General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRepublicans’ desperate plan to hide its clowns
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/07/reince_priebus_tries_his_best_to_prevent_more_humiliating_republican_presidential_debates/Wednesday, Aug 7, 2013 09:21 AM EST
Republicans desperate plan to hide its clowns
Party begs for fewer primary debates, so candidates won't embarrass themselves on TV anymore. It will backfire
By Alex Pareene
snip//
The entire Republican primary system is broken, and embarrassing debates really number among the least of their problems, but it is easier for Priebus to preemptively cancel embarrassing debates than it is for him to fundamentally alter the makeup of the Republican primary electorate, a small and largely angry group who demand ideological fealty to a political philosophy that most Americans abhor. Unfortunately for Priebus, threatening to cancel debates is going to be much easier than actually preventing them from happening.
Maybe one of the Republican Partys primary malfunctions these days is that the interests of the party as a whole are frequently in opposition to the interests of individual Republican politicians. Preibus wants there to be fewer debates, because the debates are hugely embarrassing to the party and damaging to the eventual nominee. The candidates, though, need the debates, because there is nothing so precious as free airtime, and saying stupid things on television and then losing elections is a surprisingly lucrative career move these days. The debate problem is like the Ted Cruz problem: He acts against the long-term best interests of his party because in the shorter term, being an ultra-conservative is likely to make him rich and beloved. When 2015 rolls around a half-dozen would-be presidents and tryouts for the conservative speaking circuit are going to want free airtime, and the networks will happily provide it. The only question is whether the eventual serious nominee, if thats Jeb Bush or Chris Christie, is going to join them or not.
Cruz may well be among those jokers, along with Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, Peter King, Rick Perry and various other figures adored by the base but sort of terrifying and confusing to everyone else. These guys are going to go on television if they are given the opportunity to go on television. You either finish your presidential campaign as the president or as a person who isnt the president but who is much more famous than before, and conservative movement fame means well-compensated positions at nonprofits or think tanks, speeches, maybe even television or radio jobs. Mike Huckabee is doing so well for himself he couldnt be bothered to run in 2012, and he wouldve probably beaten Mitt if he had.
So boycotting NBC and CNN isnt going to prevent another string of embarrassing debates from happening. But it may still be useful. Priebus wants to avoid those two channels in part because theyre hostile to conservatives, and the moderators they select will likely actively seek to embarrass the candidates. Republicans are still mad that in 2007, NBC allowed Chris Matthews to co-moderate a Republican debate. They sort of have a point hes a shouty Democrat, and likely had no respect for the people onstage but the problem isnt liberal bias, its nonpartisan journalist idiocy. Nonpartisan television news personalities are generally ill-informed about policy and hostile to politics in general. Bob Schieffer was utterly useless as a debate moderator. Partisan journalists are, by and large, more engaged with the issues and much more likely to ask interesting questions. Theres really no reason why conservative journalists shouldnt be moderating, or at least co-moderating, Republican debates. Byron York and Rich Lowry would do a fine job.
If there are going to be another hundred primary debates, and there probably will be, the party would most likely prefer most of them to be on Fox. And thatd be fine: The candidates will be trying to appeal to Foxs audience for votes, after all. And liberals ought to be fine with it too, because the candidates will be just as likely, or maybe even more likely, to say dumb and embarrassing things on Fox as they would be on CNN or NBC. So boycott away, Reince Priebus.
LongTomH
(8,636 posts)Yeah, they've broken up the districts with high probable-Democratic voters; but, the districts they've created are rural. The voters in those districts tend to be angry, old white guys who get most of their opinions from Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, et al, and tend to vote on social issues. The educated "country club" Republicans who used to run the party are mostly urban.
I was going to make a comment to the effect that: "Democracy needs open debates;" but, then I realized we're talking about the Republican party. Duhhhh!!!!!!
longship
(40,416 posts)I still like the Republican clown car analogy because those doofuses just don't know when to shut up. They really do come off like clowns. It's all ideology, based on some warped Christology. The more it is all exposed, the better.
pansypoo53219
(20,976 posts)KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)...but the smell will always give it away. Rheinhold may think he can gloss over how outrageous and ignorant some of his candidates are but they won't be able to hide. The crazy can't be contained and in the age of YouTube the unguarded moments tend to find their way into the public. Try to control the networks? Hell, you already own one...and that's the only channel the great unhinged watched...so why not just hold all your debates there (which is probably what will happen).
The deal, Rheinhold, is those debates aren't for us...except to provide entertainment. They're for the shrinking number of people who dare to publicly call themselves rushpublicans and the limiting of debate and access will give less options and voice to his own party members. I have a feeling the freepers aren't gonna be too happy with the "establishment" shutting things down...