Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23
  1.    #1  
    You know, while watching some of the Dem debate tonite I realized something. Watching the Dems is a bit like watching that soccer team in the Sly Stallone movie from 1981 where the POWs play against the German prison guards. Replace the POWs with special olympic players and it pretty much sums up my frustration with the Dems - their heart is in the right place; you know the other team is pure evil, but a better organized team; and you just sit and hope for a miracle that the good guys will eventually win.

    My point? Why the heck did the Dems pull this YouTube stunt? The GOP would NEVER do that. NEVER. It leads to getting too far off script and would require too much interaction with real people versus well screened GOP loyalist to toss them softballs. So while I enjoyed the idea behind it and appreciated it, you can guarantee the GOP operatives all had their Tivos recording and salvitating over the answers the Dems gave. And you can bet your a$$ the GOP will not be having YouTube questions submitted during any debates, be it Presidential Primaries or the actual Presidential Election.
  2. #2  
    Wrong:

    CNN and YouTube have just announced that St. Petersburg, Fla., will be the debate site for the Republican presidential candidates on Sept. 17. It follows this Monday’s CNN/YouTube debate for the Democrats in Charleston, S.C.
  3.    #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by Parityone View Post
    Wrong:

    CNN and YouTube have just announced that St. Petersburg, Fla., will be the debate site for the Republican presidential candidates on Sept. 17. It follows this Monday’s CNN/YouTube debate for the Democrats in Charleston, S.C.
    Thanks. Glad to be wrong on this one! Shocking, but it will be fun to watch.

    Personally, I liked the format but kept thinking about what Karl Rove would do to this. Now if the Repub's are jumping into the YouTube mix...well the Dems should have some decent return fire (whether they can use it as effectively is another matter).
  4. #4  
    What would be nice is having both parties on stage together..... pre-primaries.
  5. #5  
    YouTube may have just cost Clinton or Obama $400,000 per year (minus minimum wage). Ouch.

    And it's amazing that someone like Biden can have a net worth so low, relatively. I guess all his money went into his campaign.
  6.    #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    What would be nice is having both parties on stage together..... pre-primaries.
    That would be cool. It might give the parties less time to position themselves and define the opposing candidates. Let the candidate's define themselves....what noble idea.
  7.    #7  
    Hmmm....it is starting to look like I may not have been too far off base afterall.

    Four days after the Democratic debate in Charleston, S.C,. more than 400 questions directed to the GOP presidential field have been uploaded on YouTube -- targeted at Republicans scheduled to get their turn at videopopulism on Sept. 17.

    But so far, only Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and Rep. Ron Paul (Tex.) have agreed to participate in the debate, co-hosted by Republican Party of Florida in St. Petersburg.

    "Aside from those two candidates, we haven't heard from anyone else," said Sam Feist of CNN, who's co-sponsoring the debate with the popular videosharing site.
    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-t...be_1.html#more
  8. #8  
    Where have the real debates gone? It is not a debate, IMO, unless the moderator/questioner has opportunity to follow-up and challenge the responses.

    These we have seen are just glorified press-releases as far as I think.

    I hope PBS will eventually give this format the depth and time that it deserves.
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    My point? Why the heck did the Dems pull this YouTube stunt?
    Same reason politicians pull most stunts. Looking for attention.
    The GOP would NEVER do that. NEVER. It leads to getting too far off script and would require too much interaction with real people versus well screened GOP loyalist to toss them softballs.
    How are YouTube questions any different? They're not interacting with people in realtime. They're answering screened and pre-recorded questions.
    So while I enjoyed the idea behind it and appreciated it, you can guarantee the GOP operatives all had their Tivos recording and salvitating over the answers the Dems gave.
    I think Comedy Central was probably more interested. I loved Jon Stewart's take on it.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  10.    #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    I think Comedy Central was probably more interested. I loved Jon Stewart's take on it.
    Agreed! I about wet myself laughing over the recreation of that infamous footstool YouTube video!
  11. #11  
    What a shame I did not get in to this earlier; my wife was diagnosed with terminal cancer a couple of weeks ago. Anyway, I listened to a bit of both UTube debates and came away with the believe that bunches of these people cannot be real and if they are, they have no idea what the real world is about. I found both to be embarrassing.

    Ben
  12.    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    ...my wife was diagnosed with terminal cancer a couple of weeks ago.
    I'm deeply sorry to hear that Ben.
  13. #13  
    I appreciate the opportunity to watch candidates from different parties holding debates in different enviroments and with different demographics pitching the questions.....both sympathizing groups as well as groups with varying points of view. Both are enlightening. The Dems did the youtube thing (and it appears the GOP will too), the Rep held debates with CNN (which is certainly further left than right).........but did the Dems ever say why they backed out and refused to do a debate when it was announced it was to be hosted by Fox News?
  14.    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    but did the Dems ever say why they backed out and refused to do a debate when it was announced it was to be hosted by Fox News?
    Maybe when Fox hires a leftie that is as extreme as Glen Beck (CNN) is for the right, the Dems will start to think about it. Or at least a Lou Dobbs...but I don't even think Fox has a Lou-Dobbs-of-the-left, do they?

    Put another way...one channel is more "fair and balanced" than the other. Not perfect, but certainly much more balanced than the other.
  15. #15  
    No, they did not say why. The reason though is simple, they did not want to answer any hard questions. Listening to their answers - they say what they want, but not how to get there. Not once has any of them given a detailed plan on how to do what they want, other than to raise our taxes to pay for more government involvement.

    Also, thanks to those who responded about my wife's situation. I was pleasantly surprised. These last two weeks have been a roller coaster.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    I appreciate the opportunity to watch candidates from different parties holding debates in different enviroments and with different demographics pitching the questions.....both sympathizing groups as well as groups with varying points of view. Both are enlightening. The Dems did the youtube thing (and it appears the GOP will too), the Rep held debates with CNN (which is certainly further left than right).........but did the Dems ever say why they backed out and refused to do a debate when it was announced it was to be hosted by Fox News?
  16. #16  
    faux news unashamedly advocates for junior and the GOP.

    Their most popular and influential commentator is both a bully and an ignorant demagogue.

    O'really routinely shouts downs voices that contradict his -- or that are able to knowledgably quote back to him his own words. O'really is someone who's willing to twist facts to suit his own creative narrative (like inventing a slander against the Daily Kos, or accusing other networks of disloyalty for showing the coffins of the dead, returning home.)

    Faux is owned by an Australian who has demonstrated repeatedly that his loyalty is first last and always to greed -- irrespective of any sanctimonious pose. For example Murdoch has repeatedly kowtowed to the Red Commie Chinese, obediently bowing to censorship and "truth" manipulation.

    The Democrats are understandably reluctant to help Faux from pretending to be neutral news outfit. Faux is not a conventional media enterprise -- rather faux is a part of an organization that consciously advocates on behalf the GOP and junior.
    Last edited by BARYE; 07/30/2007 at 08:21 AM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  17.    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    No, they did not say why.
    I think its pretty clear they don't want to give credence to a channel that pretends to be fair and balanced but has demonstrated over and over again they are not.

    The reason though is simple, they did not want to answer any hard questions. Listening to their answers - they say what they want, but not how to get there. Not once has any of them given a detailed plan on how to do what they want, other than to raise our taxes to pay for more government involvement.
    When all else fails, just go ahead and toss some rhetoric into the discussion. But I can see your point...I mean Rudy has outlined a detailed plan to....wait....he doesn't have any plans either. Oh but I know he was the mayor of NYC during 9/11!
  18. #18  
    So all the reasons are left up to the individual's political alliance and personal bias to decide why the Dems were unwilling to face questions in a debate sponsored by one of the biggest news orgs.

    CNN is certainly left leaning and the GOP did not run from them.....and if they did I would demand the same level explanation of why they were not willing to face the questions that would have been posed to them.

    I think the answer should come from them directly....and not left to supports to speculate as to why the Dems were not willing go to a debate sponsored by Fox News (are they biased against the news org, were they scared of the possible questions, etc...). If they are unwilling to face questions in a organized debate sponsored by one of the biggest news orgs in the world, then they should say why they are unwilling to answer their questions.
  19.    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    If they are unwilling to face questions in a organized debate sponsored by one of the biggest news orgs in the world, then they should say why they are unwilling to answer their questions.
    I cannot answer for them. But my speculative assessment of the situation is that they don't care to legitimize a non-news organization. They are an entertainment channel that has one voice and one voice only. Obviously you see Fox News as something different than a right-wing entertainment channel.

    CNN may well lean left, but at least they have two people that lean pretty far right (especially Beck) to offer some semblence of diversity. That is not something that could be said about Fox News.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    my wife's situation. I was pleasantly surprised. These last two weeks have been a roller coaster.

    Ben
    Ben....you are in our prayers. We went through similar situations on both sides of the spectrum with my wife's mom and my dad's dad. My wife and I wish you the most!!!!
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions