REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Re: The RNC "debate kerfuffle"

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Saturday, August 17, 2013 11:53
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 483
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, August 17, 2013 7:49 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Personally, I think the decision to do a miniseries and/or documentary on Hillary Clinton is a wrong one; if it's to be done, it should be done AFTER 2016. Giving her free airtime, should she decide to run, is wrong. But I also think the GOP is playing a game, and this plays right into their hands. By now I'm guessing most of us know the Republican National Committee passed a resolution Friday to bar NBC and CNN from hosting GOP primary debates in 2016 if the networks move forward with their Hillary Clinton projects. Anyone who followed the primary debates last time knows it didn't work out real great for the GOP, so "The RNC’s very vocal outrage over the projects gave party leaders a perfect excuse to do what they’ve long wanted to do anyway: get some control over a process that led to 20 grueling primary debates last cycle and gave Mitt Romney many chances to get himself into trouble with comments about self-deportation, contraception and the like. ( http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/rnc-reince-priebus-gop-primary-d
ebates-95601.html
)

They want to cut the number of debates virtually in half. Per their resolution: “The number of debates has become ridiculous, and they’re taking candidates away from other important campaign activities.” http://growthopp.gop.com/RNC_Growth_Opportunity_Book_2013.pdf)

Yet Democrats in 2008 had about the same number of debates as Republicans in 2012:
Quote:

“The problem is not debates,” Elaine Kamarck, a lecturer at Harvard’s Kennedy School, said. “It was that, by and large, they showed America in those debates a Republican Party that was fundamentally out of sync with America. … The debates are one more piece of evidence that they’re looking for easy fixes to what is a fundamental problem.” ( http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/rnc-reince-priebus-gop-primary-d
ebates-95601_Page2.html
)

They want their own moderators. There is now "speculation that conservative radio talking heads like Mark Levin, Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh could moderate ." Per Limbaugh: “Put together your own debates with your own moderators, whoever you want, and focus on real Republican issues in these debates" ( http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/rnc-reince-priebus-gop-primary-d
ebates-95601.html#ixzz2cFSdCbZH
)

Primary debates SHOULD be handled by the party whose primary it is, that's valid. To a point. The problem is, what having fewer debates and right-wing moderators as extreme as Limbaugh or Hannity would do is allow them to better "control the image of their candidates and spin damage control when one says things like they forgot what programs they want to cut or they demean the working class by throwing around $10,000 bets. Or let the cat out of the bag that some, if not all the candidates, were just a tad bit crazy and a long way from Presidential." ( http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/08/17/republicans-resolve-to-fix-pri
mary-debates-by-controlling-moderators-and-content/#ixzz2cFSPdcob
)

The problem as I see it is that the GOP needs to find more viable candidates, not flash-in-the-pan ultra-conservatives who end up making fools of themselves on the national stage. While I think they're right to try and get moderators who aren't biased, the result of a Limbaugh- or Hannity-moderated debate might not be something they'll gain from in the end, and fewer debates won't guarantee that bad candidates don't end up being seen for bad candidates.

Wouldn't it be nice if there was a pool of trained, unbiased people whose job it was to study to be debate moderators? Hey, I can dream!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 17, 2013 11:53 AM

FREMDFIRMA



Ah, like the petulant sociopathic, immature little whiners that they are, when they don't get their way 100% they throw a temper tantrum, oh cry me a river, pun intended...

Sorry, but why were we ever taking these scum seriously in the first fucking place ?

Inqiring minds wanna know.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Sun, April 28, 2024 19:12 - 6319 posts
Dangerous Rhetoric coming from our so-called President
Sun, April 28, 2024 18:10 - 2 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Sun, April 28, 2024 18:06 - 294 posts
Scientific American Claims It Is "Misinformation" That There Are Just Two Sexes
Sun, April 28, 2024 17:44 - 24 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Sun, April 28, 2024 15:47 - 3576 posts
Elections; 2024
Sun, April 28, 2024 15:39 - 2314 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Sun, April 28, 2024 02:03 - 1016 posts
The Thread of Court Cases Trump Is Winning
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:37 - 20 posts
Case against Sidney Powell, 2020 case lawyer, is dismissed
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:29 - 13 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:28 - 745 posts
Slate: I Changed My Mind About Kids and Phones. I Hope Everyone Else Does, Too.
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:19 - 3 posts
14 Tips To Reduce Tears and Remove Smells When Cutting Onions
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:08 - 9 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL