1.
What was the most important issue the candidates went over in the first
thirty minutes (must be in the first half of debate for credit) of the
debate? Why do you think it is important? What were the positions
of each candidate? Do you agree with Scott or Crist? Why?
2. What was the most
important issue the candidates went over in the second thirty minutes
(must be in the second half of debate for credit) of the debate? Why do
you think it is important? What were the positions
of each candidate? Do you agree with Scott or Crist? Why?
3. Who do you think went
more negative (highlighted the shortcomings of the other candidate) in
the debate? Identify a specific comment and the policy area from the
candidate you believe went more negative.
4. Did either candidate mention or make light of "fangate?"
5. Did this debate make you a
more informed (potential) voter? What is the purpose of debates such
as this one? Do you think this debate achieved the purposes you
identified?
6. What was your overall impression of the debate? Who would you vote
for and why? Did anything about either of the candidates surprise you?
37 comments:
Tabitha Raskiewicz (1B)
1. The most important issue of the first 30 minutes seemed the topic of job loss and the economy. Governor Rick Scott repeatedly how Florida was the second highest state to have job loss in the United States when Charlie Crist was Governor. This was a hot topic because of how high the unemployment rate is in Florida and because unemployment is what is affecting the people the most. Crist talks about fighting for the middle class and to reduce taxes; also says that Scott is for the big utility companies, not for the people. Scott just repeats how Crist came from money and how he does not know what suffering is; unlike him who came from a family who had only one car and had to fight day to day to put food on the table. I do not completely agree with either candidate about the unemployment but I lean told Crist because his reasons seem to hold more water as well as weight. Scott seemed flustered and repeated a lot which usually indicates he does not have an answer for the problems.
2. The most important issue of the second 30 minutes seemed to be jobs AGAIN. When Scott was asked about the Trevon Martin incident, he circled back around to his plan to get not only African Americans but all Floridians more job opportunities. This is obviously the hottest topic in Florida because of how great the unemployment rate is. The entire debate seemed to circle back to economics and the job problem in Florida. Scott talks about how Crist refused to work with companies such as Hertz to bring jobs to Florida. Crist bashes Scott about how his promise of over 200 hundred thousand jobs has only a 4% success rate and a 96% failure. Crist also promises to work with anybody; Republican, Democrats and Independents to bring to Florida. Both candidates have issues about them that seem fishy and both seem like more talk than action but that is true of any politician. I still lean more toward Crist though because of his strength in his reasons as well as bringing a more detailed plan to the problem of economics.
3. As with all debates, both candidates struck below the belt to the to the other. I would say Scott went a bit lower though because he seemed to start attacking Crist first especially when he brought up how Crist’s wife had not paid her taxes or something like that. That comment seemed to hit a nerve with Crist and sparked the nasty bantering of attacks that went on off and on throughout the debate.
4. “Fangate” was not mentioned throughout the debate but I read online that “fangate” was banned on the ballot to talk about during the discussion.
5. I would definitely say this debate made me more informed seeming that I did not even know what the candidates looked like before this debate. The purpose of these debates is to make voters more informed as well as sway their vote toward each candidate. I would say the debate does make viewers more informed of each candidate if they can talk what they with a grain of salt of course. These debates do provide you with a good feel of what each candidate offers.
6. Nothing about the debate surprised me because just like all politicians they undercut each other and brought up issues about the other that made them look like a liar. It did surprise me how each candidates kept encouraging viewers to go to their websites to check about how the facts they provided were correct. Obviously both websites would be biased toward each candidate. I would barely vote for Crist but I do not think either candidate as all that great though.
1.The most important issues that each candidate went over was Ebola in Jacksonville, Abortion, Rick Scott’s and Charlie Crist’s reputations “Scott’s business paying a fine of $1.7 billion dollars fraud” “Crist’s affiliation to those in his campaign that went to prison”. Also being able to relate to the people like Scott “who doesn’t know his biological father, grew up in public housing” compared to Crist who had money. Another major topic is jobs, unemployment rates, property taxes “insurance rates”, minimum wage. I think these topics are important because it shows the differences between each candidate and how they will address the situation. I’m not sure so far who I would agree with because both seem to have things so far that I don’t agree with at all.
2.The most important issues that the candidates went over were Medical marijuana “Charlie Crist partner- John Morgan / brain cancer sister (personal connection)”, Healthcare “Charlotte’s Web – Rick Scott” , Florida football team player’s “ FSU” , Death Penalty “ Rick Scott- question started with quote from Crist”, Racism in the Republican Party “ Charlie Crist- is there too much racism in the republican party that made him leave?”, Jobs, Criminal Justice System “Travon Martin- Rick Scott”, Lifting the embargo on Cuba, Immigration Reform, Climate Change. I believe that this is import because the information from both sides is something that has or will directly affect me now or in my future. I felt that the earlier half of the debate dealt with the past except for current events “Ebola”, but the information now is something that I could relate easily to. The positions of Rick Scott was somewhat against the president and negative over all, while Charlie Crist was more positive and would agree with some things but would have a good rebuttal of how to fix the problem that will benefit the people. I agree more with Crist than Scott, because to me Scott was just focusing too much on destroying Crist reputation, but will not have a good enough answer for how to fix the problem being addressed.
3.The more negative person to me would be Rick Scott. During the first half of the debate, Rick Scott was always talk briefly positive things about his campaign, but then would suddenly move to the negative parts of Charlie Crist. Rick Scott seemed like he was always pulling the card of “a pitiful childhood” by saying “how he grew up without his biological father, in public housing, on welfare”, while bashing Crist at how he grew up rich. However, both candidates seemed to go at each other, for instance each Candidate “mostly Charlie Crist” would say “that’s not true”, “would run over the time”, “would laugh at false comments from the other candidates”.
4.Yes, both candidates would always tell each other or voters to look on certain websites for the facts of the other candidate.
5.Yes this debate did make me more informed as a potential voter. The purpose of debates such as this is to inform and influence a voter as to whose policies and values they agree with. Yes.
6.The overall impression of the debate was aggressive. Each candidate seemed to rip apart each others reputation and would make sly comments on the past moments of their political or personal lives.
I would vote for because Charlie Crist because he seemed to be more confident and had more values that I agreed with rather than Rick Scott.
It surprised me how each Candidate responded to each other, especially with their facial expressions when seemed false that appealed to them. Also it seemed that Rick Scott was lost and he would stutter, repeat, or take pauses when speaking. It seemed that he wasn’t confident to me when he was against Charlie Crist therefore that can come across as if Charlie Crist doesn’t know how to make wise decisions. How Charlie Crist would ask Rick Scott questions and Scott would respond back with “What do you want me to do? She apologized”. Rick Scott would say derogatory terms like “mudslinger” towards Charlie Crist. Both candidates shocked me when watching this entire debate.
1) The most important issue stated in the debate started off talking about Ebola to make everyone comfortable that they are prepared for it and then it led on to talk about minimum wages and jobs. These two are important because Ebola is a big problem throughout the world and they are trying to raise minimum wages to $10.10 an hour instead of $7.93. Crist wants to raise to $10.10 an hour because he feels people deserve more. Scott believes that if you raise the minimum wage it would lose over 500,000 jobs. I agree with Crist because not many people can live off of $7.93 an hour.
2) In the second half of the debate it was mainly focused on medical marijuana and FSU crimes. It is important because medical marijuana can help cure patients and Scott believes that just the little medical marijuana offered is not enough to cure them. I agree with Scott mainly about the FSU crimes because if you have made a crime you should be executed because you have killed someone.
3) I think they are both equally negative because in the beginning Scott was more negative in personally attacking Crist about what he has does wrong, but i believe in the second half of the debate Crist was more negative because he was going against Scott because he didn't agree with him.
4) Neither candidate mentioned "fangate".
5) I think this debate made me more informed about why minimum wages should be raised and more about jobs. The purpose for this debate it about closure and to see what candidate you really want to vote for.
6) My overall impression was that I didn't really think the debate covered the issues like they should have and I feel it was more of a personal attack against one another than a debate about the important issues. I would vote for Scott mainly because he is bringing in jobs and when Crist was in charge he wasn't really doing his job and things weren't going well. Nothing really surprised me about the candidates.
1. The most important topic in the first half of the debate would have been the job issue that happened and the unemployment rate that rose. I think that this is important because jobs stimulate the economy and people need to have their own source of money instead of relying on the government to take care of them when they are capable of earning their own money. Charlie Crist is a small business man because his wife owns a small business and he wants for less people to earn more money, he also believes in raising minimum wage. This could explain the job loss he had while in office. Rick Scott wants for the minimum wage to stay the same so more people can have jobs, have money and he still in the process of making more jobs for Floridians. I agree with Scott on this issue because people need jobs, and it is not fair to that one person that would have to lie off so the rest of the employees could earn more money. That job may have been that only thing the person had and since you took that opportunity away from them, they are left with nothing.
2. An important topic in the second half of the debate would have been taking care of the environment and global warming. This is important because we need to take care of the environment that we live in. Crist believes that we are the reason for global warming and we should use renewable resources and rely less on gasoline dependent machinery and have electrical cars. However, Scott believes that we are not the cause of global warming and he put millions of dollars into funds to help protect coral reefs and raise the sea level. I agree with Crist on this issue, not with the fact that we are the cause for global warming, but we need to use renewable sources and rely less on gasoline dependent machinery.
3. Charlie Crist I think went way more negative in this debate. He attacked Rick Scott within the first 5 minutes of the debate when they were talking about trust and keeping jobs. Crist stated in the debate, “He has problems in which I don’t have”. Crist also relied heavily on emotions and making sure that you were emotionally attached than attached with your brain and with facts. He also made a “plead the fifth” jab at him in the middle of the debate.
4. There was no mention of “fangate” in the debate.
5. This debate made me learn more about each of the politicians and their political views that they have on particular issues. The purpose of these debates is to show people how they feel but also how to they attack one another, keep their selves up and how do they take low blows to themselves or when their family is brought into the mess. I think this debate did its job in relaying the information that was needed
6. My view of Charlie Crist is trashed now because all he did was attack Rick Scott (which I already knew would happen), but he does not have facts to back up his argument to make them valid and he cuts off Scott and tries to run him over. I would vote for Rick Scott just because he had a better composure on television and I agree with most of is views and think he would be the best fit for governor.
1) The most important issue the candidates went over in the first thirty minutes was jobs and money. The amount of jobs being created and lost were important arguments Crist and Scott made at each other. I think this is very important because lots of citizens today are struggling to have jobs and the amount of income given affects every individual. Crist wants to raise the minimum wage to ten dollars while Scott wants to keep it around seven dollars to keep businesses open. I agree with Scott on this topic because by raising the minimum wage, many businesses will be lost and some people will be cut off from their jobs.
2) The most important issue the candidates went over in the second thirty minutes was the topic of immigrants. They asked a question on driver’s licenses and Crist’s opinion on how everyone should be able to have these rights. Scott uses this as an opportunity to mention that the President failed us by not securing our borders. This discussion proceeds to Crist stating how it isn’t right that people are being pulled over because the person doesn’t look “right”. I agree with Crist on how it is wrong that people are being pulled over because of how they look or where they are from. Especially if they haven’t done anything wrong, they will take offense to it.
3) I think both sides were negative but Scott showed it more in his words. The interviewers cut him off many times. A specific comment Scott made was how Crist is not responsible and how he is a divider.
4) Neither candidates mentioned fangate.
5) This debate made me feel more informed. I believe that the purpose of these debates is to inform voters on the candidates’ political views on certain topics. I do believe they achieved these purposes because they were given questions to agree or disagree with. It helps the audience decide who they want to vote for by getting a better picture of what the candidates want.
6) My overall impression of the debate was that it was interesting. I would not want to vote until I got more information on the specific things both candidates have planned. I would not base my vote off of this debate. Both candidates surprised me because they loved emphasizing flaws the other person had. They would bring up problems that have already been discussed in every new topic discussion. I found it funny how Crist kept promoting his site while Scott kept telling viewers to check out the real facts about Crist online.
1. The most important issue the candidates went over in the first thirty minutes of the debate is minimum wage, it is important because is discusses the future of his much employees will get paid. The position of governor Rick Scott says is that he will not raise the minimum wage that is currently $7.93. Where as Charlie Crist point is that he does want to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. I agree with governor Rick Scott, just for the simple fact that if we were to raise the minimum wage to that amount of money ($10.10) then yes, people would have more money but at the same time, considering a company standpoint, will these companies have enough money to give all of their employees. If it was raised to that amount, my question would be would individuals get laid off due to the fact that these companies can't provide for them this amount of money per hour?
2. In the second half of the debate the issue that was important issue that the candidates talk about was the immigration reform, more specifically the question was should immigrants get licenses regardless of their immigration status. The position of Rick Scott was that currently that is what's happeneing but as far as the immigration reform his main point was that the president should first secure the boarders.mshere as Charlie Crist point was he does support it he continued talking about his grandfather being a Greek immigrant and the "American dream". I support Charlie Crist just for the simple fact that I am an immigrant as well, although I am legal here, not many others have that opportunity and he supports the "American Dream"
3. I cannot cjoose as to who went mor enegative in this debate in all honesty, both of these candidates were pretty nasty with each other from the start. So,e of the commentary that Crist stated against Govenor Rick Scott is "unlike Scott, you can trust me" & "Scott is a Medicare fraud" where as Scott says "Chrlie grew up with plenty of money" indicating that he did not know the struggle that middle class indivduals have endured. as well as saying "you switched parties" & "divider in politics". Both individuals were going against each other on every issue they discussed.
4. No fan gate was mentioned
5. This made me an informed potential voter, it made me realize the views that both of these candidates has and the purpose of these debates is to inform and persuade voters on who to choose in the upcoming election.
6. My overall impression of the debate was not positive, I did not enjoy the fact that they were extremely nasty to each other with not even 10 minutes into the debate. Also, I felt like they were too concerned in inputting negative commentary about each other that they did not fully answer the questions that they were asked. But if I had to vote for an individual it would be Charlie Crist, just for the fact that I support his immigration reform and increasing the importance of teachers and the climate.
1. The most important issue of the first segment of the debate was clearly the battle about jobs and the economy. Both of the candidates had controversial standpoints. Rick Scott was constantly saying that Charlie Crist had lost over 800,000 jobs. He was also not pro-Minimum Wage increase while Charlie Crist was. I support Scott on the issue of jobs and the economy because a tremendous loss in the amount of jobs and job openings on the behalf of Charlie Crist would just make it difficult to agree with him on the subject. What's more, Charlie Crist does not take any responsibility for that "economic meltdown".
2. The most important issue during the second segment of the debate was on immigration and driver license privileges for those immigrants. Rick Scott was against illegal immigration and did not directly mention whether he supports immigrants having access to a driver's license while Charlie Crist believes that EVERY immigrant deserves a driver's license. I agree with Crist on this situation because he emphasized how EVERYONE would get it, not just the legal immigrants, but even the illegal immigrants that checked out to be non-detrimental to American society
3. I believe Rick Scott was more negative towards Crist than Crist was to Scott. During the first segment of the debate, in the process of discussing jobs and the economy, Rick Scott constantly bashed Crist with "Crist grew up on money" in order to boost the voters' expectations that he would "support families that were like his own".
4. No, they did not mention fangate.
5. This debate had a minor influence on me as a voter. The purpose of debates like these are last minute bashing and scarcity in promoting your own issues. The whole thing was a bashfest in my eyes.
6. The debate did not make too much of an impression on me. Overall, after listening to the whole debate, I would vote for Charlie Crist because he kept advocating that he is for the people, that he is not like Rick Scott who cares only to impress the big companies that he is running for. Representing the public is probably the best way to get the public to vote for you. One thing I'm surprised Charlie Crist lost 800,000 + jobs and did not even take responsibility for it, whether it was his fault or not.
1. The most important issue discussed during the first half of the debate was whether or not minimum wage should stay the same or be increased. This has been a hot topic for quite some time for much of the public who are concerned with how they will be able to support themselves through minimum waged jobs which made it an important topic of discussion. Crist believed that minimum wage should be increased to about $10.00 an hour because it would be enough to support low income families who are struggling financially, while Scott believed that the minimum wage should not be increased because it would not help improve Florida's deficit. I agreed with Crist on this issue because many people throughout Florida who do not have a very sustainable income rely on minimum wage jobs to help tend to daily needs, and Crist also connected to many Florida residents who are facing this problem and using it as a way to improve the state.
2. A heated topic of discussion during the second half of the debate was the creation of more jobs for the people. This topic was most important because jobs that are provided for the people are what help the state thrive and keep people going. Crist's position on this topic was that the more creation of jobs within Florida the better the state system will run since majority of the people will have a source of income, as well as Florida's government plays a key role in development of jobs. Whereas Scott leaned more oppositely saying that the government should not be taking the only responsibility for creating jobs within the state since the last time that was attempted it left Florida in millions of dollars of debt. I again agree with Crist because there are many parts of the governing system in Florida that are responsible for the output and availability of jobs, the better the system the stronger companies are, which will in turn provide more jobs.
3. In the first half of the debate Scott went more negative. As both candidates were discussing minimum wages, taxes, and income, Scott attempted to counterpoint Crist's argument by mentioning the way Crist was brought up as a child in a wealthier family, attempting to point out to voters that Crist did not have a first hand account of low income issues, mentioning that he grew up in a rather more wealthy family. But it sort of back fired on Scott's position because he wasn't very clear on his explanations and reasoning and Crist came back into the argument and addressed his own personal matters correctly stating that as a child his father struggled to make ends meet.
4. Fangate issue was not mentioned.
5. This debate did make me more informed as to what the candidates specifically address and how the handle Florida's political agenda offering their choice of solving the problem. The purpose of these debates is to see how much the candidate knows about the issues, and how well informed they are about the public's opinion. Clearly in this debate, both candidates touched basis on past issues the public faced, as well as present topics and issues that were properly addressed.
6. My overall impression was that both candidates had valid arguments. When it came to some topics, both of them sometimes became vague either at the beginning of the discussion or towards the end not knowing exactly what to say but overall it was specifically discussed. I would vote for Crist because i agree with his policies and perspective on resolving the issues more than Scott because he connects more to the majority of the people instead of vaguely attempting to resolve any problems that wont have a large affect.
1. Job Loss
Crist: I don’t think I am to blame for the job loss and I wasn’t responsible for economic meltdown. 1.3 million people not working today. I’m running to give you a chance. Middle class doesn’t need to be paying high than regular people and I meet up with people to get my jobs done.
Scott: I grew up with family that struggled and I can feel what they are feeling right now. Added 651,000 jobs and we have under 100,000 under unemployment. I want this state where any family can live a dream with a great job and great education
Raise of Minimum Wage
Scott: raising would lose 500,000 jobs and Charlie should be known as zero wage governor. Find better companies to get better wages. Just because a minimum wage is set, doesn’t mean you get a job. Charlie doesn’t care and grew up with plenty of money
Crist: wants to raise to $10.10 an hour and in San Francisco where minimum wage increased, there have been proven to be more jobs. Feels people deserve more and it’s the right thing to do. People would work less jobs.
*I agree with Crist because job loss isn’t something people can control and raising minimum wage wouldn’t be a bad idea. He is trying hard to get more people working and unemployment has other factors besides who was governor or president at that time.
2. Medical Marijuana
Scott: wants everybody to get the health care they need. Get better treatments at work and are safe for their families
Crist: I support medical marijuana because it helps with pain and it’s a good alternative
*I still don’t really know how I feel about this subject so I can’t really agree with any candidate but it proved to be the most important.
3. I think they went both negative and bashed each other. They both cut each other off, but Crist did seem to get sparked more by Scott’s comments especially about his wife.
4. Neither candidate talked about “fangate.”
5. I think it has made me more informed because now I know where each one of them stands. I think the purpose of debates is to see how each one thinks for different topics and their reasoning behind their logic and I think it achieved its purpose and helped people get informed on the sides each one took.
6. My overall impression was that they both had very strong viewpoints on what they believed and they both seemed to be going back and forth. They were more focused on bashing others and proving whose right then paying attention to getting their point across. I would probably vote for Crist since I agreed with some of his points, but he needs to make more improvements. Nothing surprised me.
There really wasn't much debating going on in this "debate". It was more like a petty cat fight between high school girls. However, one of the most important issues semi-discussed in the first half of the debate was the affect that the 2 different men had had on job loss and gain as governor. Crist said he was governor during a real estate crash, which caused a loss of jobs. While Scott has been governor, more jobs have been created, but certainly not as many as he said would be. I agree with Crist on this matter when he stated that he was not responsible for the job loss in the same way that Scott was not responsible for the increase in jobs. The governor can't really control the economy he comes into. This issue is extremely important because it affects the lives of all citizens in Florida who need to maintain their jobs or even obtain a job to help provide for their families.
In the second half, one of the most important issues discussed was medical marijuana. Crist is for it and Scott is against it. This is an important issue because citizens now have the right to vote for or against it and it can have a major affect on the health of many people, especially those with constant seizures or pain conditions. I agree with Crist that it should be legalized. It's practically impossible to say who went more negative in this debate because the whole thing was basically just them saying what their opponent had or hadn't done. They were just taking shots at each other. Crist stated that Scott was responsible for "the largest medicare fraud in history", while Scott said that Crist "never takes responsibility" (in reference to being paid to appoint specific judges).Neither candidate even mentioned "fangate". I think the purpose of the debate was to allow the voters to better understand the 2 candidates views on things and their reasoning, however I don't think it achieved this purpose cause they were to busy taking low blows at each other to even talk about the issues. This debate was barely even slightly informative and I could have probably been just as informed without watching it. I feel that both candidates are unfit to be governor and need to learn how to behave like adults. However, voting for the lesser of 2 evils, I'd vote for Crist due to his more liberal views on things such as abortion and immigration.
1. In the first 30 minutes one of the most important issues seemed to be jobs and the economy. There was a lot of focus on job loss and the steps Governor Rick Scott said he took to try to get them back. Scott talked a lot about how he created so many jobs during his 4 years as governor so far, although it was pointed out that he did not meet the quota he initially promised. There was also a lot of focus on the 800,00 0 jobs that were lost during Charlie Crist's term as governor. Another hot topic during the first half of the debate was the accusations against each candidates. Scott was asked about the fraud in his company while Crist being paid to make court appointments.
2. In the second half of the debate one of the most important issues was immigration. Crist says that he is for immigration reform and that if they are living in Florida they should be able to obtain a drivers license. He said that we are a nation of immigrants and we should support the ones that are living here. Scott did say he would support reform but he mostly focused on Obama's policies instead of what he believed. He repeated that Obama did not do enough for reform and also did not answer when asked if he agreed with a specific part of Senator Rubio's immigration reform proposal.
3. I think both candidates were very negative toward each other. Most of the time when they were asked a question they made a statement that was a vague position on the topic and then attacked the other candidate. Crist attacked Scott many times about his company's fraud and Scott attacked Crist on political expediency. Both candidates focused a lot on what the other candidate did wrong rather than what they believed and what they will do.
4. "Fangate" was not mentioned by either candidate. It was mentioned before the debate by the pre-debate news coverage.
5. I would not say that this debate made me more informed. Neither candidate was specific about their policy goals and avoided answering questions directly. The purpose of the debate is to show the different viewpoints and stances of the candidates so that viewers can more clearly make a decision in the upcoming election. I do not think that this purpose was achieved as well as it should be. Each of the candidates spent a lot of time attacking the other and did not focus on themselves.
6. My overall impression was that I do not think that either candidate was particularly strong in this debate. Based solely on this debate I do not think I would fully support either candidate. Their stances were unclear and it was impossible to tell from the debate which facts were true, false, or taken out of context. If I had to choose I would vote for Crist, if the things he said were true, I agree with his stances on medical marijuana and abortion.
(2B)
1. The most important issue that the candidates went over during the first 30 min. of the debate were the issues with today’s jobs and economy. I think that this is an important issue to discuss because a lot of people have recently been laid off of their jobs. Even at our own school, a student services worker has been recently laid off due to budget cuts in the school system. I believe that the candidate that shows the most commitment to this issue will earn the most votes because jobs are what sustains most people’s lives. Crist stands on the belief that he is not the one to blame for any job losses but understands what people are going through. Scott also believes in helping but at the same time bashed Crist saying that he grew up with money and doesn’t understand the struggle. I stand with Crist because he talks more about how he will help the middle class.
2. The most important issue that the candidates went over the second 30 min. of the debate today’s problems with crime, death penalty, immigration, and governor “do-overs”. Discussing these issues I believe, are also key to winning the election because crime rates have risen too high over the past few years in Florida and we citizens must stay secure. Touchy topics like the death penalty and immigration reform were also important topics to address because Scott had been accused of not taking death warrants seriously by Crist, which made him look like the bad guy. It was crucial for viewers to listen in to these type of topics that way they know which governor not only can bring economic strength, but also morale strength. Each of the candidates basically said the same thing about each of the topics except for racial criminal justice. While Crist believes that young black boys don’t get a fair chance in criminal justice, Scott believes that they do. I have to say once again that after listening in to each of the candidate’s arguments, I stand with Crist because I feel that his morals are more in line with mine than Scott.
3. I believe that Crist went more negative because at some point during the debate, he would cut Scott off or mock him of something that he said in the past. For example, when Crist had personally asked Scott a question in dealing with the topic of the death penalty, Scott didn’t give an exact direct answer. Because of that, Crist replied with, “He doesn’t answer questions, he pleads the fifth.”
4. There was no mention of fangate in this debate.
5. I do believe that this debate had made me a more educated and informed voter. This actually has made me want to vote. The essential purpose of debates such as the one that I watched tonight, is to influence voters and to show off the policies that they believe in pursuing to gain more votes. Yes, I believe that this debate achieved the purposes I identified.
6. I believe that this debate was very feisty- like and glad that it was only any hour. The candidates were very quick to cut each other off and I could sense the tension. I would vote for Charlie Crist because I feel that most of his polices line up with mine. Nothing really surprised me about either of the candidates because the way they debated is the same way that most politicians debate and have debated.
1. The most important issue discussed in the first half was jobs and economy. Both the candidates and the moderators spent the most time on the questions under this category. This is most important because people are most concerned with how money (especially their money) will be spent. It is also important because voters would like to know why certain issues with economy have risen and how the candidate plans to fix them or do better if they were to win. A specific question asked regarding jobs and economy, directed to Charlie Crist, was rather or not he thought he was to blame for the jobs lost while he was governor. He said no, he didn’t feel like he was responsible because there was a “real estate meltdown” when he came into office and Florida relies a lot on real estate. Then he redirected the question to the way he was raised and how he had less than Scott growing up, so he can relate… Crist said that he was the one who grew up in a non-wealthy home, and his parents struggled for money. So… I’m not sure I really agree or trust either candidate with this issue to be honest. Both responses (if that can even really be called a response) didn’t really hold substantial evidence or enough relevance to persuade me.
2. The most important issue discussed in the second half was immigration. This is a rising issue in the U.S., and it is especially a concern in Florida. Scott was asked if he supported the bill that provided a pathway of citizenship for immigrants. Scott said that he would need more information and Crist said that he did support the bill. I agree with Crist because I believe that immigrants should receive a better opportunity to become a citizen. Also because Scott did not answer the question.
3. There are many instances where Charlie kind of “piggybacked” something that Scott said and just turned it around and pointed out why he was better than Scott, even when it wasn’t necessarily fit for the question or appropriate. The one that stuck out the most to me was when Crist was asked rather or not he thought he was to blame for the jobs lost while he was governor and then he started talking about his background and how he, basically, had a way poorer childhood than Scott, implying that because of this he knows money and the people.
4. Fangate was not mentioned.
5. I feel that I AM definitely more informed after watching this debate. The purpose of debates such as this is to bring to light the ideals and policies of the candidates and to gain votes. This debate, although not the most persuading debate I’ve ever seen, did give me some information on the candidates and what they believe.
6. The debate could have been a little more insightful. I feel like not a lot of the questions were really answered directly, but the issues surrounding the questions were “talked about”. If I were to vote based solely on this debate, I would definitely vote for Crist simply because I feel like I know more about him, I believe in what he stands for (though I don’t really trust either candidate), and he seemed to have more direct answers than Scott. I was EXTREMELY shocked by how both candidates really gave a lot of attention to their pasts and how they were raised, in an attempt to connect with lower or middle class citizens. It seems as if though they are politically intelligent, they don’t know much about people, so they tried to find a way to connect with us. This really reminded me of something that I would have argued with my friends about, not knowing much about politics whatsoever, just trying to relate the candidates back to “normal” people somehow. I just didn’t expect the actual candidates to actually argue over a subject like this so greatly.
-Ahmani Joseph
1. I think that the most important issue that Rick Scott and Charlie Crist went over during the first half of the debate was the topic of minimum wage. Rick scott mentioned that Florida is the second highest state in terms of the amount of jobs lost and that this instance occurred when Charlie Crist was the governor at the time. Crist claims that he supports raising minimum wage to $10.10 because he believes that it will help those who struggle to support themselves and their families. He also brings up the Seattle example where raising the minimum wage has actually benefitted the state because more jobs were available. Crist repeatedly mentions that his intentions are to help the middle class because he has met people who "work 2-3 jobs just to make ends meet" so raising the wage would take away some of the burden they have on their shoulders. Rick Scott takes the opposite position by claiming that raising the minimum wage will "kill jobs." I'm not quite sure which candidate I necessarily agree with, but as of right now, keeping the minimum wage at the regular amount isn't creating jobs let along reducing the amount of jobs lost so unless something is changed, then we can determine if Crist's approach is the beneficial or detrimental one.
2. The most important issue discussed during the second half of the debate was the topic of medical marijuana. Charlie Crist mentioned that his sister was recently diagnosed with brain cancer and that these doses of legalized medical marijuana would help cope with the pain. Rick Scott wasn't necessarily for the use of legalized medical marijuana because he wants to make sure that it's safe for everyone. Again, I'm not sure about my position on this topic, but there have been studies showing that legalized medical marijuana does make a beneficial difference so I might have to agree with Crist on this topic.
3. I feel like both candidates had their fair share of pointing out each others flaws and wrongdoings; however, I do believe that Rick Scott may have taken things a little overboard and he was often redundant with his verbal attacks against Crist. At some times, Scott focused more on what Crist hasn't done instead of focusing on what Scott can do for the state of Florida. During the first half of the debate, Scott accused Crist of being a hypocrite and he pointed out that Crist had not disclosed his and his wife's tax returns. Crist admitted to his wife not disclosing that information, but he said that her reason for not doing so is because Crist doesn't want to make her do anything that she doesn't want to do. Scott also kept mentioning throughout the entirety of the debate that Crist grew up in a family with money while Scott wasn't very fortunate because grew up in a less wealthier family and didn't know his biological father. Scott also mentioned that under Governor Crist Florida lost 832,000 jobs.
4. The "fangate" was not mentioned during this debate.
5. I feel like this debate gave me more insight as to the views that each individual candidate has on certain policies and issues. The purpose of these debates is to essentially inform the public of the different standpoints of each candidate that is running for a position with power. I believe that by asking a question pertaining to different issues, as well as including questions asked by the general public, this debate achieved this purpose.
6. I honestly found this debate to be not surprising at all. It was essentially two grown men bashing each other's credibility and character without focusing mainly on the topics at hand or how to better Florida's situation. I don't think that I would vote for either of the two because they did not handle the debate maturely and they focused more on making each other look bad rather than the important issues. However, I do agree with Crist on some of the topics that he claims to support.
(1B)
(1)An important issue the candidates went over in the first thirty minutes of the debate was the issue of jobs and unemployment. This is an important issue because without jobs and flow of money our society would not run. Jobs are important because that's how we create the goods and services for ourselves. Unemployment leads to higher payments from the government for unemployment benefits, food assistance, and healthcare, which in turn leads to higher taxes. Charlie Crist wants for a certain amount of people to earn more money. Scott believes in helping but at the same time does not agree with Crist stating that he grew up with money cannot relate. I agree with Scott on this issue because people live off of jobs and he really seems to understand the peoples’ needs.
(2)An important issue the candidates went over the second thirty minutes of the debate was the issue of immigration. It regarded licenses based on immigration status. Rick Scott was mainly pointing at the president securing the boarders. Crist says that he supports immigration reform and those living in Florida should have a right to acquire a driver’s license. He basically said America is immigrants so why should we not help those now. I agree with Crist in that we should allow immigrants’ rights, because we don’t know the troubles many of them face.
(3)I believe both candidates were negative toward each other’s opinions and remarks. When they were asked a question they both made statement’s that were open and immediately one would hop on the other. But Crist did seem to be a bit more negative in that he cut Scott off and pick at things he said. Like when Crist said “He doesn’t answer questions, he pleads the fifth.” Crist attacked Scott for not being clear and precise with his answers. In numerous occasions we see facial remarks for Crist as well as to show he was not pleased with Scott’s answers.
(4)I don’t think fangate was mentioned in the debate.
(5)I believe that this debate educated and informed me more on issues governors in Florida want to repair or take hold on. I can’t vote yet but at least I know what my authority wants to do and is doing for my state. The purpose of debates is to influence voters and to give the Florida citizens insight for what the upcoming governor plans to do. I believe that the debate achieved the purposes I identified.
(6)My overall impression was impressed and shocked at the same time. I am impressed that the two want to do so much for Florida and the citizens. But I was shocked at how the candidates responded to one another really with their facial expressions. At some points it seems as though Crist got to Scott and made him nervous in a way. But I guess that is typical behavior in a debate. There is only one winner so if winning means facial expressions and making the other nervous Crist is securing his slot.
1.)The most important part of the first half was the conversation on jobs. Do to an increased need for jobs after the recession, it has become even more prevalent for more job opportunities. Crist is for helping the smaller man, while Scott focuses on bigger scale issues.I more so agree with Crist because the smaller man is where most of the demographic is.
2.) In the second half the topic of jobs and the economy was still a large issue because the has been a major issue in Florida over the years. Jobs and proper pay consume the American life, people live paycheck to paycheck. If you have no job then you have no source of income. Of course there is always government assistance, but to a certain degree it is limited. Americans do not want to lose jobs, only gain them. We fixate our lives around a paycheck, schedule our activities around a paycheck. I still back Crist on his viewpoint.
3.) I think Scott was more negative in the fact that he focused so much on bashing Crist rather than bringing his actual point to the table. When he tried to propose his thoughts it didn’t go over well because he didn’t address the actual question. Even watching television, adds bash Crist rather than getting the positive message out about his campaign.
4.) Fangate was not mentioned.
5.) This debate in particular did not make me a more informed voter because they spent too much time attacking one another and not focusing on self and their message. More so Scott however. The purpose of this debate is to get your campaign message out, identify the voters, and tie up any loose ends.
6.) My overall impression of this debate was a disappointed one. Yes I believe, Crist served more of a purpose than Crist; however, both candidates attacked one another too much. This took focus away from the message. I would vote for Crist simply because he was more clear and concise with his answers, therefore I was able to follow along and see that I like what he had to say.
1. The most important issue the candidates discussed in the first 30 minutes was the economy and money. This was the most important because governor Crist was asked if we should trust him now that he has changed parties and his stand on education, health care and abortion which lead to Crist mentioning Scott's man dealing with Medicare fraud and Scott mentioning how you cant trust Crist cause he doesn't take responsibility for anything. Crist mentioned how Scott would spend so much on useless things. I agree with Crist as far his views on abortion and Medicare and education switching republican to democrat, and his views on how the economy should spend there money.
2. The most important issue discussed in the second thirty minutes was to me a tie between African Americans in regards to the criminal justice system and more on the economy in regards to jobs and unemployment. Crist was mentioning how he doesn't think Africans get fair shake in criminal justice because there are so many things that prohibits them, like at a hotel they were against African Americans getting into the pool, whereas Scott was mentioning how he sat Down with the parents of Trayvon Martin and he is working on getting more opportunities for African Americans, and how they have changed how they do juvenile justice. Also they mentioned Yet, he disagrees with the fact that as soon as you get out of jail you get to vote. in regards to the economy Crist puts out how $20,00 of medicate was offered and Scott didn't do anything about it, but Scott believes government doesn't pay for jobs. Yet, 4 percent of jobs promised from Scott's job program got done where the other 96 percent was left stranded. In regards to both these issues I do again agree with Crist because he gives more insight on things especially in regards to the criminal justice system, whereas Scott usually Pleads the fifth.
3. I believe both candidates were negative as a whole. Scott was a little harsh when accusing Governor Crist of expediency, I personally do not think Crist was implying that he is altering or claiming his beliefs on things like abortion and women rights just to get a vote, yet mainly because those or the beliefs and policies he truly believes in.
4. "Fangate" was not mentioned in the debate it would have been interesting for it to be but then again it would have probably caused more petty arguments.
5.This debate really did make me informed and a potential voter. The purpose of the this debate was to get the candidates opinions on different topics in order to inform voters and maybe influence their vote in the upcoming election. The debate did achieve the purpose for people such as myself who see ads on television but don't really grasp how serious the two candidates are and don't really get into politics as much.
6. My impression of the debate was that it was a lot of back and forth and not really answering questions, yet it did touch on important topics and I liked how some of them were discussed. I personally wouldn't vote for ant of them but if forced I would vote for Crist based on his stands on criminal justice in regards to African Americans I think he would work more in Their favor than Scott. Also I liked Crist idea of how he would deal with unemployment and jobs how he would take the money and make small businesses. I was not surprised by any of the candidates, they seem to be really stern on what they believe in.
Jazmyn Hawkins 2b
1. The most important topic Crist and Scott debated about was the job losses caused by the fall of the economy. This topic is important because a lot of people in Florida were affected by this job losses, and according to Scott, Florida was ranked #2 in the country for job losses. Scott feels like he's repairing the jobs that were affected by Crist because, Crist "destroyed" over 800,000 jobs and Scott recovered over 600,000 jobs and there's atleast 200,000 job openings right now. Crist talks about how he would raise the minimum wages to atleast $10 because he wants people to have extra money in their pockets instead of living check-by-check. I don't really agree with either of them because mostly they just kept talking about their opponents finances and how that affects the people of Florida which was completely unnecessary.
2. The most important topic that happened in the 2nd half was the issue of young African American males and the justice system. This topic is important because, in this country there's been controversy with the police and the injustice treatment they give to Black males. Scott felt that Black males do have fair treatment in the justice system but it can be improved. He did make an assumption with the Treyvon Martin case and was stating that he met with Treyvon's parents to try to fight this case. Crist's response to this topic was that Black males have unfair treatment in the justice system. Crist feels that if he became govenor he would propose again the Restoration of Rights that Scott removed once he got in office. I agree with Crist that the young Black males in this country have unfair treatment because we've been having havoc because of police killing males for no reason for example in Ferguson and other cases as well.
3. I feel like Scott kept being negative towards Crist the whole time about his personal life. Scott would always bring up that Crist was born in a wealthy household all of his life and that he doesn't understand what a lot of people in Florida go through; Scott also started bashing Crist about how Crist doesn't like telling his wife's tax business to the world, when Crist responded about how his wife has nothing to do with this election, so its none of anyone's concern in the first place.
4. No, neither candidate commented about "fangate"
5. This debate didn't make me become more of a inform voter because I still don't really know what they stand for. Debates like this are for the people to see how the candidates talk about their beliefs on issues and debate with their opponent. I feel like this debate achieved with what I was talking about but, I feel like certain topics didn't get anywhere.
6. I thought the debate was pretty heated but overall it was an entertaining event. Honestly I don't know who I would vote on because I truly don't know what they stand for. The surprising thing that Crist said was about the Republican Party and the fact how the reason why he left was because he felt that the RP was becoming more of a Tea Party organization and how the party is changing for the worst, and the fact that Crist feels that women have the choice if they want an abortion or not.
Nadia Brown (1B)
1. The most important issue both of the candidates went over in the first half of the debate is jobs and the economy. These issues are important because of the concerns surrounding Florida residents on unemployment rates. Governor Rick Scott felt that minimum wage should not be raised to $10.10 because he think it will kill jobs. Governor Charlie Crist felt that minimum wage should be raised to $10.10 because it would help the middle class who are struggling to make ends meet currently. I agree with Crist because I feel that it is important to focus on the people in need so they do not have to struggle.
2. The most important issue both of the candidates went over in the second half of the debate is the right of citizens and immigration. This is important because citizens want equal treatment under the law. Governor Charlie Crist believes that drivers license should be given to everybody regardless of their legal status. Governor Rick Scott feels that there should be stricter comprehensive immigration reform and more borders on the country so the government knows how to legally immigrate in the country. I agree with Rick Scott on the issue of immigration because America needs to have more comprehensive policies on immigration so everything is organized and the process of handling immigrants is smoother.
3. I think both candidates were on the same level of hitting each other with negative remarks. Governor Charlie Christ said that Scott owns a private jet and flys 30,000 feet and owns a mansion and does not understand the grievances of the middle class and does not relate to real people concerning the issues of jobs. Governor Rick Scott called Christ a divider and a mudslinger when they were talking about the issue of equality and rights of African - Americans in America.
4. Both of the candidates did not mention about the "fangate" incident.
5. This debate did make me an informed voter because I was able to discern the different policy agendas for Scott and Crist. The purpose of debates is that voters can understand what the different candidates are offering to make them a potential governor for Florida. I did think this debate achieved its purposes because I learned that Crist supports the middle class, wants higher minimum wage and open immigration access while Scott wants to keep the minimum wage the same, less government intervention and strict immigration laws.
6. I thought the debate was informative about the candidates policies but on some parts it got really heated and I thought it got off topic such as Scott would talk about how Crist grew up rich so they cant relate to the middle class. I don't know who I would vote for because each candidate seemed to have cons in handling economy and jobs. I was just surprised at how both candidates were offensive and would cut each other off. I feel like they need to be more respectful.
1. One of the most important issues that were brought up in the first 30 minutes of the debate between Charlie Crist and Governor Rick Scott was increasing the minimum wage. I believe that this important because we are young people and some of us are working minimum wage jobs and we want to know which governor will help have a positive impact on the minimum wage jobs. Scott is more of keeping the minimum wage that Florida has because during his era of being a governor he has created more jobs than Crist has when he was governor. Charlie Crist wanted to raise the minimum wage because he believed that it would create more jobs but they used a source to counteract Crist statement that raising minimum wage does not help create more jobs. I agree with Scott because it may not help with the individual with getting more money but it helps overall amount of people to get jobs.
2. One of the most of the important of the issue in the second 30 minutes of the debate between Charlie Crist and Governor Rick Scott was the environmental issues and global warming. This is important because we need to improve in the world we live in. Scott put in a lot of money to help in conservation projects to help the environment. Crist believed that global warming is important and that people are the cause of global warming and pay a lot of money to contribute with land conservation. Personally, I don’t agree with none of them because I don’t think they should pay this much money for conservation but the people should do something by them not throwing away their trash everywhere.
3. I believe Crist went more negative in the debate because when he started talking he was already bashing to Scott about the business that he owned which caused a ruckus. Crist responds to Scott that “he doesn’t answer the question. Pleads the fifth.” This shows Crist negative towards Scott because he Crist believes Scott doesn’t answer the question that he asked to Scott.
4. The candidates did fangate because they mentioned the websites that they have to check up the facts that each candidate stated before and kind of disagreed with it during the debate.
5. This debate did not make me a more informed voter because the only thing the two did were argued with each other and did not focus on the main issues because they only bashed each other. The purpose of this debate is to help the voters to choose which candidate will affect the voter more positively. I think this debate did not achieve the purpose because both of them did not provide the main issues instead they just argued with each other and got really personal.
6. Overall the debate was a cat fight and you did not know what each of the governors stand for. I would probably vote for none of them because I don’t know what they stand for because I did not hear anything useful to me. Nothing surprised me about each of the governor because both of them bashed each other and did not give any sufficient facts about why I should vote for them.
1.The poor economy and low job rates was the most important topic discussed in the first half of the debate. While Charlie Crist is pushing for lowering property taxes and increasing the minimum wage, Rick Scott believes increasing it would only have a backwards effect and increase more jobs being lost. I believe this issue is important because of how many families we have suffering in Florida and how many people are still out of jobs. I support Charlie Crist in most of his beliefs, but unfortunately I must agree with Rick Scott on this issue. Although increasing the minimum wage does mean more money in our pockets momentarily, it also means less jobs would be available in the long run leaving more people with no income at all.
2.The discussion on environment, climate change, and energy use was the main issue in the second portion of the debate. I believe this is important because the increase in global warming is causing our glaciers to melt and our sea levels to rise. I believe us humans are the main cause of this and need to act now instead of later. I agree with Charlie Crist in that using clean energy such as solar and wind will drastically improve these conditions and will hopefully create a cleaner environment for the generations to come.
3.I believe that Charlie Crist was more negative in the debate as he focused on highlighting many of Rick Scott’s criminal actions. His big hit was on the health policy and how Rick Scott’s Medicaid scandal cost him millions.
4.Neither candidate mentioned the “fangate” situation. I think this is because they were both told not to mention it in this debate.
5.I do believe this debate made me more informed seeing is I had no idea who the two candidates were, much less what either of them stand for. The purpose of these debates are to inform the voters on each of the candidate’s standpoints, and I believe this debate did just that.
6.I was pretty amused by the debate. I’ve never watched one, so I was very surprised at how much focus is put on bashing each other. Although, I was way more surprised to learn about Rick Scott’s Medicaid scandal and discover how much it cost him. If I were to vote, I would definitely vote for Charlie Crist because of his democratic view points on women, abortions, and most importantly the environment.
The most important issue in the begging of the debate is on jobs since Gov. Rick Scott showed how he made jobs and how charlie Crist left jobs, it also set how charlie Crist is willing to raise the minimum wage to 10.10 and have 50,000 jobs lost,while gov.Rick Scott rather not force a raise just let the economy run it,even though he is not really saying much about what he thinks on minimum age.This issue is important since jobs are what keep Florida running with the huge tourism business, also this helps separate the two of them so voters can know some differences on policy issues.On this issue i diagree with both of them, i think minum wage needs to be raised but people are not suppose to live off of minimum wage those jobs are suppose to be for younger people who don't have lots of bills to pay,so what needs to happen is instead are increase of adults gaining the requirements to bet the higher paying jobs,empowerment of the people to be able to be proactive in gaining the types of jobs meant to support families.so we should not have to raise the minimum wage, but what could be consider is a temporary wage rise but those who want it must prove that they have done all they can to get a higher paying job otherwise they aren't working hard enough.
2.The issue in this half i think is the death penalty since it is a hot topic for debate in all states especially Florida.How Rick Scott has signed for more deaths than Crist This is important since the death penalty is a serious issue and the gov. has the ultimate decision on that persons life, it also shows how serious or not serious a state is on certain crimes,this is important since being a governor means taking care of your state and parting of doing so is keeping crime down which can be by deterrence through harsh punishments.So taking a stand on the death penalty and how each one of them uses it is important role of government.I do think a good amount of time should be considered when taking a persons life over a crime,but i also think time is never given back so a decision needs to be made and people will suffer the consequences whether now or later.I think Crist went more negative since Gov. Scott focused on his upbringing more and what he has done while Crist had to defend himself and attack him in order to look better,so he went at it as much as he could.
Also no mention of fan gate except at the begging when talking about the last debate.This debate made me more informed on what these two believe and how they are both covering themselves on the bad things they have done. I think the debate showed how they are politicians and i didn't like how they weren't focused on solutions but more on each others history and what they already have done, which isn't much to rave about.I would not vote for either of them since i couldn't choose my poison out of these two.I was surprised about Cristi childhood history he mentioned and i am surprised he didn't also use that like Rick Scott did, i am annoyed about the unprofessional manner they had and how they just don't know how to address issues in proper manner.
1. The most important issue I believe the candidates discussed during the first half of the debate was the issue on tuition and debt. The reason this stuck out to me was because as a high school senior, college is my planned destination after graduation. As we all know college isn’t cheap it is extremely expensive. What stuck out to me under this topic was Charlie Crist informing view about how “if you have to hope of going to college on a Bright Future scholarship 50,000 of you are not able to do so today because of Rick Scott”. When Crist further went on about the young lady named Marcella and how she couldn't get a bright future scholarship with a 4.7 GPA. I side with Crist on this topic because I am a student and if I qualified for a scholarship but couldn't obtain it I would be extremely upset.
2. The most important issue I believe the candidates discussed during the second half of the debate was the issue on the excessive testing students have to undergo in schools. The question was “Are all these tests needed for preparing our kids for the future”? Scott's take on the question is based on the standards of the state and at the district being guidelines for the learning. Crist simply stated that “There’s way to much testing in our schools today”. I side with Crist on this topic when he said “these Leaning centers have turned to testing centers”. I say this because I am a student myself and I see this shift in learning to strictly testing over the years.
3. I believe that Rick Scott went more negative. Throughout the debate Rick Scott answered questions but also bashed Christ constantly. A prime example of this is when Rick Scoot was asked the question “do you think the ban on same sex marriage is discriminatory?” Instead of answering the question directly he gave his point of view which was his siding with traditional marriage but then ended with the comment “but we have to remember that all this started with Charlie as governor”.
4. Neither Candidates made comments on “fangate; however comments were made during the lightning round about Crist’s use of the fan.
5. This debate definitely made me more informed as a potential voter. I believe the purpose of debates such as these are to discuss popular problems and in a sense gain information on how candidates such as Charlie Crist and Rick Scott would tackle the problems and the solutions they believe will be effective in eliminating the problems.
6. To be completely honest I am not entirely sure of who I would vote for. I agreed with but also disagreed with statements both Scott and Crist made. I was surprised at the method Rick Scott was taking. He tried to relate everything to his life and family. His bashfulness was also surprising.
1. The most important issue the candidates went over was the economy and job losses. This was very important because this really bagan the debating between the candidates. Additionally, finances are always an important factor in a society. Crist believes that he understands the less fortunate more than Scott does and be also stated that he is not to blame for the extensive amount of job losses. Scott believes that he understands the unfortunate more than Crist because he grew up with similar struggles. I agree with Crist because no one is to blame.
2. The important topic discussed in the second half of the debate was immigration. I believe this was important because it impacts my life. I definitely agree with Crist because immigrants deserve the right to travel as easily as we do and get IDs and etc. Because of this idea, my father recently received his drivers license after over 30 years. Scott believes that the borders should be heavily secured.
3. Scott was more negative. He came at Crist very rudely by bringing his wife into the debate.
4. Fangate was not included.
5. I am definitely more informed;however, I'm not informed enough.
6.This debate was unsurprisingly aggressive and competitive. I think I'd vote for Crist. He seemed to make more sense, plus his view on immigration was a grabber.
1. The first thirty minutes addressed the job market and what efforts would be made/have been made to try and revive Florida's job market and economy. This topic applies to 1.3 million Floridians who are currently unemployed, its importance needs to be stressed as those 1.3 million need a source of income to provide for their families and themselves. Crist was for reducing taxes and trying to strengthen the middle class by raising minimum wage to $10.10 while Scott was against it. Both of the candidates didn't have a clear directive as to their plans for improving the job market since both were more concerned about bashing the other.
2. In the second half, the most important topic would've been the FSU controversy and in relation, the death penalty. I believe that the FSU problem is indeed a problem. If someone has committed a crime they must be prosecuted according to the law, this will enforce the idea that no one is "elite" or above the law, and should be addressed. Scott has signed plenty of death warrants and believes they should be allowed if the crime fits the punishment. He addressed how the families of the victims have to suffer a terrible loss and the death penalty can be a real and legitimate punishment. Crist was against the idea. I believe the death penalty should be used sparingly, and only if the crime was so severe and gruesome that the person does not deserve to live.
3.I believe that both candidates were extremely negative. But if I had to choose I would choose Scott. Every other comment seemed to be an insult or an attack on Crist, to which Crist retaliated. Scott was particularly negative when job's and the economy was addressed.
4. Neither candidate mentioned "fangate"
5/6. I don't think this debate was helpful, the comments and responses were negative and berating rather than constructive and informative. It did address all the important topics like immigration, the environment, economy and the job market which is helpful while making a decision. I don't agree with either candidate, and don't see either of them fit to be the Governor of Florida. I wasn't surprised by the behavior during the debate, but I definitely wasn't informed on their individual policies as much as I would've liked to be.
1. The most important issue the candidates went over in the first thirty minutes was the issue on jobs and the economy. This is very important because we cannot maintain a flow of money without jobs, causing the economy to become weak. The issue of high unemployment rates when Crist was in office was mentioned by Governor Scott. Crist is in favor of raising minimum wage to $10.10, instead of $7.93 per hour. I personally agree with Scott because if the minimum wage rates increase, then the number of employees will decrease due to the fact that the business might not make enough to support each employee causing more jobs lost.
2. In the second half of the debate the issue of immigration reform was established. Rick Scott focused on pointing out about President Obama securing the boarders. While Crist support immigration reform and if they are living in Florida, then they should be able to obtain a drivers license. I personally agree with Christ due to the fact that everyone should be able to get the opportunity to live the "American dream."
3. Although both candidates were both negative toward each other, Scott did make a low blow when he made a comment about Crist's wife and continued brining up that Charlie grew up with money.
4. Fangate was not mentioned in this debate.
5. I would definitely say this debate made me more informed potential voter because I now know more about each of the candidates and that candidates tend to focus more on bashing the opponent rather than solely focusing on issues.
6. My overall expression of this debate was not a very positive one due to the fact that candidates tend to worry more about getting potential voters by bashing the opponent rather than focusing on issues that affect the entire economy.
1. Jake Tapper, the CNN host first introduced the topic, Ebola, and then Kent Justice asked the next question about Abortion. The next topic moved to jobs and the economy. Ebola had to be at the top of the list of priorities if it was the first one discussed. Why? Because it has dramatic amount of responses through the United States and the world due to the morality rates and safety of individuals, it has been the “talk of the town”. Crist applied Obama is dealing the situation efficiently while Scott emphasized that more supplies haven’t been delivered and are not quite “there” yet. The topic about abortion, Crist, a pro-life while Scott stated (well let me say it went to a different direction) Crist’s decisions were irresponsible and from there Scott built a wall of negative notes. The topic about jobs and the economy were demonstrated by first Crist denial to 800,000 jobs that was lost as governor was not entirely his fault but made an analogy with “private jets and mansion on the sea”. Scott, however went to a stance of Crist’s background of growing up with money and tried to get votes from pity—“grew up with a family that struggled, adopted” and tied that in with “my brother couldn’t get healthcare”. The rest were about unemployment rates and minimum wages. I don’t agree on both candidates firmly but I’m leaning toward Scott just because of his strong-wilted tone and his arguments against Crist that he grabbed a hold of, his degradation as governor and family background to the stance of unemployment rates.
2. The thing that I remember from the second half of the debate was immigration, Driver’s licenses, and new alternatives of the environment and a glimpse of law enforcement laws—criminal justice system. Immigration that was brought up in debate because they needed votes from minorities and Florida is located down –south it is more likely to come in hand with immigrants and major point of entry for immigrants coming to America. Scott vetoed the Driver license bill that stated drivers licenses are able to be distribute “Dreamers” accordingly to the bill that the Legislature passed in 2013. Crist is in favor of a driver’s license for Dreamers. I agree on both candidates that “Florida is the shining example of how promising diversity can be” (Crist) but not everyone have access of immigrating from and to the U.S. meaning it should be done legally (Scott).
3. Both candidates put each other under the bus but I feel Rick Scott was more negative because he attacked Crist in many different ways on a personal standpoint. For example, Scott told Crist, "You grew up with money." The governor added, "I know what it’s like to watch a parent lose the only family car we had.” He also attacks the way Crist handled employment with statistics under the topic of job and economy.
4. There was no mention of “fangate” in the debate.
5. This debate absolutely made me a more informed voter because they discussed their opinions and views on several different topics and hinted other competitor’s wrongs. This enhances different issues at once and compared independently my personal views and theirs. The purpose of debates is to inform and persuade their audience to vote on a particular candidate that you agree most with or has a good enough of an argument. Overall, I think they did answer and impose their views on the topic asked but some did go off-track a few times.
6. Like above, the overall impression of the debate being the last debate between Scott and Crist had an impactful influence on me but not enough to sway to a particular group or person. I wouldn’t vote for anyone right now particularly because I personally do not hold a firm grip toward a party. There were some candidates that did surprise me like their judgments toward each other’s opinions and went out of the boundaries I thought it would be, respectful, considerate and reserve but I guess debates which is aggressive and influential makes a difference.
1) In the first thirty minutes, the issue about job loss as an effect the current economic downfall is discussed. This problem is one that needs to be addressed because it plays a toll on everyone whether rich or poor. The more jobs that are lost, the more fragile the economy will become. Crist wants to increase minimum wage while Scott wants it to stay the same. In this case, I would have to agree with Scott because increasing the minimum wage is going to make it so jobs are lost to compensate for the extra money being paid to workers who survive the cuts. This pushes more people into debt or tight comic situations and ultimately a business and the economy will not be able to thrive.
2) In the second thirty minutes of the debate, the topic of immigration reform was brought up. This issue really hits home for Floridians as our population is very diverse and support from the minorities really could mean the election outcome is influenced by the minority. Scott did not sign the bill pertaining to giving driver's licenses to hopeful immigrants while Crist said he thought it was wrong to deny them of a license. On this issue, I sit in the middle. I don't believe it is fair to deny immigrants of a driver's license,but I do think it causes more problems in the event that more people will want to come over, primarily illegally. It's one of those topics that I would really need to know the in's-and-out's of to really base my opinion on, but neither candidate really gave me much to consider.
3)I believe Scott was more negative than Crist and really brought in irrelevant personal information which had nothing to do with the issues at hand. By saying Crist "grew up with money" was obviously just a way for Scott to keep his head above water which in turn just made him look foolish. Whether he grew up rich or not, it's political views that needed to be discusses, not measures of wealth.
4) Fangate, surprisingly enough, was not mentioned in this debate.
5)This debate made me a more informed potential voter but perhaps not in the way I expected. I came out of the debate knowing more about the negatives of each candidate rather than what good they could bring to office. Debates like this once are supposed to educate voters and help them finalize whose ideas they agree with or sway them to vote a certain way. This debate achieved it's purpose through bashing and credit-claiming, not necessarily through the solid breakdown of each candidates policy ideas and opinions.
6)My overall impression of the debate was that politics has gotten nastier and nastier each election cycle. Instead of explaining their ideas, politicians have to bash each other's action or ideas to get equal footing or even considered as a potential office holder by the people. I thought I knew who I would vote for, but now I am not so sure. I agree with some of Scott's ideas and some of Crist's , but in the end, I can't vote for both. Before the election, I have a lot of reading and research to do to fully decide. What surprised me is the fact that they were so vicious. On T.V. and in the newspaper, they both look like docile and kind men but in the debate, they were just ripping each other to shreds. I was expecting more policy conversation since is was a debate after all, but the slandering was entertaining at the same time.
Brandi Agle 1B
1. I think the most important debate in the first half was directed towards jobs and how it effects the economy. I think this was the most important part of the first half because it wants to increase minimum wage to about $10 dollars whereas Scott wants it to stay how it is, $7. I have to agree with Scott because business might not e able to support all the jobs available if the minimum wage was increased. If the business have a higher minimum wage then they could possibly lose there workers.
2. I believe the most important part of the second half was the issue with immigration reform. I believe that Scott was mentioning how Obama has lacked securing the borders. Whereas Crist believed that he would need more information on the bill they want to pass. I believe with Crist because Immigrants come here to get a better life so I think they should a better advantage at becoming a citizen.
3. I believe that Crist was more negative then Scott in this debate because he was mocking Scott of words he said previously and then he wouldn't allow Scott to finish his sentence. Crist got really mad when he got called out about his wife.
4. No candidate mentioned "Fangate.:
5. The debate did make me a more informed voter, because I didn't know anything about these candidates, not even their physical features. Now that I watched the debate I know what they look like and I know what policies they agree with and I feel like it would influence a potential voter to vote for them.
6. My overall impression of this debate was that they were more focused on bashing each other rather then talking about the specific issues that they were suppose to be talking about. I would vote for Scott because he seems like he is doing his job whereas Crist hasn't really done anything to get policies passed. Nothing suprised me.
1) I believe that the most important issue of the first 30 minutes was minimum wage and whether we should raise it or not. This is important due to the vast number of people that it will affect. Many people work at minimum wage and according to Charlie Crist this is not enoygh to make ends meet and these people have to work 2-3 jobs. Charlie Crist believes that we should increase the minimum wage to $10.10 while Rick Scott believes that we should keep the minimum wage as it is. Crist says that his wife is a small business owner and that she doesn't pay her employees anything less than $10. I agree with Crist because raising the minimum wage would make a lot of lower class individuals and people in general's lives easier and more comfortable.
2) The most important issue in the second 30 minutes was probably Immigration. They discussed whether immigrants should have the right to get a driver's license. This is important because Florida is a state where we have plenty of immigrants especilly in Southern Florida. Crist said that he believes that everyone should have the right to a driver's license while Scott told about his dislike for and the growing problem of illegal immigration but didn't say whether these people have the right to licenses or not. I agree with Crist because I believe that everyone in Florida should have the right to a driver's license since this would make their lives a lot easier for them. I can feel their pain.
3) I believe that Rick Scott was more negative. Scott mentioned how Crist has been comfortable his whole life and doesn't know how to represent the lower class because he was never a part of the lower class. Crist said that this was false because in Atlanta he lived in a small apartment when he was younger while his father was in medical school.
4) Fangate was not mentioned by either candidate but CNN Anchor did say "Everybody comfortable here?' which could've been a reference.
5) This debate made me a more inforrmed person and potential voter since both stated their sides and opinions on a huge variety of policy issues and interests. I now know more about each candidate.
6) I thought that the debate was informative but both candidates could have acted a lot more mature. I would for Crist because Scott has a creepy smile and Crist seemed a lot more understanding and reasonable of a governor. It surprised me how immature both candidates behaved though.
1. In the first 30 minutes of the debate, the issue was definitely focused on unemployment rates in Florida and the job market inefficiency, which is an important issue because of how jobs affect the economy; when people have jobs, they contribute more money in the form of purchases and taxes. Crist believes in increasing minimum wage for multiple reasons including supporting his wife, the owner of a small business. Scott supports keeping the minimum wage constant while also increasing the amount of jobs available. I agree more with Scott than Crist in that regard, mainly because it would lead to unnecessary indirect inflation.
2. The most important topic discussed in the second half of the debate was the issue of immigration reform. In my opinion, this is important because it brings about the reality that immigrants add more competition to the job market for those american citizens who are already here; however, there is also the argument that it's discriminatory to not allow immigrants into the country, since America was founded on the idea of equal rights. Crist believes that everyone in America should have the same rights and the opportunity to have these rights whereas Scott believes that those who are truly american should get priority and that President Obama displayed a huge failure in not further protecting our borders. Personally, I do feel that there should be more border control because countries that have more strict immigration policies seem to have more economic growth and sustainability within the country.
3. I believe that Scott displayed a more "attacking" tactic. He mentioned things like how Crist wouldn't know what it's like being impoverished or lower middle class, seeing as Crist came from a well-off family. Scott also brought Crist's wife into the debate, bringing up issues like her supposed tax evasions and such.
4. Fangate wasn't mentioned in the debate.
5. I've never cared enough to watch political debates so I'd say that this definitely made me an informed potential voter. I believe political debates to be a way for candidates to not only expand and explain their positions on certain issues and relate that to how their policy changes would benefit the public, but also highlight flaws in their opponent's beliefs, logic, and even personal lives. I think that this specific debate accomplished those things very well.
6. Overall, the debate was interesting. I learned a lot about certain issues like marijuana legalization and their impacts (or potential impacts) on floridians specifically, and also about the candidates themselves. The fact that Crist comes from a rich family surprised me as he's always claiming to be an advocate for the impoverished. I would vote for Crist because I agreed with his points more and like his character.
(Period 1B)
1. The topic most important discussed revolved around jobs and the stability of them within Florida. Jobs are very important because they supply the people of the state with stability, and lately in the economy jobs have been very low. Crist position on jobs was to help the democratic, low income families and people who do not receive a lot of money. Scott instead discussed how he would rather keep income rates for jobs lower, not really attempting to increase jobs.
2. The issue discussed that was most important the second 30 minutes of the debate was the issue over medical marijuana. Nationally this has been something that has been consistently addressed as to if it should become legalized. Scott and Crist both offered their positions on legalizing marijuana such as where Crist mentioned the incident of his sisters brain tumor and how the medical marijuana would help. Scott also mentioned that it would be beneficial if it is used accordingly.
3. In a way both candidates leaned towards a negative argument during the debate because they would attempt to bring out personal flaws in each others campaign to attempt to sway away from the purpose of focusing on policy. Both candidates tried to interfere with pointing out specific things from their life in the past which didnt focus on the policies.
4. No
5. In a way it did and didnt because the candidates spent more time sort of argueing back and forth instead of actually debating the purposes of policies and changes that need to be made within florida.
6. Overall, both candidates seem to know what they want to do and the changes they want to make. Im not sure as to who i would vote for yet because this debate did not make me very informed about both candidates parties and desired policy reforms.
1. The most important issue that Scott and Crist went over in the first thirty minutes of the debate would be the issue of jobs and the current state of the economy. This issue brings importance because Jacksonville in particular has seen fluctuating levels of unemployment rates over the past few years and many citizens have to live their life without the means of having a job. Governor Rick Scott tackled the idea that he wants minimum wage to remain the way it is so that people have a much easier way to get a job. I agree with Governor Scott because hardworking people deserve jobs and their earnings will help in the future. IF the person is up to the challenge, then they should not have to rely on others to gauge how to work. But on the other hand, Charlie Crist wants minimum wage to go up, which allows for less individuals to gain the monetary values that they desire.
2. The most important issue that they went over in the second thirty minutes of the debate would be the issue of immigration. The moderator asked both candidates about their stance on immigration reform, and it is important because we need to know as to whether immigrants should be granted licenses despite their current status or not. Governor Scott stated that his stance on this issue was directed to President Obama and that he should focus on making sure the nation's borders are secure. Crist's stance was of the opposite, by stating that everyone should have the chance to live the American dream. I agree with Crist on this issue because I come from an immigrant family and my parents were fortunate enough to come into the states.
3. I believe that throughout the debate, both candidates were equally negative. But Crist went through to attack Governor Scott even more by pulling in personal topics that were unrelated, which caused the debate questions to not be fully answered.
4. Neither candidate mentioned the topic of fangate in the debate.
5. This debate did make me a more informed potential voter. It allowed me to know what to look for in the two candidates and what they stand for. This debate did achieve my purposes because I now know where Scott and Crist stand on certain issues.
6. I was overall not surprised by the tensions these two candidates caused. Their back stabbing and negativity was an obvious thing for me because of all the attack ads on television. Unfortunately, I cannot base my vote on this particular debate because I felt that the candidates took this opportunity to attack each other back and forth. If I was given more relevant information about each of the candidates' stances, then I would choose wisely.
Monica Lozano (Period 2B)
1. The economy, job loss and gain by both governors, as well as the minimum wage were important topics of interest in the first thirty minutes of the debate. This topic was incredibly important because many of the citizens of the State of Florida that will be voting for either candidate were affected by the massive amounts of job loss. Many of the citizens of the State of Florida are affected by the minimum wage and everyone is affected by the economy and it was clear in the debate that both governors had some thorough explaining to do on this topic. Crist was trying to defend why he lost 800,000 or so jobs in the State of Florida when he was the governor, while Scott was attacking Crist and explaining why he didn't land as many jobs as he promised. I agree with Crist because he lost jobs in the recession and although he could've possibly done more, Florida is a tourist state and was clearly affected more than other states so I feel that the job loss was justified.
2. Immigration and Drivers license reform was an important topic in the second half of the debate. Crist and Scott had two differing views as Crist believed that non-citizens should have the right to obtain and own a drivers license as long as they aren't inimical to society. Rick Scott seemed to avoid the question more than Charlie Crist and didn't provide a solid basis for his answer because he was talking about President Obama and his policies on immigration. I agree with Crist because he again provided a more concrete answer than Scott.
3. Although both candidates were unscrupulously negative, Rick Scott was more negative in my opinion. An example of how Rick Scott attacked Charlie Crist was when he repeatedly stated that Crist "Grew up with money" and didn't experience poverty like he did. This was particularly annoying to me because Rick Scott is extremely wealthy and seems to turn a blind eye to the poverty that exists in our state today.
4. No, neither candidate made a reference towards "Fangate" that surrounded the last debate.
5. This debate made me slightly more informed as a potential voter, however not as informed as I'd like to be by listening to our next potential governor. Debates like this serve a purpose to clearly define each candidates position on certain topics that are important to voters and the State of Florida so that voters can make a more well informed decision of who they want to vote for. This debate definitely served the purpose of clarifying each candidates position on topics but on the other hand didn't inform voters as much as I believe we should be informed by listening to each candidate.
6. The debate was more colloquial than the first debate, but was interesting to watch. I would vote for Charlie Crist because he seems to have a more defined position on certain topics of interest to me, as well as appealing to my opinion on many of these topics. Crist seems to be more honest (Even if just by a hair) than Scott which is appealing. I wasn't surprised about any feature of either candidate as I think the first debate prepared the voter well for coming to see and recognize each candidate's colloquialisms.
1) The most important issue the candidates went over in the first thirty minutes of the debate is the issue of Ebola. I believe that because it makes the public feel safe if there was a breakout of Ebola in Florida. It shows how they will handle it and this is important because it is people’s real lives and humans are in danger of dying. They both had the same position of prevent, protect, and prepare for Ebola in Florida for the most part. I agree with it because the public has nothing to fear now. The other issues I feel like they were not as sincere on as well.
2) The most important issue the candidates went over in the second thirty minutes of the debate is the issue of immigration reform. This is important because it increases illegal activities by not regulating criminals in the USA. Scott blames administration for not having a good immigration reform as Crist supports or defends them. I don’t know who is telling the truth but I would choose Scott because he had a more developed opinion on the matter and Crist only had one good point.
3) Scott went more negative in the debate because he went on and on about how Crist was rich since birth and works for nothing. Scott mentions his wife in the debate like seriously dude. Crist looked good because he pointed out that Scott was being a douche and that “he does not know me”.
4) No.
5) It does not inform in the ways it should in my opinion. The purpose of the debates is to make your opponent look bad so I think Crist won. Scott negative outlook on Crist backfired on him a lot more than he thought I think. Yes the debate accomplished this purpose.
6) The overall impression is negative and teenage girl like. Crist because Scott seems too shady for me personally. No, not really, they both suck and are liars. Politics are corrupt.
Post a Comment