone in this region to tru...

The Endless Cycle of Misinformation and Deflection: Biden, Harris, and the 2024 Campaign

For four long years, a column was being written in the press, a persistent narrative that followed President Joe Biden through his term in office. Every time Biden faced tough questions or criticism, he would pause, take a deep breath, and yell back, branding the conversation as either "misinformation" or "disinformation." It became almost a hallmark of his response—deflecting any criticism by labeling it as part of some broader, nefarious campaign to distort the truth.  This strategy came full circle the day Biden signed his name to a critical decision: his reelection announcement for 2024. By deciding to run again, Biden’s reelection bid felt like the culmination of a column that had been continuously drafted, edited, and critiqued. His familiar refrain against “misinformation” became, in essence, the core message of his defense—any challenge to his policies or leadership was dismissed as an attack not based on facts but on falsehoods. But the story didn’t end the...