Take-Home Quiz for Week of 3 October

Take-Home Quiz for week of 3 October

Buckner F. Melton, Jr.

Fall Semester 2016

For our quiz for the week of 3 October, watch this week’s presidential debate, either live or taped (at least one link where you can find a recording will appear on the course website by Tuesday). Review the questions below BEFORE you watch the debate (if possible). Take notes during the debate and then, after the debate, type in your considered responses to the questions below.

If, going in to the debate, you already strongly support one of the candidates, admit this to yourself and try to “cut the other candidate some slack” so that you are as objective as possible in your answers. This may be difficult for you to do, but in life you need to learn the difference between subjectivity and objectivity. The goal here is to analyze the debate process and the strengths and weaknesses of the type of candidate that Americans tend to nominate, not to tell me why you want Clinton to win (or lose) or why you want Trump to win (or lose).

Please type your responses on this form and turn the form in on the first day of class next week. Give examples for each of your answers; don’t just answer “yes” or “no.” Failure to follow these instructions will result in a zero on the quiz.

1. Was the debate moderator fair? Did he ask questions of equal difficulty of both the candidates, or were his questions for one candidate tougher than for the other candidate? Did he appear to bend the rules (such as for time allowed to answer) for one candidate but not the other? Give examples for each of your answers; don’t just answer “yes” or “no.”

2. Did both candidates always answer the actual question that the moderator asked, or did one or both candidates ever dodge a question by (for instance) answering a question that wasn’t asked, rephrasing the question to suit him/herself, expressly refusing to answer the question, or using some other method?

3. Did each candidate show a command of the basic facts of the issue under discussion, or did one or both candidates seem to be less than fully-informed about one or more issues?

4. Did each candidate appear “presidential” (e.g., well-dressed, dignified, civil, reflective, honest, intelligent, and such)? Did each candidate describe sufficiently what s/he wants to accomplish as president, or did s/he spend too much time simply attacking and denigrating the other candidate or the other candidate’s statements/positions/agenda?

Document1