David Postman covers the current reticence of Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney to join the CNN/YouTube debate.
There is a robust debate going on in the blogoshpere about the issue. Hugh Hewitt says no, Patrick Ruffini says yes. Some conservative bloggers are running a petition to keep the GOP candidates on board.
Taking a step back from the details of the debate about the debate, Dean Barnett makes some salient points about Ruffini's premise. Mainly, that in the question of which comes first, the passion or the online organization, it's generally the passion that starts first. Ruffini seems to think large, effective, online operations are possible in politics in the absence of a powerful motivating force. I don't think so. As such, his concern seems overblown and a tad misplaced.
That being said, and while a greater intellectual case can be made against joining the YouTube debate, smart politics probably mean candidates shouldn't skip it. After leading Democrats weaseled out of a debate on Fox News (hosted, ironically, by the Congressional Black Caucus), it's better for Republicans to claim the moral high ground of not appearing to wuss out of major MSM forums, not matter how potentially stupid they might be.
It does actually look like Mitt Romney and perhaps Rudy Giuliani may well appear if the scheduling can get worked out. The CNN/YouTube Einstein that thought a debate in the last two weeks of a fundraising quarter would be a good scheduling choice deserves a head check. That dynamic breeds a nightmare for campaign schedulers and shouldn't be overlooked as a real challenge.
Candidates should probably come prepared to express appropriate, righteous indignation at inappropriate or ridiculous questions. Based on the questions at Democratic debate and the specter of CNN screening the YouTube submissions such a scenario certainly seems plausible. Still, they should show up.
UPDATE: Last sentence fixed.
UPDATE II: And the title is fixed too. Clearly not enough sleep after the draining trip to DC.
Posted by Eric Earling at July 28, 2007 05:07 PM | Email Thishttp://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/viewbydate.asp?id=1625
Posted by: Mike H on July 28, 2007 06:28 PMBailing is the right call.
Posted by: Hinton on July 28, 2007 08:34 PMNewt called it right. If the GOP keeps doing debates with lefty lapdogs moderating and controlling the questions they might as well let Pelosi choose the GOP nominee.
How about if the dems submit to some GOP type questions for a change??? Lead or prepare to get spanked in the next election.
On the upside, the democrats appear to be running against Bush in '08. Haven't they heard he isn't up for re-election or are they unaware that congressional approval is at 14%.
Posted by: Andy on July 29, 2007 10:04 AMUsing the Internet (asynchronous) for a debate (synchronous) is like connecting an iPhone to a US West local twisted pair line to make toll calls.
The power of social networking is that I can create my own "debate" by having 24 x 7 access to all the candidates opinions and statements via http, streaming, and other channels...plus I can get a million different spins and comments from people like me, or not like me.
Posted by: John Bailo on July 29, 2007 10:44 AM
1. Can actively participate in; and
2. Proactively want the candidates to participate in.
I hope you and your readers will help sign the petition at http://savethedebate.com.
Posted by: David All on July 29, 2007 12:41 PM"Republicans ducking this debate(if that's what they're doing) makes them look no better than the "courageous" democrats who bowed to nutroots pressure and ducked the Fox News debates. If Republican candidates want to look just as 'in-touch' as democrats with the YouTube generation, they will sign up tomorrow to do the debate. Fred Thompson, with all his acting experience, would be the perfect fit for this debate format. Why hasn't he signed on? Now yes, Romney gets it right that some of the video questions posted were outright silly, and the office of the President should be treated with more respect. But what does that have to do with showing up for the debate? If you think it's silly, fine. But go to the debate and say so, instead of issuing a disconnected press release through a campaign minion.... And besides: ducking tough debates is for democrats. "
Responses to "Republicans To Skip YouTube Debate?"
RedBeard Says:
July 29th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
The proper way to handle this is to show up and be prepared to demolish the slanted liberal questions with thoughtful responses.
Not showing up is a sign of both elitism and bad judgement.
Riteaidbob Says:
July 29th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
Another debate...(yawn)
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Can we just hurry up and start electing?
DITTO! to both.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 29, 2007 12:43 PMhttp://politics.wizbangblog.com/2007/07/27/save-the-debate.php
http://www.savethedebate.com/
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 29, 2007 12:46 PMP.S. Eric, I think you're distorting Ruffini's argument. Ruffini is the former eCampaign Director of the RNC.
Posted by: Patrick on July 29, 2007 02:39 PMIt shouldn't be about how creative I can make my question. It should be about the question and the answer!
Using this format is going to be problematic at best- See the snowman question and others as example. Submitting questions using E-mail, chat, forums, etc. would be better. What is needed is serious questions being asked by someone who can push for clarification where needed, not amateur movie makers trying to show off to the country. This debate is to help us decide on who would be the best candidate for the President of the United States, not America's Funniest Home Videos.
Will it make a difference to me if someone does or does not participate in this debate? No. Ultimately, it will be the candidate's positions which will earn my vote.
Posted by: David on July 29, 2007 03:15 PMOK, after my initial "huh??" that actually makes sense.
If they blow-off the goofy YouTubers, the perception is they are afraid (does that sound familiar??). In this fast moving internet age, they cannot affrod that perception to become reality by virtue of a gleeful leftnut internet whispering campaign.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 29, 2007 03:26 PMThe Hillary, Edwards, Obama 3 ring circus are tripping over each other to win the farthest of the far left kooks.
Do you see them clamoring to have Bill O'reilly moderate a debate? No. They aren't trying to win the moderates or the right- they're playing to the loons that they are PRAYING show up to vote- or at least that an ACORN person will submit a ballot for.
Were there any questions from the U-boob audience about whether they are for or against doctors drilling holes babies during the 3rd trimester of a pregnancy???? I didn't think so. Did they ask whether they believe a 13 year old girl needs her parents consent to get an abortion? I didn't think so.
Walk around the this one like the stinky pile of dog poo that it is.
Posted by: Andy on July 29, 2007 08:28 PMI could possibly see this debacle happening if Fox News did the question screening... but DCCN?
No matter what the candidates do, there will be a "gleeful leftnut internet whispering campaign... or what you might call, a moveon.org leftnut internet screaming campaign.
Since that's going to happen anyway, there is absolutely no need to feed the fringe-leftist beast by providing YouTube footage they can modify into GOP blithering idiocy.
Posted by: Hinton on July 29, 2007 10:16 PMRagnar, I am surprised with your view. This is your first comment of 100 that I have disagreed with.
You don't debate for this position with stoned out questioners.
Posted by: swatter on July 30, 2007 07:18 AMReally? That didn't stop the CNN moderator from asking the GOP what they think should be taught in an 8th grade science class. Hell they may as well have Senator Kennedy moderate if that's the debate they are running.
Posted by: Andy on July 30, 2007 09:30 PMThe GOP used to love to call for the abolishing the department of Education as late as Bush Sr. I am not sure why so many in the GOP are scared of answering such a great question now.
Ron Paul I know is still in favor of abolishing the federal dept of education and has not been afraid to say so publically. He has my vote!
Travis Pahl
Posted by: Travis Pahl on July 30, 2007 09:42 PMAgain- How is it OK to ask the GOP about creationism being mandated in schools but not ok to ask Democrats about partial birth abortion? This could only happen if lapdogs on the left are controlling the debates.
Posted by: Andy on July 31, 2007 07:52 AMThere's something about a soprano snowman (with no snowballs), asking supposedly adult humans about global warming, that captures the essence of the male Democrat voter.
Posted by: Rey Smith on July 31, 2007 02:36 PMBut the real reason that Giuliani and McCain bagged out on the YouTube debate is that YouTube is the only stronghold of Ron Paul. It is his turf, and they know that by going there they will only enhance publicity for Ron Paul.
Ron Paul is a threat if he ever breaks into the MSM.
Giuliani and McCain had nothing to gain and lots to lose by appearing in this venue. So they wimped out. But the people should recognize this as a cowardly dodge, and indicitive of something to hide and should swerve away from these two near-neocons as a result.
Oh, and Travis, the party you are talking about in 24 is not the GOP at all. It's the Libertarian Party. The GOP hasn't been for small government since Newt Gingrich.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on August 3, 2007 08:36 PM