No Republican YouTube/CNN Debate?

[Brad61]

So far, only Ron Paul and John McCain have signed on to a YouTube/CNN Republican presidential primary debate. The front runners have all come up with lame excuses like “scheduling conflicts”.

In case you don’t know the YouTube debate format, anyone can make a video asking the cadidates a question, and submit it to YouTube. Then people vote, and the most popular “video questions” make it into the debate.

The Democratic candidates had a debate like this recently, and most Democrats seem to agree that (despite a couple of cutesy moments) the YouTube questions were a lot fresher than the old boring format where DC journalists ask the same boring questions. The YouTube format lets the voters ask the questions they want to ask!

So why won’t there be a Republican version? Is it because the GOP leadership thinks that if the true base of the GOP is allowed to show it’s face on national TV, that the party risks losing millions of independant votes? Maybe they’re afraid of questions from the GOP base like this, on national TV:

“Why don’t we just nuke Iraq, and get it over with?”

“Why don’t we just nuke Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Syria and Venezuela?”

“If you are elected, will you ban all types of abortion as your first act as president? Will you make abortion a felony crime punishable by life in prison?”

“Will you ammend the Constitution to make Christianity the official religion of the United States?”

Etc.

If the average Republican like JeffR or Headhunter was allowed to ask the Republican candidates any questions they want on national TV, it could be a disaster!! And even worse, the Republican candidates would have to come up with sensible-sounding answers to those questions!!!

[Mikeyali]

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
So far, only Ron Paul and John McCain have signed on to a YouTube/CNN Republican presidential primary debate. The front runners have all come up with lame excuses like “scheduling conflicts”.

In case you don’t know the YouTube debate format, anyone can make a video asking the cadidates a question, and submit it to YouTube. Then people vote, and the most popular “video questions” make it into the debate.

The Democratic candidates had a debate like this recently, and most Democrats seem to agree that (despite a couple of cutesy moments) the YouTube questions were a lot fresher than the old boring format where DC journalists ask the same boring questions. The YouTube format lets the voters ask the questions they want to ask!

So why won’t there be a Republican version? Is it because the GOP leadership thinks that if the true base of the GOP is allowed to show it’s face on national TV, that the party risks losing millions of independant votes? Maybe they’re afraid of questions from the GOP base like this, on national TV:

“Why don’t we just nuke Iraq, and get it over with?”

“Why don’t we just nuke Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Syria and Venezuela?”

“If you are elected, will you ban all types of abortion as your first act as president? Will you make abortion a felony crime punishable by life in prison?”

“Will you ammend the Constitution to make Christianity the official religion of the United States?”

Etc.

If the average Republican like JeffR or Headhunter was allowed to ask the Republican candidates any questions they want on national TV, it could be a disaster!! And even worse, the Republican candidates would have to come up with sensible-sounding answers to those questions!!! [/quote]

Actually I would be willing to bet that they aren’t doing it because the YouTube debates are retarded. It strikes me as childish and unprofessional. Your theory about losing independant votes is about as accurate as what your assumptions of what the “average” republican would ask. Such pokes show a pretty intolerant and ignorant view of republicans.

I am not a republican but I do live in Idaho with mostly republican friends and can tell you that the “average” republican lacks the zealotry of HH and the totalitarianism of JeffR. They are extremists.

mike

[Zap_Branigan]

Those Youtube debates were childish and embarassing. After seeing the horseshit the Democrats had to deal with I don’t blame the Republicans for not doing them.

Why won’t the Dems come on FoxNews?

[LIFTICVSMAXIMVS]

This is all just silliness. Were the YouTbe debates any good? not by a long shot–however, I guarantee you anyone not showing up is committing suicide because “the people” will view it as a weakness.

Frankly, I don’t know why this wasn’t done by email…I mean really, the technology has been there for about a decade. There is no reason why we need “journalists” asking questions if there were a method of picking “good” questions–maybe letting “the people” vote which questions to ask…?

Anyone not attending this debate is telling us they don’t care about our concerns–whether you liked the format or not.

[pat]

I don’t know, who gives a shit. I wouldn’t waste my time listening to it. If I want to be lied to, I just attend one of our corperate meetings.

[LIFTICVSMAXIMVS]

[quote]pat36 wrote:
I don’t know, who gives a shit. I wouldn’t waste my time listening to it. If I want to be lied to, I just attend one of our corperate meetings. [/quote]

What!? You don’t trust the “ministry of truth”. I think it is far easier to make value judgments when one actually watches candidates speak than if one just listens to 3rd party reports from spin-meisters.

[pookie]

I think they won’t do it simply because there is nothing to be gained from it for any of them. Most of the Republican “base” is made up of older Americans, many of whom probably don’t even know what a “youtube” is.

The legions of young people that are internet savvy are largely left-leaning, because when you’re young and dumb, you tend to lean left. When life kicks you around enough to make your smart and mean, you go right.

The only huge change that could happen would be if one of them made a huge blunder. So there’s a lot to lose with practically nothing to gain from it.

Maybe Fox can orchestrate one filled with softball questions, like they do on all their shows.

[JeffR]

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Brad61 wrote:
So far, only Ron Paul and John McCain have signed on to a YouTube/CNN Republican presidential primary debate. The front runners have all come up with lame excuses like “scheduling conflicts”.

In case you don’t know the YouTube debate format, anyone can make a video asking the cadidates a question, and submit it to YouTube. Then people vote, and the most popular “video questions” make it into the debate.

The Democratic candidates had a debate like this recently, and most Democrats seem to agree that (despite a couple of cutesy moments) the YouTube questions were a lot fresher than the old boring format where DC journalists ask the same boring questions. The YouTube format lets the voters ask the questions they want to ask!

So why won’t there be a Republican version? Is it because the GOP leadership thinks that if the true base of the GOP is allowed to show it’s face on national TV, that the party risks losing millions of independant votes? Maybe they’re afraid of questions from the GOP base like this, on national TV:

“Why don’t we just nuke Iraq, and get it over with?”

“Why don’t we just nuke Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Syria and Venezuela?”

“If you are elected, will you ban all types of abortion as your first act as president? Will you make abortion a felony crime punishable by life in prison?”

“Will you ammend the Constitution to make Christianity the official religion of the United States?”

Etc.

If the average Republican like JeffR or Headhunter was allowed to ask the Republican candidates any questions they want on national TV, it could be a disaster!! And even worse, the Republican candidates would have to come up with sensible-sounding answers to those questions!!!

Actually I would be willing to bet that they aren’t doing it because the YouTube debates are retarded. It strikes me as childish and unprofessional. Your theory about losing independant votes is about as accurate as what your assumptions of what the “average” republican would ask. Such pokes show a pretty intolerant and ignorant view of republicans.

I am not a republican but I do live in Idaho with mostly republican friends and can tell you that the “average” republican lacks the zealotry of HH and the totalitarianism of JeffR. They are extremists.

mike[/quote]

Thanks, mikey.

Oh, and the average American doesn’t wave guns around and throw a tantrum when people are frightened.

JeffR

[JeffR]

[quote]bradley wrote:
So far, only Ron Paul and John McCain have signed on to a YouTube/CNN Republican presidential primary debate. The front runners have all come up with lame excuses like “scheduling conflicts”.

In case you don’t know the YouTube debate format, anyone can make a video asking the cadidates a question, and submit it to YouTube. Then people vote, and the most popular “video questions” make it into the debate.

The Democratic candidates had a debate like this recently, and most Democrats seem to agree that (despite a couple of cutesy moments) the YouTube questions were a lot fresher than the old boring format where DC journalists ask the same boring questions. The YouTube format lets the voters ask the questions they want to ask!

So why won’t there be a Republican version? Is it because the GOP leadership thinks that if the true base of the GOP is allowed to show it’s face on national TV, that the party risks losing millions of independant votes? Maybe they’re afraid of questions from the GOP base like this, on national TV:

“Why don’t we just nuke Iraq, and get it over with?”

“Why don’t we just nuke Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Syria and Venezuela?”

“If you are elected, will you ban all types of abortion as your first act as president? Will you make abortion a felony crime punishable by life in prison?”

“Will you ammend the Constitution to make Christianity the official religion of the United States?”

Etc.

If the average Republican like JeffR or Headhunter was allowed to ask the Republican candidates any questions they want on national TV, it could be a disaster!! And even worse, the Republican candidates would have to come up with sensible-sounding answers to those questions!!! [/quote]

Hello, bradley.

I have to admit that I enjoy causing you so much discomfort.

It seems that half of your posts are about me.

I’d be flattered if it was from someone else.

I laughed out loud at the democrats. Nice selection of misfits. I was one of those people who watched for pure enjoyment.

Thanks for the laughs.

Oh, if I was asking the questions, they certainly wouldn’t be softballs.

Things like, “How do you propose to get bin laden as the Pakistani leadership appears afraid to confront him?”

Or, “How do you propose to lessen our reliance on Middle Eastern oil?”

Or, “How do you plan on securing our Southern Border?”

Things of that nature?

I have to admit, I would ask them if they have any theories about why democrats smell like fish.

JeffR

[Brad61]

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
I am not a republican but I do live in Idaho with mostly republican friends and can tell you that the “average” republican lacks the zealotry of HH and the totalitarianism of JeffR. They are extremists.
[/quote]

That’s good to hear. Maybe there is hope for the Republican party, after all.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Why won’t the Dems come on FoxNews?[/quote]

Democrats do go on FoxNews all the time, but I take it you are referring to the FoxNews Dem presidential debate which got cancelled. The rationale is that FoxNews operates more like an arm of the Republican party than a legitimate news channel. There are hundreds if not thousands of examples that give credence to this theory.

More specifically, candidates like Barack Obama are probably not happy seeing their picture on FoxNews with the caption “Osama Bin Laden” (which happened at least twice I believe). There is no excuse for that ever happening even once, even on a shitty two-bit local news station in Peoria, let alone a national network that wants to be taken seriously, and Obama has a legitimate beef.

When a national network repeatedly pulls that kind of bullshit, it’s inexcusable. Democrats participating in a FoxNews debate would legitimize Fox’s shady underhanded tactics, while boycotting the debate sends the message that Democrats don’t consider FoxNews to be credible.

Also, I’m sure you realize that there is a huge difference between taking questions from a partisan pundit like Brit Hume, and taking questions that were submitted by voters (non-pundits).

So anyway, I got part of the story wrong: CNN ultimately decided which YouTube questions made it into the Democratic debate. It wasn’t based on viewer votes. So now there are some right wing blogs who think they (the blogs, not CNN) should get to decide which questions get asked to the Republican candidates.

That would be the best possible development, in my opinion. Because right wingers have ‘worked the refs’ so fiercly (claiming media bias) it’s likely that CNN would cower and only pick softball questions and non-crazy questions for the Republicans. So I hope that CNN lets Right wing blogs like LittleGreenFootballs pick the questions, so that people can see the batshit crazy side of the GOP.

[Solid_Choke]

Actually I wouldn’t mind if more republicans didn’t show up. If it means more time for Ron Paul then I’m all for it. He is the only candidate who actually gives a damn about liberty. I don’t really agree with his immigration policy but ALL the other candidate of the two major parties are statists so if Ron Paul doesn’t win the primaries I’ll pretty much have to sit this election out. I just can’t bring myself to vote for a Juliani or Hillary which are pretty much the same person IMO.

[Mikeyali]

[quote]Solid_Choke wrote:
Actually I wouldn’t mind if more republicans didn’t show up. If it means more time for Ron Paul then I’m all for it. He is the only candidate who actually gives a damn about liberty. I don’t really agree with his immigration policy but ALL the other candidate of the two major parties are statists so if Ron Paul doesn’t win the primaries I’ll pretty much have to sit this election out. I just can’t bring myself to vote for a Juliani or Hillary which are pretty much the same person IMO.[/quote]

Yeah, I really wish Paul would take a step back from a couple of the conspiracy theory wackos that are attaching themselves to him, but I’d like to see the guy do well. He gets a little off track from time to time, and I hate his Iraq policy, but I still love the guy.

Between Thompson, him, or Gingrich, I might have to put some serious thought into it. What I can say for sure though is that I would vote for Hillary over Guliani, Romney, or McCain. shudder I actually said I would vote HILLARY. Now I need to go take a shower. Barry Goldwater, where are you?

mike

[Zap_Branigan]

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
I am not a republican but I do live in Idaho with mostly republican friends and can tell you that the “average” republican lacks the zealotry of HH and the totalitarianism of JeffR. They are extremists.

That’s good to hear. Maybe there is hope for the Republican party, after all.

Zap Branigan wrote:
Why won’t the Dems come on FoxNews?

Democrats do go on FoxNews all the time, but I take it you are referring to the FoxNews Dem presidential debate which got cancelled. The rationale is that FoxNews operates more like an arm of the Republican party than a legitimate news channel. There are hundreds if not thousands of examples that give credence to this theory.

More specifically, candidates like Barack Obama are probably not happy seeing their picture on FoxNews with the caption “Osama Bin Laden” (which happened at least twice I believe). There is no excuse for that ever happening even once, even on a shitty two-bit local news station in Peoria, let alone a national network that wants to be taken seriously, and Obama has a legitimate beef.

When a national network repeatedly pulls that kind of bullshit, it’s inexcusable. Democrats participating in a FoxNews debate would legitimize Fox’s shady underhanded tactics, while boycotting the debate sends the message that Democrats don’t consider FoxNews to be credible.
…[/quote]

MSNBC pulls the exact same kind of shit. Olbermann is an embarrassment. Someone recently posted a clip from MSNBC with a cation that read "Is Bush an Idiot?

The Republican candidates are not afraid to appear on that network and to talk to their biased commentators.

[Zap_Branigan]

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
…

Yeah, I really wish Paul would take a step back from a couple of the conspiracy theory wackos that are attaching themselves to him, but I’d like to see the guy do well. He gets a little off track from time to time, and I hate his Iraq policy, but I still love the guy.
…
mike[/quote]

I wouldn’t go so far as to say I love the guy but I would like to see him have an effect on the Republican party.

I too disagree with him on Iraq and think he has too much conspiracy nut about him but he isn’t all bad.

[LIFTICVSMAXIMVS]

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I too disagree with him on Iraq and think he has too much conspiracy nut about him but he isn’t all bad. [/quote]

Agreed. I attended a Ron Paul meet-up group to see what all the hub-bub was about a couple of weeks ago and out of 30 people a handful were definite whacos. This lady actually tried to tell me the powerlines by her appartment were used for mind control purposes.

She knew it was a fact because she read a story on the internet that showed a picture of the device attached to the power cable that just happened to look like the one by her house…does the future of this great country really depend on these people’s votes?

These whacos’ YouTube video questions are the ones that CNN will use to help discredit Ron Paul’s message…guilt by association.

[Brad61]

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
MSNBC pulls the exact same kind of shit. Olbermann is an embarrassment. Someone recently posted a clip from MSNBC with a cation that read "Is Bush an Idiot?

The Republican candidates are not afraid to appear on that network and to talk to their biased commentators.[/quote]

Nope, that’s different than what FoxNews does. Olbermann may be biased (though I doubt he’s as biased as you think. Saying that Bush sucks, does not automatically make anyone a radical liberal. LOTS of people say Bush sucks, all across the political spectrum).

I can’t give a better example of FoxNews’ bias than the Osama/Obama example I already gave. That’s one of the republican campaign talking points (Obama is secretly a Muslim, be afraid! He went to a Madrassa, etc) Actually he’s a Christian. But there’s Fox spreading the right wing talking points in a way that’s more effective than radio or print (with a photo, under the pretense of “Fair and Balanced” news). I don’t think MSNBC is so great either, but I’ll be surprised if you can find blatant examples that can match up with that.

[Zap_Branigan]

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I too disagree with him on Iraq and think he has too much conspiracy nut about him but he isn’t all bad.

Agreed. I attended a Ron Paul meet-up group to see what all the hub-bub was about a couple of weeks ago and out of 30 people a handful were definite whacos. This lady actually tried to tell me the powerlines by her appartment were used for mind control purposes.

She knew it was a fact because she read a story on the internet that showed a picture of the device attached to the power cable that just happened to look like the one by her house…does the future of this great country really depend on these people’s votes?

[/quote]

These people are everywhere in every country. Scary stuff.

[quote]

These whacos’ YouTube video questions are the ones that CNN will use to help discredit Ron Paul’s message…guilt by association.[/quote]

Probably but they will do it under the guise of entertainment. Same as the ridiculous questions and people the Democrats had to deal with.

[Zap_Branigan]

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
MSNBC pulls the exact same kind of shit. Olbermann is an embarrassment. Someone recently posted a clip from MSNBC with a cation that read "Is Bush an Idiot?

The Republican candidates are not afraid to appear on that network and to talk to their biased commentators.

Nope, that’s different than what FoxNews does. Olbermann may be biased (though I doubt he’s as biased as you think. Saying that Bush sucks, does not automatically make anyone a radical liberal. LOTS of people say Bush sucks, all across the political spectrum).

I can’t give a better example of FoxNews’ bias than the Osama/Obama example I already gave. That’s one of the republican campaign talking points (Obama is secretly a Muslim, be afraid! He went to a Madrassa, etc) Actually he’s a Christian. But there’s Fox spreading the right wing talking points in a way that’s more effective than radio or print (with a photo, under the pretense of “Fair and Balanced” news). I don’t think MSNBC is so great either, but I’ll be surprised if you can find blatant examples that can match up with that. [/quote]

How about CNN messing up Obama/Osama?

It is bias if Fox does it and innocent if CNN does it?

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/CNN_comments_on_Obama_gaffe_in_0101.html

CNN apologizes for Obama gaffe in Bin Laden graphic

[Mikeyali]

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Brad61 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
MSNBC pulls the exact same kind of shit. Olbermann is an embarrassment. Someone recently posted a clip from MSNBC with a cation that read "Is Bush an Idiot?

The Republican candidates are not afraid to appear on that network and to talk to their biased commentators.

Nope, that’s different than what FoxNews does. Olbermann may be biased (though I doubt he’s as biased as you think. Saying that Bush sucks, does not automatically make anyone a radical liberal. LOTS of people say Bush sucks, all across the political spectrum).

I can’t give a better example of FoxNews’ bias than the Osama/Obama example I already gave. That’s one of the republican campaign talking points (Obama is secretly a Muslim, be afraid! He went to a Madrassa, etc) Actually he’s a Christian. But there’s Fox spreading the right wing talking points in a way that’s more effective than radio or print (with a photo, under the pretense of “Fair and Balanced” news). I don’t think MSNBC is so great either, but I’ll be surprised if you can find blatant examples that can match up with that.

How about CNN messing up Obama/Osama?

It is bias if Fox does it and innocent if CNN does it?

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/CNN_comments_on_Obama_gaffe_in_0101.html

CNN apologizes for Obama gaffe in Bin Laden graphic [/quote]

Yeah, call me crazy, but I’m calling it a mistake, rather than blatant bias. You’ve got two guys with near-identical names that are headline news guys. That’s like when they gave the plaque to James Earl Jones on Martin Luther King Day, but instead they engraved the name James Earl Ray. And again, as an Idahoan, the only person I heard accuse Obama of being muslim was a democrat who said he is going to vote for Hillary because he, “can’t vote for that Muslim guy.”

I also recall Ted Kennedy saying, “Why don’t you ask Osama bin Laden, I mean Osama Obama – Obama” . That seems like another “joke” gone bad rather than a slip of the tongue. But I mean, since it was on Fox News they probably had a Ted Kennedy look alike in there to say it. Damn their evil bias. More often than not, these are simply accidents. That is unless you’re Mitt Romney, in which case you’re a moron. And a socialist.

mike

[Zap_Branigan]

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
…

Yeah, call me crazy, but I’m calling it a mistake, rather than blatant bias. You’ve got two guys with near-identical names that are headline news guys. That’s like when they gave the plaque to James Earl Jones on Martin Luther King Day, but instead they engraved the name James Earl Ray. …[/quote]

I am glad someone else remembers that.