GOP YouTube fallout: We’ve lost the perky vote
posted at 8:18 am on July 30, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
The teddy bears on the bed are a bit much.
Here’s another one, short but much less sweet. I hope this is what they have the boss talking about tonight on O’Reilly. A righteous, nationally televised lambasting of GOP cowardice on this subject is just what the doctor ordered. Plus, it’d give KP a golden opportunity to perform her crowd-pleasing standard, “I agree with Michelle.”
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] 3 4 »
No kidding, if you take it literally and not look at the germ of truth behind it. Like all old sayings, it’s still and old saying because it’s true.
In case you hadn’t noticed, winning and election is selling a product. No, publicity like being caught in bed with a dead boy is not good. But publicity such as standing up to the people who insist you pander to the lowest common denominator and deriving the pr that says you are a principled, serious candidate, happens to be great pr, particularly in the primaries where you are trying to set yourself apart from a group of people who are trying there hardest to all say virtually the same thing. Ask candidate Barrak Obama who has been able to spin his initially weak response on meeting with dictators into a gain in the polls.
Except for Ron Paul. But that’s because he is a martian.
JackStraw on July 30, 2007 at 10:13 AM
AND please stop calling this a debate! It is a gimic show brought to TV addicts by the same type of people who bring them all those “reality” shows.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 10:14 AM
Tabula Rassmussen?
profitsbeard on July 30, 2007 at 10:18 AM
I think Michelle needs to announce a HotAir debate… and watch the Dems run for the hills..
GoodBoy on July 30, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Actually, she says she’s a vlogger and aspiring writer. Her other videos include reactions to Anderson Cooper Live, the original CNN/YouTube debate, and an interview with Howard Dean at the CNN/YouTube debate. All of her videos appear to be politically-themed.
Regardless, she’s not the only one who would be submitting questions. I know that for a fact. My niece is interested in politics, and was planning to send a video into the debate.
amerpundit on July 30, 2007 at 10:21 AM
If all publicity is good — why isn’t Hillary doing a Penthouse spread? I’m sure Larry would be interested.
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Yep.
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Damn you. You just scarred me for life.
Professor Blather on July 30, 2007 at 10:24 AM
Oh.My.God. Must….purge….that…thought…
amerpundit on July 30, 2007 at 10:24 AM
Blake, Blake, Blake…
Now I have to rinse my mental eyeballs with witch hazel, if not CLR.
profitsbeard on July 30, 2007 at 10:25 AM
Huh, would you look at that. According to Pew Research, publicity is a good thing.
Now who would have thought that?
JackStraw on July 30, 2007 at 10:26 AM
Well, hell, she can tie it into healthcare and woman’s issues: See my uterus? Shouldn’t every American woman receive the same gynological care I do?
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 10:28 AM
Man do this Youtubers rant!
The girl could have made her points in one minute.
terryannonline on July 30, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Possible. Notice how it’s always the left eyebrow. Coincidence? Hmmm…
IrishEi on July 30, 2007 at 10:30 AM
You’re evil. Evil, I say.
Professor Blather on July 30, 2007 at 10:31 AM
aspiring writer… blogger…. ties to Howard Dean….pretense of “truth” where have we heard this recently?
jus’sayin’
cadetwithchips2 on July 30, 2007 at 10:42 AM
And skewed hard left.
steveegg on July 30, 2007 at 10:44 AM
I guess you shot me down. I’ll have to admit now that the candidates to run the most powerful country on earth at a time when western civilization is at it’s most vulnerable should go on a cable show and answer questions chosen by the ideological cousins of Al Jahzeera given by people dressed as Santa and clowns, living in their parents basement. And when it is over nbc, cbs, msnbc, npr, abc and the new york times will be racing to tell the American public how brilliant all the candidates where.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 10:48 AM
Excuse me, sir. You’ve triggered my sarcasm detector. Please come with me.
Professor Blather on July 30, 2007 at 10:49 AM
Actually, I like the idea of such a debate…but we get to play by the same rules the Dems did. The candidates would answer questions from their base, just as the Dems did. I would love to be able to ask serious questions of all the candidates-all the showbiz aside, we will have to pick our Presidential choice from a very limited field.
Forget youtube/CNN. Foxnews and Hot Air could host the debate, with Michelle, Mark Steyn, Hewitt moderating, and actual conservative Republicans asking the questions. And no snowmen.
Doug on July 30, 2007 at 10:51 AM
I’m waiting for the obligatory “If you had to have gay sex with one of the other candidates, who would it be and why?” because you know it’s going to show up there eventually. Seriously, this next election will be dems voting for their dem candidates and visa versa for the republicans. The youtube-question-game-show will have zero effect on swaying those voters. Personally I think that the republicans that take a stand against participating in a demeaning version of “President Idol” will be respected more than those that pander to a liberal demographic that wouldn’t vote them no matter what. Youtube is for goofy entertainment. It’s not and should not be a tool to be employed for serious consideration when we decide who the next leader of the free world will be.
Guardian on July 30, 2007 at 10:53 AM
And this is the reason to abandon this debate? No different from the left jumping ship on the Fox Debate.
nailinmyeye on July 30, 2007 at 10:54 AM
“…and maybe ride a pony or two.”
Who rides two ponies at the fair?
Who even has a pony?
Not that there’s anything wrong with that…
profitsbeard on July 30, 2007 at 10:55 AM
And on a personal note, despite my appreciation and fancy of the female form, women who wear halter tops look like hookers.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Thank you
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 10:59 AM
Just wondering if the “perky one” was equally dissapointed about the democrats bowing out of the FOX News debate?
dlmcilvain on July 30, 2007 at 11:00 AM
So you are equating Britt Hume with the people we saw on the democrat debate?
And don’t say they will be different, CNN CHOSES THE VIDEOS.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:00 AM
More perky stupidity.
I didn’t say all questions were created equal…
nailinmyeye on July 30, 2007 at 11:01 AM
Ms. Perky may actually vote conservative someday. It might be decades, but… If she were a real tabula rasa (vacant lib), she would never have dared make the Al Gore/Internet joke (and it was a joke). If she’d tried that at an Inconvenient Truth rally, she’d have been frozen out quicker than if she’d been hit with the snows of Kilimanjaro.
Goateeguy’s just a typical snot.
eeyore on July 30, 2007 at 11:03 AM
Ever since Bill Clinton had sax on the stupid Arsenio Hall show, the Democrats have been misfiring on the idea that the MTV generation is going to provide the necessary swing votes for them. Didn’t work in 2000 and didn’t work in 2004. Instead of focusing on the young hip-hopping, vote-or-die crowd this time, they’re focused on the myspace-like-OMG-WTF crowd. They will again fail miserably if this is the constituency they’re staking their campaigns on. But I support their desire to do it.
TexasRainmaker on July 30, 2007 at 11:03 AM
Nope. Never said that. See the video I just linked.
Are you saying that the Dems should have bowed out of the Fox debate?
nailinmyeye on July 30, 2007 at 11:04 AM
No, you were impliing all questioners were equal.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:04 AM
You aren’t making any sense. You are equating a guy with 30 years of journalistic experience, who is well thought of by rational people left and right, with people who dress in costumes to ask the potential president of the US rambling barely coherent questions. The democrat youtube show was stupid, but the whole democrat/leftist ideology is centered around the belief that our citzens for the most part are stupi.
Why do the republicans have to play games and by rules made up by the left?
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:08 AM
Those of you arguing against the Republicans participating in the YouTube debate are seriously out of touch. The Democrats set a precident, whether they came away looking better or worse for it is irrelevant. We are going to alienate an entire generation of voters if we don’t do this.
CorinthianJest on July 30, 2007 at 11:09 AM
Something like the 2004 MTV “Vote or Die” crowd? What it’ll be this time? “Watch or die”?
Kokonut on July 30, 2007 at 11:12 AM
It’s a tube top. Halter tops have a tie around the neck. Don’t make that mistake again!
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 11:14 AM
I never equated anyone with Brit Hume, you did. So, come off it.
What I said was that it is unwise for the Republicans to bow out of this debate. I think that the fodder for the Left is not worth it. I said that the candidates created this situation for themselves by jumping in this early. Note that potentials such as Thompson or Gingrich do not have to play this game, as, they are not in it yet.
Do I think some of the questions are stupid. Yes. Absolutely.
But, I also think that any one of us has the opportunity to make our own questions, flood the system with them, and hopefully get some thoughtful stuff out there.
nailinmyeye on July 30, 2007 at 11:16 AM
I beg to differ sir. Coming away looking worse IS relevant.
Guardian on July 30, 2007 at 11:16 AM
You have no faith in our youth. To believe that an entire generation takes video downloading so serious that a republican skipping this spectacle will scar them for life is ludicrous. The hardcore liberals I know are in their 30’s and 40’s. The early 20’s people I know and come in contact are very open minded and an awefully lot of them are conservative . I see an aweful lot of cars with surf boards on top and Bush stickers or patriotic stickers right next to the reggae stickers on the back.
The msm will ride it as long as possible but as soon as they drop it it will disappear from the collective consciousness.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:18 AM
Is that the required uniform of youtube?
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:19 AM
When they grow up, they’ll get over it. How many young people vote? They don’t. No matter how many “rock out the vote” crap they throw, they don’t vote. And that is not a bad thing in that most of them are idiots.
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 11:19 AM
We’ve explained our reasons why. That said, if the Dems jump off a cliff, must the GOP do the same for the sake of parity?
And I don’t think the Mac guy was threatening to vote GOP in the first place. Those in his generation (myself included) have already drawn there political lines.
There can be nothing to gain except for the left from a GOP YouTube “debate”.
unamused on July 30, 2007 at 11:21 AM
It is to get me to watch.
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 11:21 AM
These two are exactly why they should blow off this debate.
Within seconds “perky” showed her colors. “Don’t know much about Romney?” Then you are not a Republican or conservative.
And mister “potty mouth”. Doubt his opinion was suddenly realized by his YouTube outrage.
So why would liberals go to the trouble of goading their sworn enemies? Because they are our enemies (at least they know it). Enemies of reason, respect, and Republicans.
However, it would be a good idea for the Republicans to advance a idea as an alternative. Lots of high quality videos on their web pages for example. Take a look at Duncan Hunter’s Ross Perot like videos. Informative, persuasive.
The nature of “debate” hasn’t framed issues for decades, and canned vague responses to an anchorman or a snowman are pointless.
This is all or nothing this time. Our candidates can not continue to profess merely that their “position” is like ours, but that Democrats are wrong!
Every time a Democrat politician says someone is against “stem-cell research” THEY LIE. The same is true on every issue. Race, education, health care, security.
Agrippa2k on July 30, 2007 at 11:22 AM
Fodder for the left? Since when do they need inspiration? A few weeks ago they went after Romney for the dog kennel thing. They will grasp anything to attack the republicans. This show, it is not a debate, will give them so much to spin that the candidates will be trying to correct stuff the msm spins for weeks.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:22 AM
I’m sure there was resistance to the first radio and then the first television debates for exactly the same “dignity” and “respect” and “it’s just a gimmick” reasons. Reasonable arguments can be (and have been) made for and against attending the debate but I must say that this thread shows that some of us are in danger of checking into the echo chamber.
student on July 30, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Furthermore, I think our minds are in the wrong place if we are to recognize democrat pandering as “precedent”. If we do ANYTHING as a party, the leading reason for doing it better damnsite be more than “the dems did it first”.
We should be the trend-setters. We should set the tone. I think refusing the debate does just that. We will end up looking like the guy who stayed on the curb while the moron next to him stepped in front of a buss. We will be left standing and shaking our head in contempt of the weaker party.
unamused on July 30, 2007 at 11:26 AM
CorinthianJest on July 30, 2007 at 11:09 AM
We are going to alienate an entire generation of lib voters if we don’t do this.
And working off another posters’ comment, it will probably, in actuality, take 3 decades for them to vote conservative. The lib indoctrination is far more invasive than it was in previous generations.
captivated_dem on July 30, 2007 at 11:27 AM
Whatever.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:27 AM
Being forced to answer stupid loaded questions from anonymous cartoons, sock puppets, food, Santa Claus and assorted weirdos is NOT the definition of debate. Not even close.
Guardian on July 30, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Hmmm. That left eyebrow looks familiar.
I didn’t know Alan Colmes had a teenage daughter.
BacaDog on July 30, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Republicans have an advantage that Democrats did not. They know what to expect and have a month to prepare for it.
I think this is just a misunderstanding about what is at stake here. This is the equivalent of telling a generation that their opinions don’t matter. Will they get over it and rationally come to the Republican party because it just makes more sense? Well, there are still people voting Democrat so I have to assume that they might not. :P I feel like I need to put on my Darth Vader voice and say “Do not underestimate the power of the You Tube”.
And I’m one of them. Where do you live and are any cute and single? ;)
CorinthianJest on July 30, 2007 at 11:38 AM
The long and the short of it all is that there is a tremendous opportunity to score big points. The problem is that campaigning in general has become a vaudeville act. With less talent.
Now, do we have candidates that are savvy enough to turn stupid, ignoble questions into rhetorical gold simply by answering the question that should have been asked?
If they aren’t willing to show up with their A-game, and prepared to fight Total War, it is, as I said, a vaudeville act.
cadetwithchips2 on July 30, 2007 at 11:38 AM
She has a lot of people/backing behind her. Just check out her videos (I just checked out the 1st one and she is obviously a fraud) and her website. Everything is professional and it would take lots of money/time to pull this off. She’s another “LonelyGirl” that pretends to be a struggling college student with a part-time job…….Riiiight!
The whole CNN/YouTube thing is ridiculous enough without having paid advocates doing the video questions.
nottakingsides on July 30, 2007 at 11:39 AM
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:41 AM
Yep. Guess she hasn’t learn about disclosing conflicts of interest.
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Score points with WHO? That is the myth, that somehow this one show, again it is not a debate, somehow represents a whole generation of voters and participation will effect the outcome of not only this election but elections for decades. Any young people who already watched the first youtube show will do something else for the second because the first one was STUPID! The largest demographic watching this show will be journalists looking for the next days hook. Do you think republicans will lose the journalist vote if they don’t take part?
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:48 AM
How many people watched the donk youtube debate? I thought it was a bust.
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 11:50 AM
The Democrats set a precEdent when Bill Clinton declared his choice in underwear. Whether he came away looking better or worse is irrelevant. We are going to alienate an entire generation of voters if Mitt and Rudy don’t answer the boxers-vs-briefs question.
Yeah. Arguing “they did it so we have to” is really this stupid.
The voters you think we might be alienating are exactly the voters who won’t be voting Republican.
Meanwhile the voters we WILL be alienating are the actual, you know, Republicans.
You are the one out of touch.
Let the Republicans who choose not to participate boldly stand up and say why. They will impress the base and win primary votes. Their integrity will pull in swing voters.
And anybody alienated by that sort of honesty is on the other side anyway.
Dear God - some of you are scaring me with this “no matter how low Democrats sink, we have to follow their example” sort of argument.
Professor Blather on July 30, 2007 at 11:54 AM
Youtube speaks for an entire generation.
So those two women who asked the question about gay marriage are indicative of the next generation and are the future of our country?
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:55 AM
What he said.
If you’re arguing that Republicans *must* participate, that’s fine - as long as your argument is something better than “Democrats did it.”
Professor Blather on July 30, 2007 at 11:58 AM
That was a symptom of what is wrong with our culture and his answer should have been the end of his campaign. Anyone who thinks a republican should answer questions like that is not looking for the same type of individual to run this country as I am.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 11:58 AM
See what I mean?
student on July 30, 2007 at 12:00 PM
How is this any different, really, from the usual format? Do you think Chris Mathews, for example, is any better?
student on July 30, 2007 at 12:02 PM
Amen.
The bottom line is that the only people that will care about this You Tube silliness are people that won’t be voting Republican no matter what.
For those who disagree … can you please describe the type of “debate” scenario that candidates *should* avoid? If sockpuppets and snowmen and “like fer shure” girl is something we just have to do … can you point to ANYTHING that we could fairly decide not to participate in?
Assuming, of course, that Democrats did it first.
Some of you are awfully eager to hop on this particular slippery slope. We’ve explained that there ought to be a line drawn somewhere - if not here, where do YOU draw it?
Professor Blather on July 30, 2007 at 12:03 PM
Perky had valid points. She struck me as someone who (A.) won’t vote Republican and (B.) doesn’t believe everything her professors told her and is willing to listen. Sure she is a mall baby….but a damn smart one.
SkidMark……he was trash. He’ll never put down the Nintendo controller long enough to go the the polls anyway.
Limerick on July 30, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Say something that makes sense next time.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 12:12 PM
Nude debates.
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 12:13 PM
There you go again.
The whole point is that a serious campaign for president is what the American people deserve and neither youtube or Chris Matthews is about that.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 12:15 PM
She was a blank slate, YET, she reminds him that he has some questions that he needs to answer. Meh. Sounds like she had her mind made up about some stuff. She’s probably a stone liberal who KNOWS the youtube format administered by CNN will make the dems look stupid.
She has a good point about people not wanting their face on TV, BUT, there must have been someone other than a snowman or a perceived gun kook that asked the same questions in an intelligent respectful way.
csdeven on July 30, 2007 at 12:18 PM
“How can you ignore that,” Fer sure, bag your face.
It would be totally bitchen if you would do the utube debate,
Fer sure.
I was a blank slate now I am just a vapid idiot. Fer sure
400lb Gorilla on July 30, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Perky is right, long winded and irritating to listen to but right.
We can’t beat up the dems for running from Fox news if we run from this one. And besides, if our candidates can’t handle the type of questions that would come from this, we have the wrong candidates.
I would be curious to see the reaction here if Fred said he would attend. hmmmmm.
conservnut on July 30, 2007 at 12:23 PM
She is well left of center and biased. Also, she has a conflict of interest in that she appears to make these videos for a living so she has an interest in the possibility of getting her videos on national television.
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 12:27 PM
I wouldn’t worry about giving them Dems ammmunition, or catching crap from them just because we don’t do a debate - we are always going to be on the recieving end of the maximum amount of crap they can throw. If they don’t have anything they’ll make something up. You know that, I know that.
I don’t care if they do it or not - isn’t that up to each campaign to decide? I would imagine that Mitt and Rudy both have had very well-paid staff members take a serious look at it. If they think that it will help their chances, they’ll do it, period. They’re politicians, for crying out loud.
I just wish that Republicans would stop allowing their behavior to be dictated by liberal Dems - they will never approve or accept us, and they will never stop the attacks nor the whining. At least until we grow a pair and stand up to them , fight back, and maybe (gasp!) even do things that they disapprove of.
Dork B. on July 30, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Why doesn’t CNN just take the question the Youtubers submit, and ask them without the video?
That way, the debate still happens, they’re still answering questions from “The People” and there’s no circus.
Or is this about CNN making Republicans look bad one way or another?
apollyonbob on July 30, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Within reason. If the Democratic candidates go door to door giving blow jobs to voters, then I’d agree with you that we don’t need to follow them off the bridge. But this is a debate. A debate on CNN.
If existing Republican voters are alienated because the prospective candidates participate in a debate that caters to a younger generation simply because of the non-traditional style of the questions being asked, then may God have mercy on our party. But you know what, I’ll even cede that point to you. Maybe it will.
Seriously, though. You guys think the YouTube debate will go away after this election? You think that 2012 will come around and they will say “Oh man, that YouTube debate, what an abysmal failure. We definitely don’t want to repeat that again!” What you are seeing is just a glimpse at how media is changing. Maybe there is just one like it this year, but there may be two or three like it next election. Are we going to take a stand on all those, too?
CorinthianJest on July 30, 2007 at 12:33 PM
I keep hearing this over and over on here but no none will explain who we are going to beat up the democrats to? Ourselves? We know they are creeps and cowards. If the people who keep making that point haven’t noticed, that debate is done and gone. No one is even talking about it anymore. Do the people making that point believe that the morning after a youtube debacle, the msm are going to be talking about the courage of the republican candidates who attended in contrast to the leftists who were afraid of fox?
Sounds like an alternate univers then mine.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 12:33 PM
You know, after watching these two vids, I feel better about the plans not to have a YouTube debate.
Somehow, the concept of either a girl who might be old enough to vote, and seriously scary/self-absorbed (or so she comes off) and a guy who believes that everyone agrees with him, and those that don’t are douchebags being “for” a debate makes me wonder if the debate is a good idea.
And next election, UL HV 2 DB8 BY ANSRN TXT MSG ?S R UL BE ALN8TNG N NTRE GNR8TUN AGN - HW CN U B SO DUM TO NOT C Y IS MPRTNT 2 LSTN 2 D NEW GEN N DO THNG THR WAY ?
Really, tell me the “next” next generation isn’t the text message generation who can actually read the near gibberish sentence above (sorry, I don’t bother doing text-speak under any normal circumstances, so I’m sure some of the above is incorrect)?
Ok, now do you risk alientating the 18-24 aged block, who turns out almost no voters; or the old fogies who are going to wonder what the hell you’re reading and responding to, and why you’re bothering to have a discussion with someone who believes that proper spelling and grammar aren’t needed when posing questions to prospective Presidents?
Remeber, old people vote, young people don’t. That’s going to have to change before most candidates are going to willingly look silly/stupid/peculiar/different to show the young people they matter. Right now, with the numbers as they stand, young people don’t vote. So sorry, numerically, statistically, to the people trying to push the numbers for the votes, they really don’t matter. You can offend 2 people aged 18-24 (turnout under 30%) and avoid offending one over 45 (turnout over 65%) and gain ground overall. Or please two 18-20 and offend one 65+ and lose ground. Simple numbers mean that the 18-24 crowd is the least likely to get listened to.. and the 65+ (really 45+) gets a lot more attention.
It’s not that you’re not a good crowd, its just that people a bit older than me are twice as good a crowd with the same number of seats.
SRC: (the first I could find with age based numbers, runs to 2000)
http://lilt.ilstu.edu/gmklass/COW/archive/2002/feb1902turnoutage.htm
gekkobear on July 30, 2007 at 12:33 PM
I agree with Allah and Michelle and anybody else who thinks its a mistake to skip this “debate.”
As for the notion that this will be all risk and no reward, how so? Sure the people submitting the questions will be bleeding heart liberals, but what’s wrong with that? An adult should not have trouble answering questions from 1st graders. The more mindless a question is the easier it should be to answer directly. A clear, quick, logical, well-thought-out answer can do alot to make a question/questioner look insane.
Also, the debate is going to be shown on TV like any other debate. The audience is not going to be “youtube users.” The audience is going to be the typical audience that watches presidential primary debates. Typically, all the questions come from journalists. That does not mean that the audience is always just a bunch of journalists.
Even though it may have been a little corney at times the youtube debate seemed to work well when the Dems did it last week. The overall feedback was positive and the format got the candidates talking about things that they don’t ordinarily talk about. It made me look forward to the Republican candidates turn. I’ll be dissapointed if they back away from this and I hope they don’t. I think it will be a mistake if they don’t do it.
Zetterson on July 30, 2007 at 12:35 PM
This circus is given credibility with statements like that.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 12:36 PM
I disagree. That would presuppose that youtube is equal to Fox news in credibility.
csdeven on July 30, 2007 at 12:39 PM
I was in a convenience store owned by pakistanis. The tv behind the counter was on and I got to listen for a few minutes waiting my turn. The accents and attitudes of the commentators and wording of the text made me wonder if it was Al Jaheera. As I paid a commercial came on and it was CNN International.
Why Americans give cnn all this credibility as some kind of voice of reason and objectivity escapes me.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 12:40 PM
Of course that should read…
CNN will make the republicans look stupid.
csdeven on July 30, 2007 at 12:41 PM
and yet no one at CNN used any of my questions for the dems. why was that ?
Mr. Kucinich how presidential would it be to have to sit in a booster seat to see over the desk in the oval office??
Mr. Obama doses Dumbo know you have his ears???
Mr. Clinton dose Bill know you’re really a man???
Mrs. Edwards what’s it like to be the first women in the top tear running for president??
Mr. Bidden isn’t it a sign of mental illness to constantly open your own mouth and shoot your self in your own foot over and over again?
For the rest of you losers besides raising taxes cutting defense and opening the boarders and doing the bidding of your special interest group’s wtf have you done for the American people.
And to CNN how long before you catch up to pmsnbc in the ratings?
Mojack420 on July 30, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Wait - Aren’t the Democrats going to do a LOGO channel debate dealing exclusively with gay , bisexual, transgender issues? I guess we’ll have to also do one if invited?
Link to WorldNet Daily article:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56601
Dork B. on July 30, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Okay, let me spell it out for you. Dismissing a contrary but respectful opinion with a flippant “whatever” is exactly what I meant by checking into an echo chamber.
student on July 30, 2007 at 12:42 PM
No it isn’t. The youtube “President Idol” show is by no means a reasonable definition of “a debate”.
Guardian on July 30, 2007 at 12:48 PM
My opinion was that your comment made little sense and was written to impress yourself with your own writing. A liberal symptom, being obsessed with perception over reality and substance.
Whatever ahead of time.
peacenprosperity on July 30, 2007 at 12:48 PM
I couldn’t watch Perky Prom dress for a whole minute, much less however long that video was. Not only is her voice a dead give-away liberal, its the obnoxious, self-righteous, close-minded variety and not the actually concerned about society kind. (Having spend most of my life in Boston and Seattle I’ve known enough of them to make careful distinctions.)
My reaction was if this is the best that Moveon.org can do to try to sucker us into their quagmire, we’ve already one this round.
pedestrian on July 30, 2007 at 12:49 PM
I rarely disagree with you, but here I must. I do not know about Rudy, but Mitt! does talk to people face to face in townhall meetings. So he will be able to counter any criticism about skipping the debate with that point. He can point to at least three questions to bolster his point….
1) The snowman
2) The gun owner.
3) The are you offended by manbearpig.
Plus we have the what do you dislike/like question.
I think at the least, Mitt! has himself positioned to deflect all criticism.
csdeven on July 30, 2007 at 12:50 PM
No doubt, but you won’t find it anywhere on TV. I acknowledge that an argument can be made against appearing on this debate, but I don’t think it’s a settled matter.
Patrick Ruffini makes a good point when he says that if the candidates believe themselves to be too haughty to respond to an oddball question or two, what reason do we have for believing that they will listen to us about immigration or spending or any of the other “serious” issues?
student on July 30, 2007 at 12:52 PM
There is nothing respectful in accusing people who disagree with you as “checking into an echo chamber.”
Blake on July 30, 2007 at 12:52 PM
“you just aleated the you tube voters.” Right. And Romney’s a douchebag. Do another onehitter.
LtE126 on July 30, 2007 at 12:59 PM
I strongly agree with this statement. I think Republicans are just as guilty of only believing the mainstream media’s perception of youth. When in fact, there are many young and minority voters who are not afraid to think for themselves, and consider themselves conservative. Ignore us long enough and you’re gonna end up with a viable third party.
The reason is that many of the older liberals are trying to recapture their youth through liberalism. They are fighting for their lost youth and missed chances to go to Rainbow Gatherings and Woodstock. Extreme left politics are often just a red herring for trying to feel young and/or get laid.
Regarding youtube:
Think about the growth of myspace. It started out as a playground for bored kids. Then its popularity skyrocketed and its demographics shifted. Adults chase youth culture at an ever-increasing rate. And some adults just chase young tail.
Either way, nearly 50% of Myspace users are over 35. How long before youtube reflects a similar shift? Many parents, coworkers and business colleagues use youtube as a resource. Its ubiquity is unavoidable.
We owe it to our troops and fellow countrymen to do whatever it takes to regain congressional control. A Presidential victory would go a long way towards doing that. We must scrape up every vote from every nook and cranny of the electorate pool.
Record your own video and quit acting like the Flat Earth Society.
The Race Card on July 30, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Actually, as it happens, I don’t necessarily disagree; as I said, I think a good argument can be made for both sides. My concern was that if we dismiss any argument other than our own as being stupid or evil, which it appeared to me several posters who are against the debates did, then we risk ending up in an echo chamber much like the liberals.
student on July 30, 2007 at 1:02 PM
What makes you think perky/potty-mouth votes?
(My nimnul detector just went-off.)
Look at it this way, if perky or potty-mouth should venture out to vote,
1) will he be issued a free one month trial membership to a pornography web-site?
2) will she be issued a cash certificate that can be used at the nearest shopping mall?
3) will either one of them be issued pizza/fries/nachos of some other unhealthy fast food?
4) will either one of them receive any form of self-multilating body-art or jewelry?
(Do I need to go on-and-on here, or are the readership’s pattern recognition skills kicking-in?)
What’s that you say? Perky won’t receive any insta-perks?
EXACTLY. THAT’s why perky and potty-mouth don’t vote.
You see, (TexasRainmaker acknowledged) the myspace-like-OMG-WTF You-Tube generation is ALL ABOUT instant gratification, and well, I am sorry, but the electoral process just doesn’t have much to offer them, now does it?
In fact, even if they vote for the winner, their candidate wouldn’t take office for MONTHS!! Since You-Tubers have the attention span of a gnat, I sincerely doubt that by the time inauguration day rolls around that either perky or potty-mouth would be able to remember who they voted for, or why.
Okay. Go ahead ahead an tell me now what a rotten person I am for believing such a thing.
Yeah, that right’s AP, I am just mean, aren’t I?
Or is it that the You-Tubers just can’t handle the truth?
CyberCipher on July 30, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Unless we want to alienate gays, bisexuals, and transgenders. Wait, what? We already do that? Oh, well, ok, I guess we can skip this one, lol. I think your example helps my argument more than it hurts it…
Also, apparently CNN is no longer a legitimate news network. *shrugs* Who knew? I guess when they try to have a presidential debate that isn’t cosponsered by YouTube, we can decide not to participate in that one, too. Since, you know, not a real network and all.
43 million viewers tuned in to the last half hour of American Idol in 2006 to watch the winner be announced. I refer you to my previous post. Welcome to the new media. Try not to get your shoes too dirty while you are dragging your feet.
CorinthianJest on July 30, 2007 at 1:02 PM
AP and MM for some reason have their panties in a knot over this stupid You Tube debate. I usually agree with MM point of view but not on this.
calgrammy on July 30, 2007 at 1:02 PM
If the GOP can avoid the TrogdorGeneration’s vote, I’d say that’s a victory. I’d rather lose than get the vote of people who think YouTube is the cultural touchstone of our generation.
YouTube: Give me my ’80’s Spandex metal videos and leave it at that! Seriously…I use YouTube for entertainment and I don’t want it spoiled by fish-smelling hippie defeatest crazies.
Thanks.
otcconan on July 30, 2007 at 1:06 PM
Comment pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »