I mean no matter what the question is, it's the liberal media's fault. Every question a GOP candidate doesn't like has the same answer.
Charles Pierce touches on something else about that debate. The candidates basically felt no compunction to even answer the questions they were asked.
Often they'd just decide they didn't like the question and answered another one no one had asked.
"There never has been a debate in which the panel seemed less relevant, and this isn't the fault of the three people on it. The folks behind all the podiums came to the stage wanting to say things, and damned if they weren't going to say them. It started when John Kasich answered a question about his biggest weakness by pointing out what know-nothing schlubs Donald Trump and Ben Carson are. Sequiturs? Non! It got worse. Trump bludgeoned Kasich in return about how much of Kasich's success as governor of Ohio was due to the fracking boom, and then mocked him for getting tough because he's polling so badly. Dr. Ben (The Blade) Carson spun his mathematical cotton candy into sweet swirls of complete non-fact. And Marco Rubio claimed that the bad press he's getting about missing votes—and, it must be said, for his going around talking about what a miserable job the Senate is—is a result of the gap between "the mainstream press" and conservative politicians. Jeb! Bush asked him "as a constituent" why he didn't walk away from the completely miserable existence forced upon him as a United States Senator. Rubio flashed back by reciting how many votes previous senators—citing Bob Graham, John Kerry, and the president—missed while they were running. Of course, none of them complained about their day jobs and, by the time Kerry ran, he was a decorated war hero, and a veteran senator who had led hearings into international money laundering and the drug trade. Marco Rubio was…speaker of the Florida House. Where is Lloyd Bentsen when we all need him?"
"But the highlight of the first hour, and the most vivid example of what was going on, was when Ted Cruz was asked about the budget deal that was struck this week between the Congress and the White House,and he replied by ripping the moderators up one side and down the other. This was the Tailgunner in full cry, channeling the spirit of the original Tailgunner when he called the last Democratic debate, "the Bolsheviks vs. the Mensheviks." Are you now, or have you ever been."
"This wasn't a lack of control. The format was fine. But there's nothing you can do about someone like Ted Cruz, who isn't encumbered by either truth or civility. Even defending the other candidates, he doesn't care what damage he does, as long as he can stand atop the rubble. Come to think of it, that could be said of pretty much all of these people."
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a39260/gop-debate-question-doesnt-matter/
"The real bias is in the journalists' weak attempts to create drama."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/10/29/presidential-debates-often-stink-but-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-liberal-media-bias/
I think that's spot on. The CNN debate was very tiresome in this respect. Almost every question there was along the line of 'Donald Trump likes this for lunch. Why is he wrong?'
Meanwhile there is a movement afoot among the GOP candidates themselves to set up their own format in future debates. Just like the House GOP is always at war with its Speaker, the candidates are now taking aim at the RNC for doing such a bad job.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/10/29/presidential-debates-often-stink-but-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-liberal-media-bias/
Josh Barro on Chris Hayes last night made the good point that Ted Cruz's war on the moderators doesn't benefit all the GOP candidates equally. The 'cage match' approach actually suits some, he argued like Carly Fiorina who would have been fine with another marathon 3 and a half hour debate like second debate.
Now Ben Carson is declaring that it's time to change the format as there isn't enough time to answer questions. That was true but then of course, as Tom Brown points out:
"Regarding Carson's demands that the debates be restructured, I found these two quotes:
"There's not enough time to talk about your plans..."
"Bennett noted that the Carson and Trump campaigns forced CNBC to shorten the debate"
Hmmm, is this a case of (as Jason pointed out in a recent post) A < B, B < C and C < A?
I.e. mob "logic?" Are the candidates becoming personifications of the irrational emergent "representative agent" of the mob?''
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/10/sorry-beltway-pundits-but-trumps-night.html?showComment=1446143411771#c2061979397374964370
Yet, I think in this case Ben's demands are coherent. The second debate was way too long and this one left too little time to answer questions properly.
The real problem is there are too many frigging GOP candidates. At the very least they ought to can the kid's table already. Sorry, if you have less than 3% just watch it from home.
P.S. The good news is that is the next GOP debate is under two weeks away and for this one Chris Christie may well not have the requisite 3% poll numbers to be in the main debate-I'm careful not say adults' table.
In that vein, maybe we shouldn't do away with the kid's table debate so fast. It would be worth it just to see Christie confined to it.
For more on Christie, here is the NY Times telling him to go home.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/30/opinion/governor-chris-christie-time-to-go-home.html?_r=0
Trouble is they don't want him there either. NJ was very clear that they wanted him to resign if he ran for President.
Charles Pierce touches on something else about that debate. The candidates basically felt no compunction to even answer the questions they were asked.
Often they'd just decide they didn't like the question and answered another one no one had asked.
"There never has been a debate in which the panel seemed less relevant, and this isn't the fault of the three people on it. The folks behind all the podiums came to the stage wanting to say things, and damned if they weren't going to say them. It started when John Kasich answered a question about his biggest weakness by pointing out what know-nothing schlubs Donald Trump and Ben Carson are. Sequiturs? Non! It got worse. Trump bludgeoned Kasich in return about how much of Kasich's success as governor of Ohio was due to the fracking boom, and then mocked him for getting tough because he's polling so badly. Dr. Ben (The Blade) Carson spun his mathematical cotton candy into sweet swirls of complete non-fact. And Marco Rubio claimed that the bad press he's getting about missing votes—and, it must be said, for his going around talking about what a miserable job the Senate is—is a result of the gap between "the mainstream press" and conservative politicians. Jeb! Bush asked him "as a constituent" why he didn't walk away from the completely miserable existence forced upon him as a United States Senator. Rubio flashed back by reciting how many votes previous senators—citing Bob Graham, John Kerry, and the president—missed while they were running. Of course, none of them complained about their day jobs and, by the time Kerry ran, he was a decorated war hero, and a veteran senator who had led hearings into international money laundering and the drug trade. Marco Rubio was…speaker of the Florida House. Where is Lloyd Bentsen when we all need him?"
"But the highlight of the first hour, and the most vivid example of what was going on, was when Ted Cruz was asked about the budget deal that was struck this week between the Congress and the White House,and he replied by ripping the moderators up one side and down the other. This was the Tailgunner in full cry, channeling the spirit of the original Tailgunner when he called the last Democratic debate, "the Bolsheviks vs. the Mensheviks." Are you now, or have you ever been."
"This wasn't a lack of control. The format was fine. But there's nothing you can do about someone like Ted Cruz, who isn't encumbered by either truth or civility. Even defending the other candidates, he doesn't care what damage he does, as long as he can stand atop the rubble. Come to think of it, that could be said of pretty much all of these people."
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a39260/gop-debate-question-doesnt-matter/
I'm still not sure how to characterize what happened with the moderators. The consensus seems to be they did a horrible job. I do agree with Paul Waldman here. It's not that the moderators are liberal-and how has there been this terrible media bias when the first debate was on Fox and the third was on CNBC-which if you've ever watched the station you know prefers Republicans?
You could just as soon call CNBC Stephen Moore TV.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/10/29/presidential-debates-often-stink-but-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-liberal-media-bias/
I think that's spot on. The CNN debate was very tiresome in this respect. Almost every question there was along the line of 'Donald Trump likes this for lunch. Why is he wrong?'
Meanwhile there is a movement afoot among the GOP candidates themselves to set up their own format in future debates. Just like the House GOP is always at war with its Speaker, the candidates are now taking aim at the RNC for doing such a bad job.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/10/29/presidential-debates-often-stink-but-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-liberal-media-bias/
Josh Barro on Chris Hayes last night made the good point that Ted Cruz's war on the moderators doesn't benefit all the GOP candidates equally. The 'cage match' approach actually suits some, he argued like Carly Fiorina who would have been fine with another marathon 3 and a half hour debate like second debate.
Now Ben Carson is declaring that it's time to change the format as there isn't enough time to answer questions. That was true but then of course, as Tom Brown points out:
"Regarding Carson's demands that the debates be restructured, I found these two quotes:
"There's not enough time to talk about your plans..."
"Bennett noted that the Carson and Trump campaigns forced CNBC to shorten the debate"
Hmmm, is this a case of (as Jason pointed out in a recent post) A < B, B < C and C < A?
I.e. mob "logic?" Are the candidates becoming personifications of the irrational emergent "representative agent" of the mob?''
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/10/sorry-beltway-pundits-but-trumps-night.html?showComment=1446143411771#c2061979397374964370
Yet, I think in this case Ben's demands are coherent. The second debate was way too long and this one left too little time to answer questions properly.
The real problem is there are too many frigging GOP candidates. At the very least they ought to can the kid's table already. Sorry, if you have less than 3% just watch it from home.
P.S. The good news is that is the next GOP debate is under two weeks away and for this one Chris Christie may well not have the requisite 3% poll numbers to be in the main debate-I'm careful not say adults' table.
In that vein, maybe we shouldn't do away with the kid's table debate so fast. It would be worth it just to see Christie confined to it.
For more on Christie, here is the NY Times telling him to go home.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/30/opinion/governor-chris-christie-time-to-go-home.html?_r=0
Trouble is they don't want him there either. NJ was very clear that they wanted him to resign if he ran for President.
I liked that esquire quote.
ReplyDeleteAnd for this:
"The 'cage match' approach actually suits some, he argued like Carly Fiorina..."
Or like Cruz himself! If Cruz didn't have the media to bag on, he wouldn't have got the applause line he did.
Let's say the debates are moderated by right wingers... that would be a total sham, but it does have the possibility of fun as well. Imagine Ann Coulter asking all the questions... the only one that's going to smell like a rose from that encounter is Trump. Cruz tried to dodge the immigration question when he was asked (by a Fox News interviewer -- not during a debate) if he supported deporting 11 million like Trump. He accused the Fox host of asking questions like a liberal media host would. He never answered.
See I'd love to see Ann Coulter do the debate because she's totally in the tank for Trump.
DeleteLike I am-in the GOP primary!
Rush would basically turn it into a contest for who can insult Hillary Clinton the most
O/T, Mike, you might like this:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.vox.com/2015/10/23/9603028/conservative-marketing-scam
Here's another liar: Rand Paul... and his promised "filibuster" ... all 19 minutes of it:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/30/rand-pauls-heart-isnt-even-in-filibustering-anymore-it-seems/
I'd think that Paul's base: libertarians, who pride themselves on being logical and rational (even thought many accept the voodoo of Austrian econ and gold buggery)... who are probably the least fundamentalist (and most atheistic) of Republicans... who claim they accept science (some even climate science... like Cochrane an Sumner)... they must feel like Paul has insulted their intelligence with that pathetic performance, don't you think?
This slate article gets it exactly right:
ReplyDelete"The biggest problem was not what the moderators asked but that they were unprepared for the candidates to deny the very premise of their questions. Exhibit A: Ben Carson flat-out lied about his relationship with a shady nutritional company. Exhibit B: Donald Trump denied he ever said something his own website quotes him as saying."
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/30/rnc_pulls_plug_on_nbc_news_debate_partnership.html
These moderators have to be prepared to be painted as the bad guys by the GOP candidates and their simian fans in the audience. They have to have the facts right there at their disposal for follow ups to the dodge they know is going to come... preferably easily Googlable facts so the home viewer can type in a few works and check for themselves. They have to know going in that these GOP candidates average 90% full of shit in their responses, and they won't even pretend to answer questions they don't like. Assume the worst: prepare as if it's Franco, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and Mao that'll be answering questions. These candidates are lying scum and should be treated as such.
The Dems should run ad after ad of losing, whining, overpaid athletes complaining like spoiled little girls having a tantrum about "unfair" refs and calls... drawing the analogy so people understand why the Democrats don't huff and puff and stamp their feet after they're asked tough questions.
I'm gratified to see that most of the day today, searching for "Ben Carson" in Google News brought up articles highlighting his Mannatech lies.
ReplyDeleteSomebody needs to ask him if lying is OK in his religion.
Coulter got on the wrong side of this one regarding the moderators:
ReplyDeletehttp://ringoffireradio.com/2015/10/30/ann-coulter-criticizes-gops-media-bashing-which-is-weir/
Shame on her! She needs to learn to "lead from behind" but appear like she's out in front. What do you bet she flops on this one? Even Trump abandoned her here... must be tough trying to predict what to say to appear to always agree with the loose cannon you're supporting will eventually say... without waiting for him to actually say it. And even that (waiting) is no guarantee (e.g. she may have thought it was safe to go after Zuckerberg and H1 visas, but that was yesterday. History rewrites are done to meet the needs of today)
Well, I'm glad to see it anyway. The problem with all these lies is it's impossible to keep them all straight. You're bound to end up on the wrong side of the pitchforks eventually. Like trying to keep your head on your shoulders in the French Revolution.
That is except for the fact that the mob logic of the base lives and breaths cognitive dissonance. A typical requirement for cult membership. So A<B, B<C and C<A makes perfect sense to them. It's the emotional purity that counts. Ideological purity is too much to ask for these days. That discomfort they feel from the vestiges of rationality left in their skulls (a shrunken rationality which has the thankless job of somehow inventing ways to justify the ever shifting nonsense they're expected to swallow) can be written off as a by product of the liberal media trying to confuse them. "Testing" their faith like Satan.
I don't know what is is about me and Ann Coulter but we seem to be agreeing these days on any number of things.
DeleteWhat happened? Donald Trump! LOL
Mike, if the GOP candidates do decide to "take control" of the debates, wouldn't it be hilarious if they all agree that the only questions they have to answer is ones they themselves write: So Ben Carson only has to answer questions that Ben Carson asks, and Trump only asks questions that Trump asks, etc. I wouldn't put it past them!
ReplyDelete(I can't take credit for thinking that one up... Chris Matthews briefly joked about that today)
But the visuals on that are hilarious. They're so fragile they can only tolerate being questioned by themselves.
Hilary should start making fun of them right now with some jibes like that. Let's see an SNL skit about it... these candidates need to be ridiculed for being sniveling, spoiled cry baby children.
Mike.... Reince Priebus is the new "Toadie / gang crier" character from Mad Max 2, The Road Warrior. He's the guy who feels he has to laugh along with the rest of the motorcycle gang of rapists and savages when he tries to catch the steel boomerang and it ends up cutting all his fingers off.
DeleteMark Levine goes on a tear about what an incompetent boob Priebus is... that he should be immediately fired. That this disaster of the debates just didn't start with CNBC, or CNN... it actually goes back to "you know who" ... Levine said!... he said "all" of these media corporations are "left wing at the top" ... so he's calling Fox as being left wingers. Rachael Maddow went into some detail about this today... hilarious!
DeleteAnd there's Priebus, being interviewed on Fox after Cruz suggested Levine and Limbaugh and Hannity be the moderators... and he says "I agree with that." He agrees that Levine, the guy who said Priebus was an incompetent boob who should be immediately fired... that he should be the next moderator.
He is the Toadie! His fingers have been cut off, and the mob is laughing, and he's holding his mutilated hand... looking at the bleeding stumps, and he's looking around at the mob laughing, and he's starting to laugh too... like a pathetic weaseling toadie!
Dude-I literally just watched this on Rachel Maddow. Is that where you saw this?
DeleteYes, exactly, that's what I said. ...she should have run the clip from Mad Max though... that would have really been funny.
DeleteOops! I guess I missed that part. She had a really funny piece about jeb as well where he took some snake oil to increase his political energy
DeleteYes, it's pretty sad all this carping about the media. It really is now seriously being argued that the future debates should be moderated by Rush, Hannity, Levine, etc.
ReplyDeleteTed Cruz called for that on Fox last night.
Ed Rogers argues that after last night's outrage by CNBC all Republican debates have to have Republican moderators.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/10/30/the-insiders-cnbc-has-probably-changed-gop-presidential-campaign-debates-forever/
However, I do agree with Catherine Rampel that the way these debates have been moderated does deserve criticism. Not because they are all liberals trying to humiliate Republicans but because that a lot of their antics are pretty lame attempts to create drama and get this candidate to criticize this one-mostly this time getting others to criticize Trump.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lessons-learned/2015/10/29/7d23d98e-7e78-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html
the problem is that the structure of the GOP debates is just so chaotic with all those candidates and it tends to reward behavior.
Because there are so many candidates either you have to have a debate that is way too long-the second debate or one where no candidate has a chance to answer questions properly-the third debate.
Because of these pressures a candidate is rewarded for going over the time limitjs, interrupting other caniddates and playing gotcha.
Though as Rampell points out the candidates in the third debate may have figured out that it doesn't pay to attack another candidate because then the one attacked gets so much time to respond.
For whatever reason, Carly Fiorina is very good at getting more time than anyone else. She did it with two very different formats in debate two on CNN and three on CNBC.
Carly Fiorina seems to be:
ReplyDelete1. The pedantic student who is always best prepared for the exam. Kind of like Rubio she' excels when she's rehearsed for a particular subject. She memorizes and studies what she will say. It's all planned like with him, too.
2. She is ruthless in her ability to interrupt and talk over other candidates.