Romney makes a bad move
posted at 11:00 am on July 28, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
He’ll skip the YouTube debate, because it’s not “respectful” enough. So Chris Matthews was “respectful?”
Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney said Friday that he will not participate in a debate on Sept. 17 co-sponsored by CNN and YouTube, calling the debate not “respectful” enough to be part of the process of selecting a presidential nominee.
In an interview with Steve Scully on C-SPAN, Romney said he has informed CNN that he will be in New York that day and will not attend the debate. He told Scully that all of the candidates will be racing to the end of the third-quarter fundraising deadline at the end of that month.
“During September, we are all scrambling around to raise money we need to run our campaigns,” Romney said. “We will have had four debates by then.”
Asked about the format, which featured video questions submitted by the public, Romney said “There is a degree of respectfulness that ought to be associated with the process fo selecting a nominee. From what I’ve heard, that level of respectfulness was breached.”
“…from what I’ve heard…”? He hasn’t watched the Democrat version yet?
I’ll be the first to say that it’s a gimmicky format. I slogged through the pile of junk videos before the first one, and the vast majority were worthless questions from ill-informed liberals. The GOP version will crank that up to 11, no doubt. That’s just being Captain Obvious. But I’ll also be the first to say that the spin on this decision to skip the debate will be ferocious — “Republicans afraid to take questions from average Americans” is how it’ll get played. Wired is already on that beat. Expect others to follow.
Message to Mitt: Don’t run away from the CNN/YouTube debate.
Update (AP): Must read.
Update (AP): Meanwhile…
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
This is ridiculous!!!
What is Romney afraid of???
terryannonline on July 28, 2007 at 11:02 AM
and so it begins….
Guardian on July 28, 2007 at 11:03 AM
I would go and ask why the democrats won’t go on FOXNews.
SouthernGent on July 28, 2007 at 11:12 AM
Screw the afraid crap. If the Dims can slam Fox News, then the GOP slamming a dimo hack machine is in order. A YouTube debate is selected ignorance by a very biased network. Like they say, “they are not an American broadcast, they are an international broadcast.” Heck, their founder (Turner) cannot decide whose side he is on in the Iraq war. It would be an all out attack on the GOP without any objectivity whatsoever. Why be stupid enough to walk into a trap?
volsense on July 28, 2007 at 11:14 AM
You can’t win if you look like an idiot taking questions from snowmen. There is such a thing as being Presidential and when you are served up idiotic videos of the worst America has to offer (which CNN will guarantee) and take the questions seriously, you look like an idiot. The only people who care are people looking for a stream of content. Most Americans, especially primary voters, could care less.
TheBigOldDog on July 28, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Romney just tossed Giuliani a major softball. If Rudy’s in, he makes Romney look silly. If he’s out, it’s McCain vs. the 3rd tier in the YouTube debate. Which one is a better strategic decision?
Big S on July 28, 2007 at 11:15 AM
I agree with Mitt. I mean really! Why don’t they have Space Ghost interview all the candidates while they’re at it. We’re picking the leader of the free world here. Not a guest host for the Jimmy Kimmel show.
Mojave Mark on July 28, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Not participating in this debate, freak sideshow though it may be, is a mistake that none of the GOP candidates can afford.
In taking this position, Romney places himself above the average Joe.
flipflop on July 28, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Speaking only for myself, that would be awesome.
Big S on July 28, 2007 at 11:20 AM
I love Dean saying how the people could speak directly to the candidates without the intermediary of the media or the press. Just who does this genius think picked the questions that were aired? And was it just me, or did old Howie look sedated?
That said, I don’t think skipping the debate is the best idea. It’s a chance to get their views out there and get them seen by an audience that might not watch a debate on Fox.
Kowboy on July 28, 2007 at 11:23 AM
I’m not that excited about having a Mormon for president. It’s part of their apocalyptic revelation before they take over that one of their own is elected to power. I’m not sure what level Mitt is in the temple system, but it’s going to be interesting how much of the wealth the Later Day Saints have will wind up in his campaign fund.
I prefer the Italian American candidate who is at odds with the Pope.
Hening on July 28, 2007 at 11:26 AM
Has anyone else considered the idea that Howard Dean’s biggest contribution to easing the “health care crisis” was removing himself from the health care business?
flipflop on July 28, 2007 at 11:27 AM
Dean is totally mentally ill. Being a governor from Vermont removes any doubt of that. He is a perfect spokesman for the DNC. Not attending a CNN – YouTube debate would be like not knowingly walk into an ambush. The selection of the questions would only be to embarrass the the candidates. Besides after the first debacle, who in their right mind will even watch.
volsense on July 28, 2007 at 11:31 AM
from a squeaky voiced snowman.
I really don’t object to the YouTube format, I object to the very large possibility that CNN will use the most asinine submissions in the Republican “debate.”
Then you are a fool.
If this was going to be honest-to-God, meat & potatoes debate, your words would have merit, but this is nothing but a popularity contest put on by CNN. There is no way I am going to believe that they will be “fair & balanced” with this. CNN runs the debate (DING! TIME!) and selects the “questions.” What part of that last sentence don’t you get? Eh?
You’d have a better chance being on trial for apostasy in Iran.
TwinkietheKid on July 28, 2007 at 11:32 AM
Romney is showing courage in deciding not to roll in the sewer that the msm and liberals create. Watch the polls in the next few weeks, he will take a jump if not actually become the frontrunner.
Everyone wants another Reagan but I have’t heard anyone speculate if Reagan would do this youtube debate. I don’t think he would have even considered doing it.
Although there were candidates I would not vote for, I had not come close in making a decision on who I want to support. Romney has just made a bold move.
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Watch the video that I produced on the topic before calling me a fool, moron. CNN will be biased. That’s a given. The candidates ought to smart enough to be able to work with that.
Bryan on July 28, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Bryan, the spin on anything the republicans do is negative. We are not going to win over the nutjob liberals, ever. We will win over the Reagan democrats. Romney has made a strong move in getting the adults in the democrat party to take a look at him.
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 11:40 AM
Where is it law that the democrats make the rules? Why are you sooo willing to play their game?
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 11:41 AM
I’m not playing anybody’s “game.” But you watch and learn how the spin game works. The GOP candidates are committing an unforced error here, both on spin and on substance, as Ruffini describes in the article that Allah linked above.
Bryan on July 28, 2007 at 11:48 AM
I don’t see Romney having anything to gain by attending this “debate”. It is a demeaning platform, all you had to do was watch the Dem Youtube debacle to know that.
Youtube skew to the young and the left, not exactly Republican candidate territory. This will be one of those occasions when the winner will be the person who does the least damage to himself, it won’t be an opportunity to elevate. Look at the Dems, Biden came off looking like an overbearing chump and Hillary and Obama are at each others throat over an overly simplistic quesion from an overly simplistic moron. About the only good that came from that is we will now never see a Hillary/Obama ticket.
Oh, and somebody ought to tell that dumbass Dean that in the Republican debate on FOX (yeah, I know, he didn’t watch) in NH, fully half the two hour debate was dedicated to answering questions from the audience. You know, real people, not talking snowmen.
JackStraw on July 28, 2007 at 11:53 AM
This is going to be Mitt’s saving grace, mark my words.
The medium/message is that politics is a joke.
Romney is anything but a joke.
His position will serve him well.
Mark my words.
Romney’s subconscious message here is:
“I’m a serious candidate here and I will not, I repeat, I will not be reduced to a joke”!!
It’s comical how everybody admits [[begrudging groans]] that the CNN/YouTube craptastic, fantabulous, cuckoobate, was a disaster,
but then,
turn around and say that it must be done to save one’s campaign!!
Seriously,
This is proof that you believe subconsciously that politics is a joke
Further proof that you have watched way too much television.
What you MUST COME TO GRIPS WITH HERE IS THAT TELEVISION IS A ONLY FIGMENT OF REALITY!!
Brain scans have proven that watching television requires absolutely no creative or original thought!!
Rather it is the same part of the brain involved when one is hypnotized.
Admission to it being cuckoo while supporting it, is the same as saying, “Aem ah.. chicken” when hypnotized.
Mcguyver on July 28, 2007 at 11:54 AM
Here’s what will happen…..
If the front runners are in, CNN will select the videos that will demean them. If the front runners don’t show, they will put on the best videos they can find and make the front runners look stupid for skipping it.
I hope Rudy and Mitt! have a strategy for dealing with the latter scenario. Either way, the blogasphere is dominated by idiots who want a free ride, so nothing the reps will say will matter to them anyway. And the candidates that do attend aren’t going to get a big enough bump out of it to make a difference. The only people who might benefit would be the 2nd tier candidates, and even their bump will only thin the ranks.
csdeven on July 28, 2007 at 11:55 AM
The msm is telling the country that the election is all but decided. Whomever the democrat party picks is the next president and the republican will be a sacrificial lamb. That attitude makes a given out of two things; 1)the leftist ideas and policies are the right thing for this country 2) the American people either agree with that or are too stupid to know or think different. These positions are elitist and arrogant.
Although the circumstances and causes may be different, I think the attitude in the country is very simiar to that of 1980. More Americans are looking very closely then are given credit. A candidate with a little dignity and humanity will be given a look at. Whether Romney can take advantage of the scrutiny remains to be seen but he has put himself above the panderers with this move. The person I want to vote for is not someone who runs from group to group trying to make everyone happy, but someone who has the same message for all Americans and has the courage and committment to speak it anywhere. That was what Ronald Reagan was all about and Ronald Reagan would not have insulted the dignity of the office with a circus like the youtube show.
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 11:57 AM
Also, let’s please knock it off with this nonsense that the debate is going to be a two-hour hit job brimming with videos of Truthers screeching about PNAC. It’ll be like the Democratic debate: mostly legitimate questions, a few curveballs, and probably one or two goofball queries in the snowman vein. Naturally all the people who oppose the debate will cite those two goofball questions as proof that the whole debate was a hit job, but sayin’ it don’t make it so.
We do ourselves no favors by spinning genuine concerns about media bias into paranoia, but increasingly that’s where the right is headed. And FYI, even if the debate did prove to be a hit job, even if CNN did decide to toss away whatever claim it has left to objectivity, the resulting outrage on the right might actually be catalyzing in motivating a dispirited base.
Allahpundit on July 28, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Anywhere but a YouTube debate, that is.
Big S on July 28, 2007 at 11:59 AM
In the last “Youtube debate”, there were two thousand questions submitted – and twenty of those were selected.
This is basically the same thing as the leftists using children as shills: “Oh, no. It’s not a liberal reporter asking the incredibly slanted questions; it’s a bunch of completely innocent people.”
Of course it would be stupid to take part in a “debate” like this. But:
1) That line should have been drawn a long time ago, and
2) The Republican candidates should say explain, in no uncertain terms, exactly why this is a farce.
Just calling it “disrespectful,” what the Hell is that even supposed to mean anyway? You’re just making it worse.
[Looks in crystal ball] I see another eight years of “compassionate idiocy” coming out of any of these ten midgets.
logis on July 28, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Clicking on little humorous clips is entertaining for a while, but it gets old. I can see where people who make their living off this kind of stuff will feel slighted, but they will get over it.
pedestrian on July 28, 2007 at 12:05 PM
I’m sure CNN would love to portray McCain and Ron Paul as representing two thirds of the Republican Party.
logis on July 28, 2007 at 12:06 PM
Did I see a different debate then everyone else Monday?
Yes, there were some silly moments but overall I didn’t think the questions weren’t that much different then you typically see. Youtubers were just mimicking journalists.
terryannonline on July 28, 2007 at 12:07 PM
I think Allah has been hanging out at cocktail parties in Georgetown with Time magazine reporters.
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 12:07 PM
There was a show called “Now” on my local pbs channel last night that I believe is one of their national programs. The story I watched very matter of factly explained how the republican party is methodically forcing black people, poor people, soldiers and college students off the voter rolls. Why don’t you find and watch that tax payer funded program and then tell me I am paranoid.
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 12:10 PM
The majority voting conservatives are not doing this.
Mcguyver on July 28, 2007 at 12:12 PM
I agree. At first I was ambivalent about the YouTube format, but the more I think about it, the more I like the idea. In fact, I think any leftward slant in the questions, aside from blatant personal attacks, is likely to benefit the candidates. It would them opportunities to forcefully state their positions on a variety of issues, and offer “conservative” solutions to problems.
Big S on July 28, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Yea I gues Little Big Horn catalyzed the infantry.
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 12:19 PM
So let us not also skip it. Everyone, I don’t care how camera shy you are or hate hearing your voice, needs to submit questions. If we sit by and only let a few motivated conservatives submit, then the debate is already slanted because we did nothing. Start thinking of good questions and recording now.
- The Cat
MirCat on July 28, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Mitt’s right, and the others ought to follow suit. What do they think – “this time it’ll be different”? “This debate will be a fair and honest showcase with good questions”?
ROFL.
Our guys won’t get a fair deal on CNN/YT, as long as the lefties at CNN/YT get to select the questions to be used. It’ll be just another exercise in self-abasement. Pick another venue, and a reasonable moderator.
Arguments that “skipping this will cede YT to the lefties” are ingenuous – the left already has hard and fast control of YT, as well as its parent, google. More and more, google IS history. “If you can’t find it with a google search, it never happened” is the prevailing mentality. And the left already owns it. Gramschi laughs in his grave.
bofh on July 28, 2007 at 12:23 PM
You don’t think anyone else pays attention like you do, Bryan?
You people really believe that if the candidates give brilliant answers to nutjob questions, the entire msm will report it that way the next day? The msms will report it as the republicans being condescending towards the questioners. No matter what happens the msm will have tons of soundbites to spin anyway they want and the candidates will be trying to clarify things for weeks.
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 12:25 PM
CNN CHOOSES THE QUESTIONS.
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Yes, but the questions are there for all to see before the debate even begins. The more good and serious questions that are submitted, the greater the pressure on CNN to choose ones that are legit.
Big S on July 28, 2007 at 12:33 PM
And it’ll be the goof ball questions that demean the tenor of the “debate”.
IE…the guy with the gun….No one remembers Richardson’s answer (which was decent), everyone talks about Biden’s answer.
THAT is what asinine questions do to the free flow of substantive ideas. And as bad as it was for the dems, CNN’s bias will be that much worse for the reps.
csdeven on July 28, 2007 at 12:35 PM
You’re kidding, right? How many voters do you think will wade through thousands of YT video’s to see what the real selection of questions was?
bofh on July 28, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Meh, as some of you know I’m not a fan of Mitt for the nomination (quite opposed to the idea in fact), but I don’t see this as that big a deal… unless the other candidates participate, and that may not happen from the looks of it.
For one thing, the Sept 17 debate is still three and a half months before Super Tuesday. By then few will have remembered much about the “debate” anyways.
Second- if it’s still another 9 man dog-and-pony-show, it’s hardly a “debate” anyways; just candidates giving 30 or 45 second rehearsed soundbite answers to questions that they’ve likely anticipated anyways.
Third- the gimmicky format. Even if the questions aren’t any dumber than those posed by Chrissy Matthews… talking snowmen? If that’s the kind of sensationalistic crap CNN is going to use, screw them.
OTOH, if Rudy, Fred and McCain participate, yes, it does make him look pretty bad. So far it looks like they may not. If they’re smart, they’ll participate because Mitt is sitting it out, though Mitt might just flip flop again and change his mind if that happens.
Hollowpoint on July 28, 2007 at 12:38 PM
What planet do you live on? Haven’t you been following this Scott Thomas thing? When are these leftist media outlets pressured off message?
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 12:39 PM
lockquote>It would them opportunities to forcefully state their positions on a variety of issues, and offer “conservative” solutions to problems
The quotes around conservative was what caught my eye.
Do you go by Big S at the Daily Kos also?
peacenprosperity on July 28, 2007 at 12:46 PM
100 points to the first candidate or non-candidate that comes out and says, yes, I will go and do the cnn/youtube debate, and I will be more than happy to answer any of the questions that come up, but I will treat them with the same seriousness as the question has.
Of course the questions will be silly, pointless or mundane, but have a little fun, so you don’t come off as being a stick in the mud.
Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on July 28, 2007 at 12:46 PM
I don’t see it as a hit job so much as I see it as a joke. Lot’s of debates feature really people asking questions in a dignified and respectful way or they ask people to send in questions to be asked. The only thing this format does is allow people to be oh so quirky and way cool. This garbage about this format for the first time allows real people to talk to the candidates is just that, garbage.
Dems are always going to look better in this format, they pander to the least serious and most hip. Republicans, by contrast, come of looking like a group of stuffy old white men. I don’t think having Romney wear a coral jacket and bell bottoms is gonna change things. What’s the benefit to dumbing down the prosess?
Maybe for the net debate we could have the candidates sit in a Hollywood Squares studio and only allow their answers to be in the form of a question.
JackStraw on July 28, 2007 at 12:50 PM
From my understanding, the Dim candidates had an opportunity to see the questions before hand or were given a preview of what was coming. Can anyone confirm that?
If the candidates know whats coming, they will have a better chance of reacting to the goof-ball questions.
Mallard T. Drake on July 28, 2007 at 12:53 PM
Howard Dean can’t read good.
thesheesh on July 28, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Hyperbole, thy name is Howard Dean.
Mallard T. Drake on July 28, 2007 at 12:56 PM
Can anyone tell me if the candidates prescreen the questions. It seemed like Greasy Joe was locked and loaded for the gun control question. That guy was awesome. He was all in their face. He reminded me of Robert DeNiro in Taxi Driver “You talkin to me?!?” Heh Heh
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Yep.
If the Republicans skip a CNN debate then they are no better than the Democrats who wouldn’t debate on FOX News. For so many reasons the Republicans should show up. AP is correct, I believe. The questions will be mostly legit questions in YouTube packaging. The MSM will try to spin whatever they can against the Republicans no matter what they do, that is true. Not showing up for this debate will throw them a juicy bone. I think any serious candidate can take any question and answer it well, even if the answer is, “that’s the stupid question I ever heard, but not bad from a snowman.”
I agree with other comments here. Start recording your questions now! Perhaps WE can raise the level of discourse.
Ordinary1 on July 28, 2007 at 1:04 PM
You can view the questions for the Republican “debate” here.
Guardian on July 28, 2007 at 1:16 PM
Howard Dean
can’t read good.doesn’t read well.thesheesh on July 28, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Sister Mary Jacob will fail you for such a glaring grammatical error.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 1:19 PM
Heh. No, the quotation marks were just to acknowledge that conservatives are not a monolithic group, and that a number of positions on any issue may be justified from what I like to think of as conservative first principles, which include a healthy respect for the Constitution, the promotion of individual rights and responsibilities, a belief in small government as a safeguard of liberty, and a strong national defense. My point in the above comment was meant to address one of my greatest fears for the Republican party: that it has failed to address many issues that weigh on the minds of Americans (e.g health care, a clean environment, job losses in a changing economy, etc.), and has ceded gound to leftist Democrats in doing so. Judging by a sampling of YouTube videos, these kinds of questions are likely to come up at the debate. Rather than worrying about them as “biased” questions, candidates should relish the opportunity to respond with an “I understand your concerns, but here’s a different way you can address the problem” when confronted with one. That’s all.
Big S on July 28, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Mike Huckabee will shine in a youtube format. He’s a pastor and plays lead guitar on stage. He also dabbles in stand up. Not bad for a Christian. He might even move up to first tier. Mike will be there.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 1:33 PM
Personally, I agree with Mitt. The debates are getting bad enough as it is, this whole Youtube idea is simply ludicrous. I don’t care how “hip” it may be. This election cycle is turning into a real dog and pony show, if it keeps going, the next one will be worse.
I don’t think Mitt has to be too worried, the crowd that thinks he is “unhip” doesn’t vote anyway. Why cater to an internet entity that actively breaks copyright laws, shows jihadi propaganda and supresses conservative videos?
No kidding, I would hope the president is above the average Joe.
reaganaut on July 28, 2007 at 1:34 PM
I always liked Huckabee. I surely don’t agree with him on everything (he’s much more of a social conservative than I am), but I find his manner refreshing.
Big S on July 28, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Because Space Ghost has a higher IQ than most You-Tubers and he would ask more sensible questions. (BTW, that space monkey deserved what he got.)
My collie says:
Stupid dog.
CyberCipher on July 28, 2007 at 1:44 PM
I hope Hunter, Tancredo and ideally Newt show up, nobody else. Now that would be an awesome debate, even with the CNN/YouTube format! If the prima donna campaigns are worried that their candidates will forget their carefully calculated positions balanced between issue-poll results and special interest needs, then they can stay home and watch the real men tackle the hard questions based upon their actual principles.
Go Hunter!
FloatingRock on July 28, 2007 at 1:46 PM
Again so what if the republicans dont show up ? If they do does that mean the dems will go to Fox news ? Highly unlikely.
We seeem to be worried that huff and puff or Kos will be crowing about the republican debates. Ultimately who CARES what those idiots think ? I am not going to die because Kos is having an orgasm about some political non event.
Republicans standing up to the MSM is as much a message as republicans doing every single event that the MSM throws at them. We dont acheive our goals by pandering to CNN or MSNBC or any of the other networks.
Have the democrats been hurt by turning down the fox news debate ? Not one bit. Will the republicans be hurt by turning down youtube ? not one bit.
I would urge every candidate to come on conservative blogs and let us here ask them questions and invite the media to cover that.
That achieves several purposes. It give us here in the base more of a direct line to our candidate. Two it weeds out the kos nutters who want to pull a “Macaca” moment on our candidates. Three it gives conservative blogs more of a mainstream exposure. And 4 it forces the MSM to respond to the candidates rather than the other way around.
I suggest to Charles or LGF, Michelle , and most other serious bloggers to set up such a debate forum. Lets get Laura Ingrahm or Micheal Yon or Michelle herself to moderate debates and set up an interactive forum where Republican candidates can come answer our questions.
We have the power to do something like this. Lets push for it rather than bow down to whatever gimmic the MSM wants to throw at us.
William Amos on July 28, 2007 at 2:01 PM
If Romney is the only one who skips it, it may turn out to be a fatal error.
Labamigo on July 28, 2007 at 2:02 PM
It won’t.
If he is lucky enough to be the only one to skip it, this can be spun to his advantage. We’re talking about the Republican primaries here. Republican primary voters, especially in most of the early primary states(Iowa, Nevada, Wyoming, Florida, South Carolina), don’t give a damn about Youtube.
reaganaut on July 28, 2007 at 2:12 PM
I like Tank for his stance on immigration, but his herky jerky mannerisms when he answers questions is irritating. Like he knows alot more than he is able to disclose and is perfoming a mental scan of his choice of words. Something isn’t right.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 2:13 PM
Good idea
FloatingRock on July 28, 2007 at 2:24 PM
Let’s face reality here. Any candidate who stands on principles will perform just fine at the CNN/YouTube debate. In fact, if many of the questions are lefty curve balls, so much the better the opportunity to explain conservative principles to younger people who may never have heard them before.
The reason that Rudy, Mitt and Fred aren’t going to show up is for the same reason that pathological liars eventually get caught. They spin their tale over a period of time but after a while forget some of the details of their fictional story. Before you know it they begin contradicting one fiction with another and then the entire house of cards comes tumbling down and they get caught.
Rudy, Mitt and Fred would definitely be making a big mistake showing up for the CNN/YouTube debate.
FloatingRock on July 28, 2007 at 2:33 PM
I guess there is no longer anything like what we used to call “public education” anymore. But it’s still apalling to me how many people have no clue what a debate actually IS.
In this idiotic quiz-show format, the candidates aren’t debating EACH OTHER; they are debating the person asking the question.
That process is aout 90% pointless when the questioner is a liberal journalist who will deny until the day he dies that he has a political opinion about anything, but will at least have to show his face on TV again the next day.
That almost-complete waste of time finally becomes 100% pointless when the debater is an anonymous Youtube geek.
logis on July 28, 2007 at 2:41 PM
That’s a good point. I’m sure that the candidates could negotiate for a more traditional debate format but where the YouTube videos provide the questions.
FloatingRock on July 28, 2007 at 2:47 PM
Good for Mitt. CNN/YouTube is a side show. A lose lose situation for the Republicans. I have debate fatigue, and won’t watch anymore debates, until after Conventions.
calgrammy on July 28, 2007 at 2:47 PM
Wait…what?
You are talking about men of principle and goofy youtube debates in the same breath? Give me a break.
This is a petulant demand from the kiddie table to dumb down the process of electing the most powerful person in the world. The only men of honor will be those who decide not to pander to this sort of crap and perserve the dignity of the office.
This goofiness started a dozen years ago with MTV. Do you remember Clinton being asked “boxers or briefs”? Worse, he answered. Now we have moved the bar even lower and we have talking snowmen, guys hugging their assault rifles and calling them baby and other really inspiring dialogue. This is a freak show, nothing more. The same people who were sitting here poking fun at the Dems for their participation in their youtube debate are now saying Republicans face a catastophe if they don’t participate? Please.
I will have more respect for those candidates who show respect for the office and themselves by taking a pass on this garbage. Besides, skipping debates may be a great strategy. Look how well Fred has done skipping all of them to date.
JackStraw on July 28, 2007 at 2:56 PM
The MSM will play up that the Republican frontrunners are afraid of questions from the public. True or not that is how it will be played. The Dems will make hay with it as well. Like I have said before, we have nothing to fear. If they do throw up a few wacko truther videos, our guys will knock them out of the park. If I was running, I would love to get the chance at a good sound bite slapping down some fool.
It is a hugh mistake not to participate.
conservnut on July 28, 2007 at 2:59 PM
Actually, a real debate doesn’t have questions; it has a resolution. And of course there are no “answers.” If there isn’t a pro side and a con side to a discussion, then of course it is not a debate.
If Chris Matthews doesn’t have the slightest clue how any of that works, it’s pretty safe to say that the average Youtube addict will have only a slightly better understanding of the process.
logis on July 28, 2007 at 3:06 PM
The current top tier Republican candidates are panderers and fakes. Rudy won’t debate in an unfriendly forum because he won’t be able to defend conservative principles that, for the most part, he doesn’t believe in. Mitt won’t debate because if the questions are blowing from the left, his weathervane will turn into the wind and he will likely damage his carefully constructed platform. Fred won’t join the debate because he still hasn’t gotten a passing grade from his debate coach and/or his issues coach.
Hunter, Tancredo, Newt and Huckabee(sp?), (and maybe Fred someday), would all do just fine in such an arena because they are all men of principles and not panderers and fakes.
For those of you complaining about the format of the Democratic version of the CNN/YouTube debate/thing… presidential debates usually include negotiations by the various candidates to make sure that their standards are met. Perhaps the Republican campaigns can negotiate seats on the panel that selects the questions, for example, with a neutral as a tiebreaker. If the negotiations fail because CNN isn’t being fair, then at least the Republicans can put the blame on CNN.
FloatingRock on July 28, 2007 at 3:20 PM
I want mitt and fred and Rudy and all the others to answer MY questions and the questions of others in the republican party.
They are running for the Republican nomination right now not the full presidency. Its ultimately REPUBLICANS who will deceide which one of these guys is our guy.
Do you honestly believe that anyone of us here will pull any punches ? if anything we will be as hard on the candidates as any youtuber would be. After the fiasco of the last election and the Amnesty debate I can honestly say most conservatives have a lot of reservations about our party leadership.
lets have the candidates answer to US before we worry about how they will appear to the rest of America
William Amos on July 28, 2007 at 4:08 PM
I don’t get this. Why is it that the Democrats are not hurt by boycotting Fox News Channel, but the Republicans would be hurt by boycotting the YouTube debate?
Personally, I think the Republicans should do the debate, even though I think all the debates, no matter what format, but especially in the format of allowing uninformed ignoramuses ask questions, are pointless.
In addition to that, why are people, especially Republicans, expecting a trouncing in 2008? It is not like any Conservatives are going to NOT vote for the Republican candidate and allow a Socialist/Communist win the White House and destroy this country. I don’t like any of the candidates right now, Fred Thompson included after his hiring of Spencer Abraham, but there is no way in hell I am going to sit out and see what has gone on in the Congress also go on in the White House.
So why are GOP supporters so worried? Are we really fretting the infamous “Independents”? Are Independents going to vote for a Socialist/Communist over a “Moderate”/Liberal Republican all because they (rightly) felt the YouTube “debate” was a farce?
Seriously, is this what our Republic has lowered itself to? Voting or not voting for a Presidential candidate based on YouTube?
How sad.
Michael in MI on July 28, 2007 at 4:08 PM
I just went through the youtube vids and didn’t find a decent relevant question until vid #136. The guy is a gay rep and wants to know how Rudy is going to encourage gays to vote for him.
csdeven on July 28, 2007 at 4:10 PM
JackStraw–right on the money.
This “debate” format seemed more like a game show to me. Stupid, classless, vapid. When did we put children in charge?
nyrofan on July 28, 2007 at 4:57 PM
In addition to that, why are people, especially Republicans, expecting a trouncing in 2008? It is not like any Conservatives are going to NOT vote for the Republican candidate and allow a Socialist/Communist win the White House and destroy this country. I don’t like any of the candidates right now, Fred Thompson included after his hiring of Spencer Abraham, but there is no way in hell I am going to sit out and see what has gone on in the Congress also go on in the White House.
Well put.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 5:16 PM
So well said. The media ‘decided’ all other elections so far and we know what happened. No one, but no one can predict what will happen. Fortunately the media’s wishes are not who decides the final outcome, hard as they try. Their unconditional and hyperdedicated effort might have the opposite result.
Don’t know but it isn’t unheard of. See Antonio Villaraigosa and Univision.
This long process, including the debates are a charade and a spectacle, or a series of spectacles. The masses don’t seem to cherish being the circus-crowd. There are no gladiators in the rings either. The one who comes up with a completely new style/format, with substance, will definitely be noticed.
Entelechy on July 28, 2007 at 5:18 PM
I did and it still leaves me with the same conclusion, along with a bunch of others on this thread. Morons one and all, no doubt.
I will repeat what I said in another thread, these people hate us more than Al-Qeada; why do you want to play their game with their rules?
As for the “candidates being smart enough,” that has yet to be proven. Now if one of them were to tell the CNN moderator to go-do-that-which-is-physically-impossible (likely a life-long ambition) in an FCC friendly way with their asinine/biased question, I will drop all of my objections. A red faced moderator will definitely cover the “cost of admission” to one of these farces.
Okay?
TwinkietheKid on July 28, 2007 at 6:58 PM
Entelechy on July 28, 2007 at 5:18 PM………I have read one or two excellent alternative formats here on this thread…..William Amos on July 28, 2007 at 2:01 PMThis was one that I thought could and should be brought about.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 7:04 PM
Entelechy on July 28, 2007 at 5:18 PM
Continued; Villaraigosa was another radical on Berkley campus, while the pied piper California rock bands of the sixties were destoying young minds and bodies with their tune in turn on and drop out mantra. The rest they turned into liberals.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 7:18 PM
I don’t believe that this is a bad move completely beyond repair. All Mitt has to say is thus:
I will participate in a debate co-sponsored by YouTube when the entire Democratic field agrees to participate in a debate co-sponsored by Fox News.
Short sweet and to-the-point.
gryphon202 on July 28, 2007 at 7:51 PM
Not having decided who I’d support as of yet, I could care less if any of the candidates showed to any of these televised publicity ops. Calling these “debates” is a misnomer.
oldernslower on July 28, 2007 at 8:00 PM
I could just about cry.
I guess in 2009 I’ll be saying “God bless the President, and her First Man!. :-(
Is their any courage left?
Darnell Clayton on July 28, 2007 at 8:13 PM
It’s a trap!
packsoldier on July 28, 2007 at 8:53 PM
I haven’t seen this posted on Hot Air. It answered some of my questions. Florida will host a Republican debate in October, and the Florida primary is ony six months away.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 8:57 PM
This MSM liberal bias concept is getting tired. Has it only been since Bernard Goldberg’s Books that this has been confirmed? Is FoxNews your only source of news? Do you only visit right-leaning blogs and news sites?
That’s backasswards. That’s actually the same dysfunction you are accusing mainstream journalists of having. We need to expand our horizons and take control of our role within the new media.
Where were all the complaints complaints of bias during the Reagan Era? During Newt’s contract with America?
How did any of those victories come to pass?
The Race Card on July 28, 2007 at 9:02 PM
I used to like Wired Magazine a decade or so ago. They used to report on technology and had some neat stuff in there. Now it just echoes the liberal media. I still think the Youtube debates are a joke.
Maybe Romney just doesn’t want to field questions from sock puppets, snowmen, and strung out teens. Hey, wait, maybe if Fox had the sock puppets, snowmen, etc. the dems would agree to a debate on Fox? Better yet, have Fox use a ventriloquist act or some sort of Jim Henson puppet host the debates. That way maybe the dems can relate…
Tuari on July 28, 2007 at 10:06 PM
He always reminds me of the guy who should have been in “TWINS” with Ahnold instead of Danny DeVito.
Romney should take advantage of any and every opportunity to defend his own positions in public.
If you can’t stand the doofuses, stay out of the arena.
profitsbeard on July 28, 2007 at 11:00 PM
The use of youtube in the debate format might draw an audience who otherwise would not watch the debates. It could be used against the Republican candidates though. Thats a tough call. I guess in the name of progress it needs to be done.
sonnyspats1 on July 28, 2007 at 11:22 PM
Man you must be very, very, very young….
TheBigOldDog on July 28, 2007 at 11:27 PM
Oh give me a break. You could cry? Take the friggin’ skirt off and get some courage of your own. Damn defeatists….
reaganaut on July 28, 2007 at 11:43 PM
I have some dresses in the closet from a couple past lives ago.
I’m happy to donate to anyone in “need”.
Whatever floats their skirt.
Mcguyver on July 29, 2007 at 1:18 AM
If Republicans skip this, nobody will remember it in 6 months. Everyone in the blogosphere thinks it’s a big deal, but then the blogosphere is already made up of political junkies and geeks who are paying attention. Most of the country isn’t. There’s only a downside to participating – especially given that CNN will be hand-picking the submitted questions. I suspect there will be a 3 to 1 ratio of liberal submissions for the Republican debate. It can only be bad.
TexasRainmaker on July 29, 2007 at 1:46 AM
I think it is important to be able to answer liberal questions from a conservative point of view.
Big S on July 29, 2007 at 1:59 AM
Typical moonbat/wingnut. When someone disagrees, throw insults.
Missing the YouTube/CNN debate (no matter how “tilted”) sends the wrong message to potential voters, especially young Americans.
We hear about politicians wanting to always address the publics issues…well, if the GOP has any manhood left (and some humility) they would attend this event and answer the questions of the general populace, no matter how liberal.
Heh! At least you can’t say the GOP lacks a sense a humor. I think I’ll miss that most after Hillary gets in office (mainly because only Ron Paul showed up at the debate).
Darnell Clayton on July 29, 2007 at 3:45 AM
I have to side with Hugh Hewitt on this one. You can hear the intensity he brings to his delivery leap off the page (or screen, in this case). I’m sure he’s near apoplectic that the candidate whose very presence in this race he’s spent so much time defending is one of the first major GOP candidates to say no.
Look at the press Tancredo got for showing up at the NAACP convention. That is exactly what everyone hopes to make the candidates who skip this event look like, and the image will stick, video will go viral, accusations flung. It is the GOPs version of the Dems bowing out of the Fox debate. It has the potential to be the internet equivalent of the ridicule Geo HW Bush got for not recognizing a grocery store scanner, which of course, was not what it was made out to be.
Captain Scarlet on July 29, 2007 at 7:09 AM
The fact that we are having this debate is proof enough to justify any candidate to refuse to attend.
NO ONE is discussing ANYTHING any of the dem candidates said. Instead we are talking about how the debate will be presented. Snowmen, gun “kooks”, what do you like/hate about the candidate to your left, are you offended by al gore, etc.
I understand all the reasons for attending the debate and they are valid, but do any of us really think that a day after the debate we will be discussing any specific questions answered? No, we’ll be discussing the asinine questions CNN had picked and complaining about their demeaning of the rep candidates.
csdeven on July 29, 2007 at 7:59 AM
But does CNN get to pick which video questions are to be used in the debate? If so, I don’t blame Romney for skipping this ridiculous fiasco. The Socialist Democrap Party YouTube debate was so far beyond stupid that the looney left doesn’t even know when they’re being stupid. Believe me, the Stalinists at CNN will be more than happy to attempt to make the Republican candidates appear to look worse than the Socialist Democrap Party candidates.
lynnv on July 29, 2007 at 8:46 AM
Yea well that wasn’t Hugh Hewitt. Look again. That was written by a guy who built his career on the intertubes. Hardly shocking that his knickers are in a twist, but it also doesn’t mean he’s right.
Gee I hope it has more impact than that. That move cost them exactly zero with people who would never have voted for them and was read meat for their base. I hope those who walk from this, and Guliani has also said he has a scheduling conflict and probably won’t be there, get the credit they deserve from their base.
You’re joking, right?
JackStraw on July 29, 2007 at 9:43 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »