• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Second Pres Debate: Who Won?

Here's a little more info on the "projector." Bolding is mine. Apparently, and sadly, it was not funded.

"In tonight's debate, Sen. McCain cited a $3M earmark Sen. Obama sought for a projector at a planetarium.

For FY08, Sen. Obama requested a $3M earmark for a projector for the Adler Planetarium. The project was not funded.

Here is the verbatim description from Sen. Obama's request:

"Adler Planetarium, to support replacement of its projector and related equipment, $3,000,000.

One of its most popular attractions and teaching tools at the Adler Planetarium is the Sky Theater. The projection equipment in this theater is 40 years old, and is no longer supported with parts or service by the manufacturer. It has begun to fail, leaving the theater dark and groups of school students and other interested museum-goers without this very valuable and exciting learning experience."
Click to expand...

http://www.npr.org/blogs/politics/2008/10/that_planetarium_earmark.html
 
BeAChooser said:
What do you expect when the folks they put in the audience to ask the questions are still undecided at this stage in the election? To be undecided they basically have to be clueless and uninformed. :D
Click to expand...

I didn't have a problem with the questions, either from the in-room audience, Internet submissions, or the moderator.

My problem was with the answers. Both candidates were indirect and stuck to prepared talking points. They didn't have to do that.

BeAChooser said:
Now I'd like to see an old style debate. Where one candidate gets to ask a question of the other and the other gets a minute or two to respond. Then the other candidate gets a question. And they continue that process for a hour or two. Then we might actually get a picture of who these two are. :)
Click to expand...

I'd agree, however it's easy to see how such a method could be abused. I have little doubt this approach would devolve into soundbites and loaded questions instantly. Negativity works, sad to say. With the "town hall" format or an independent moderator, we at least deflect some of that by forcing them to respond to a neutral party, rather than simply open fire with invective right off the bat.

Ideally, I'd like to see a brief from each candidate. Say 50-100 pages, outlining in very clear and concrete terms their domestic priorities, goals for foreign policy, spending plan, metrics, etc. Let us decide on that basis. They frequently provide a shadow of this, but hard details are anathema to current campaign strategies. It's easier to vote for a vague happy promise than a well-reasoned but slightly painful compromise.

The debate format, for me, serves primarily as a test of their ability to present and lead in discussion, and to think on their feet, much less tangible but nonetheless critical for a President. Our current debates are flawed, but they do at least serve this purpose.
 
Last edited:
R.Mackey said:
Ideally, I'd like to see a brief from each candidate. Say 50-100 pages, outlining in very clear and concrete terms their domestic priorities, goals for foreign policy, spending plan, metrics, etc.
Click to expand...

You mean something like a website?

Have you ever looked at Barack Obama's website?
 
pgwenthold said:
You mean something like a website?

Have you ever looked at Barack Obama's website?
Click to expand...

Yes. I've also looked at McCain's. And Kerry's, W's, Gore's, etc. I haven't read Obama's book, however.

It's a start. There is quite a lot of vagary there, however, I'm sure you'll agree.
 
Obama won the post-debate.

Both women, as well as the third audience member, were especially emphatic about their feelings on the two men’s performance after the debate. All three said that Mr. McCain shook hands with several audience members and then left fairly quickly. Mr. Obama and his wife, Michelle, stuck around to shake far more hands, pose for pictures, sign autographs, and answer more questions, including from people who had been on stage but did not get a chance to ask their questions. Only when Secret Service agents told them it was time to go did the couple leave (upon which they headed for a post-debate fundraiser at Al and Tipper Gore’s house nearby).

“McCain leaving right afterward was pretty shocking to me – even some of the big McCain fans among us were really surprised he did that,” Ms. Jackson said. “I thought the Obamas came off like real people much more in the end.”

Ms. Trella added: “I was very impressed that the Obamas stayed til the very end, shook everyone’s hand, and just seemed very accessible. I think they won some people over by just sticking around and seeming happy to talk more.”​

Maybe McCain had to "race back to Washington" to save the economy again.
 
And you can show the stars as they existed when the Pyramids were built, and show that a different star, not Polaris, was the northern star then. And use that to explain precession of the equinoxes.

And you can use it to discuss ancient calendrical systems.

And you can put people AT Stonehenge or any other astronomically-aligned archeological site and show them how those alignments appear.

And of course you can project any film or any slides you want to in the process of your lesson.
Click to expand...

Did you say project?????

WOW it can do all that!!!! I didn't know that scientists needed to look at that stuff. I thought they already knew about that stuff. A planetarium is nothing more than a sophisticated overhead projector. You want to do research and discovery, you use the Hubble Telescope. You want pretty pictures, go to the planetarium. I have nothing against planetariums as teaching devices, but to say someone got their first look at the stars in a planetarium is insane. I'm sure they saw the stars on their way to the planetarium.

And of course you can project any film or any slides you want to in the process of your lesson
Click to expand...

Hey, if they showed Spiderman or Batman movies in there maybe they would make enough money to support themselves? Oh wait, IMAX beat them to it. Too bad.

Still waiting for answers to the other questions.
 
The Painter said:
You want to do research and discovery, you use the Hubble Telescope. You want pretty pictures, go to the planetarium.
Click to expand...

A planetarium is primarily a teaching tool. For certain applications (such as teaching positional astronomy) it is by far the best tool to use. It can also be used for entertainment, and for many it's also a source of inspiration.

Planetariums can also be used in historical research. For example, there's some question about whether or not a particular cycle in the Mayan calendar is related to a conjunction of the five naked-eye planets. You can run the planetarium backwards in time and see when and if such a conjunction would have been visible from Mexico.
 
As both a physics & astronomy professor and someone who has worked in a planetarium running the projector, I have to say that I am absolutely appalled by the willful ignorance displayed by The Painter on the subject of planetarium use.

TP: My advice is...

1. Try reading a little something about astronomy & planetarium technology before you spout nonsense, and

2. keep this particular line of discussion out of the politics threads. It belongs in the science & tech threads - go on and post your ill-informed rants there, if you have the guts. You're likely to get torn to shreds, "my friend." ;)
 
MattusMaximus said:
As both a physics & astronomy professor and someone who has worked in a planetarium running the projector, I have to say that I am absolutely appalled by the willful ignorance displayed by The Painter on the subject of planetarium use.

TP: My advice is...

1. Try reading a little something about astronomy & planetarium technology before you spout nonsense, and

2. keep this particular line of discussion out of the politics threads. It belongs in the science & tech threads - go on and post your ill-informed rants there, if you have the guts. You're likely to get torn to shreds, "my friend." ;)
Click to expand...

I never knew that about you! :)

We should discuss mirror-making some time if you are interested in that part of things!
 
....back to the OP....

I agree that the debate formats and execution leave a lot to be desired. This is one area where I long for the good old days when the League of Women Voters decided on the format and moderator and invited the candidates and the networks to show up. (At least that is how I remember it).

Now it's the two political parties running their own show and both, being risk averse, drive the process into banality.
 
Agreed. I'd love to go back to the days when the LWV ran the show. I'd also like to see more third party candidates get some air time during the debates.
 
R.Mackey said:
The debate format, for me, serves primarily as a test of their ability to present and lead in discussion, and to think on their feet, much less tangible but nonetheless critical for a President.
Click to expand...

You really think that two people who've achieved the level of Senator haven't already demonstrated those things?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom