No Name Calling

 

 

Not a debate

But a question and answer,

Not a moderator

But an interrogator.

 

Not the planned six

But only three,

And I must admit

There wasn’t much to see.

 

A mixed bag

A mixed bag indeed,

One participant was cautioned

Another carried the lead.

 

The third was unconvincing

But convincingly so

And given the issues raised

I’m still not in the know.

 

That all three had a plan

There was no doubt,

It is just that

Only one got to carry it out.

 

Of the other two

One was a constant bother

While the other saw himself

And not another.

There is a challenge

Re a debate among three

As a matter of fact

I deem it an impossibility.

 

Given the little I know

And that is just a tiny bit,

Two persons or two teams

Is the established habit.

  

Not three candidates

And certainly not six,

For with three participants

The moderator was in a fix.

 

Three debates if possible:

Candidates two

With the drawing of numbers

To determine who.

 

In this arrangement

All six would be heard

And then the public could judge

Based on their word.

What plans have you

To either correct or improve…?

No slandering or vilifying-

This is an awful groove.

 

The public will judge

One way or another:

Either with their X

Or with their street chatter.

 

No rebuttals

I am seriously tempted to warn

But just a minimum

Since this is the norm.

 

No name calling,

That is a definite no-no

And stick to the high ground,

No going down low.

 

 

That’s my two-cents worth

Thanks for your time,

Remember:

A lot can be gained

From your opinion and mine.

 

Stewart Russell © October 31, 2020