Apple Highlights iOS and tvOS Apps for Watching U.S. Presidential Debate

Apple recently updated the iOS and tvOS App Stores with a collection of apps that will be able to live stream tonight's first presidential debate, airing at 9PM eastern at Hofstra University. The debate between presidential nominees Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump marks the beginning of the seven week final stretch between the first debate and election day on November 8. There will be three presidential debates in total, and one vice presidential debate.

On both App Stores, Apple's "Watch the Debate Live" section contains a few of the same apps. For iOS, top billing goes to major social networks Twitter and Facebook, and then news outlets CBS News and ABC News. Twitter recently launched a live streaming tvOS app, so it's also first on the Apple TV app store, followed by CBS News, ABC News, Washington Post Video, Reuters TV, and more.

presidential-debate-app-store
    Watch the Debate Live on iOS:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • CBS News
  • ABC News
  • The Washington Post
  • Reuters TV
  • NBC News
  • CNN
  • Fox News
  • YouTube
  • Univision NOW
  • MSNBC


    Watch the Debate Live on tvOS:

  • Twitter
  • CBS News
  • ABC News
  • Washington Post Video
  • Reuters TV
  • NBC News
  • Bloomberg TV
  • CNNgo
  • Fox News
  • YouTube
For those with a cable subscription, Wired reported that all three upcoming presidential debates will be broadcast simultaneously across most major networks and cable channels: ABC, NBC, Fox, CBS, MSNBC, Fox News, CNN, Univision, and C-SPAN.

Earlier in the month, the Commission on Presidential Debates confirmed that both Facebook and Snapchat will be covering each debate to provide content for users of both social networks. Users can comment and ask questions on Facebook Live videos, and follow along to Snapchat's Live Stories "from the different perspectives of students from the debate host universities, volunteers, media and many others."

Although not included in Apple's collection of apps, other streamable services will support debate coverage, including: BuzzFeed News, Hulu, PBS, Yahoo, and more.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)
Avatar
40 months ago
The candidate I'm voting for won't be present, so I see no point in watching.

#LetGaryDebate

Just to respond to anyone who wants to yell at me about voting third party in advance:

#1 - It is possible for third party candidates to win, as long as they run between the major parties. Ross Perot handed the 1992 election to Bill Clinton because he was running on the right. He stole votes exclusively from Bush Senior. Ralph Nader similarly handed the 2000 election to Bush Junior because he was running on the left, exclusively stealing votes from Al Gore.

Gary Johnson is running down the middle, stealing votes equally from both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. He easily leads with independent voters (AKA, swing voters, the people who decide elections), voters under the age of 30, and veterans.

If you want to vote for him, but are afraid you'd be handing the election to <insert name of candidate you hate most>, go to http://balancedrebellion.com/ - They'll match you up with someone who hates <your lesser of two evils> from the same state you live in. Both of you then pledge to vote for the candidate you most like, knowing that you haven't handed the election to anyone, because you nullified a vote for that person.

#2 - Gary Johnson doesn't have to sweep the map. If he wins a single state, it becomes difficult for either of the other candidate to reach 270 electoral votes. In that case, Congress determines who wins the election. Republicans control both houses by a small majority, but many have already said they back Johnson, not Trump. Thus the anti-Trump Republicans can cooperate with Democrats (who unanimously despise Trump) to hand the presidency to Johnson.

#3 - The presidential debates are controlled by a board of 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats. They set arbitrary rules for what it takes to be in the debates. In 1992, they said you only needed to have 5% support in national polls to be in the debate. Ross Perot had 6% so qualified. By the time of the election, he won with 19%, largely because the extra exposure from the debates gave him a huge boost in those final 2 months.

This year, Johnson has 13% support before the debates. So the threshold was arbitrarily moved up to 15% to exclude him. Had he been in the debates and received a boost similar to Perot's, it's reasonable to think his support would have gone to between 26% and 40%, potentially giving him the plurality.
Rating: 10 Votes
Avatar
40 months ago

No thanks. Apple has proven its bias against other candidates in the past. I'd rather find a source ran by grown-ups that may or may not like all candidates but won't actively run a bias.

All the outlets are literally showing the exact same debate, how is bias possible?

And Fox News is listed there, your point is invalid
Rating: 8 Votes
Avatar
40 months ago
Would love to see a 3 person debate, I think it would make things really interesting.

#letgarydebate
Rating: 8 Votes
Avatar
40 months ago
Thanks, but no thanks. These two for me are Trump: Nope. Hillary:Noper
Rating: 4 Votes
Avatar
40 months ago
I'm going to find a dumpster, light it on fire, and watch.

It'll be more entertaining and more informative than what's going to be on TV tonight.
Rating: 3 Votes
Avatar
40 months ago
If you believe in a 2 party system.... this election is like choosing between a colonoscopy or a root canal.

#LetGaryDebate
Rating: 3 Votes
Avatar
40 months ago

The candidate I'm voting for won't be present, so I see no point in watching.

#LetGaryDebate


Could be fun if you invite friends over for a drinking game.
Rating: 2 Votes
Avatar
40 months ago

All the outlets are literally showing the exact same debate, how is bias possible?

And Fox News is listed there, your point is invalid


Lmao that's what I was thinking. One of the reasons I hate politics. Left wing this. Bias that. Dumpster fire that.
Rating: 2 Votes
Avatar
40 months ago
They aren't worth wasting your time watching. There are no real candidates there, and it's all scripted and controlled anyway. What a joke.
[doublepost=1474916959][/doublepost]

As much as I love your rhetoric, Gary Johnson just hasn't garnered enough popularity nationwide to appeal to the masses. I wish that wasn't the case but it is wishful thinking at this point. Better for us to realize our collective errors and focus on the next election.


Actually, go check out Congressional Dish podcast... the episode on Electoral College. If Johnson won even a couple of tiny state, it would throw the election to a decision in Congress. That would create an interesting situation, for sure.

BTW, we should probably focus more on Congress, and be sure to check out that podcast anyway, as it's packed with info on what Congress is up to (the good, but mostly the bad and ugly).
Rating: 2 Votes
Avatar
40 months ago

The candidate I'm voting for won't be present, so I see no point in watching.

#LetGaryDebate

Just to respond to anyone who wants to yell at me about voting third party in advance:

#1 - It is possible for third party candidates to win, as long as they run between the major parties. Ross Perot handed the 1992 election to Bill Clinton because he was running on the right. He stole votes exclusively from Bush Senior. Ralph Nader similarly handed the 2000 election to Bush Junior because he was running on the left, exclusively stealing votes from Al Gore.

Gary Johnson is running down the middle, stealing votes equally from both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. He easily leads with independent voters (AKA, swing voters, the people who decide elections), voters under the age of 30, and veterans.

If you want to vote for him, but are afraid you'd be handing the election to <insert name of candidate you hate most>, go to http://balancedrebellion.com/ - They'll match you up with someone who hates <your lesser of two evils> from the same state you live in. Both of you then pledge to vote for the candidate you most like, knowing that you haven't handed the election to anyone, because you nullified a vote for that person.

#2 - Gary Johnson doesn't have to sweep the map. If he wins a single state, it becomes difficult for either of the other candidate to reach 270 electoral votes. In that case, Congress determines who wins the election. Republicans control both houses by a small majority, but many have already said they back Johnson, not Trump. Thus the anti-Trump Republicans can cooperate with Democrats (who unanimously despise Trump) to hand the presidency to Johnson.

#3 - The presidential debates are controlled by a board of 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats. They set arbitrary rules for what it takes to be in the debates. In 1992, they said you only needed to have 5% support in national polls to be in the debate. Ross Perot had 6% so qualified. By the time of the election, he won with 19%, largely because the extra exposure from the debates gave him a huge boost in those final 2 months.

This year, Johnson has 13% support before the debates. So the threshold was arbitrarily moved up to 15% to exclude him. Had he been in the debates and received a boost similar to Perot's, it's reasonable to think his support would have gone to between 26% and 40%, potentially giving him the plurality.

As much as I love your rhetoric, Gary Johnson just hasn't garnered enough popularity nationwide to appeal to the masses. I wish that wasn't the case but it is wishful thinking at this point. Better for us to realize our collective errors and focus on the next election.
Rating: 2 Votes
[ Read All Comments ]