Yes an audience is needed
No, an audience is not needed
I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
It's not needed, but people do pay for those seats. Also, it's kind of a likeability meter.
The road to Hell and the road to Jahannam is the same damn road.
I became a conservative by being around liberals. I became a libertarian by being around conservatives. ~ Greg Gutfeld.
"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, it to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution." —John Adams
I believe having an audience in debates is good. The politicians get to see the audience react, and it also tests their mettle on stage based on the audience's reaction.
Not for the purposes of debate, but yes for the purposes of the sponsors wanting to make some cash.
Audience in Debates is very much needed Needed.
If you find the Audience to be annoying, a distraction or you just don't like the applause, think about this.
The Audience adds a little pressure to the Candidates and it shows who has the personal and stage presents to operate under the gun so to speak.
Anyone can can talk one on one with a Moderator but some people can't deal with a crowd and if that is the case they are in the wrong business.
Boston: City of Champions. New England Patriots: 2001, 2003, and 2004 Boston Red Sox: 2004, 2007 and 2013 Boston Celtics: 2008 Boston Bruins: 2011 Boston University Men's Hockey: 2008