Monday, August 13, 2007
|
|
Will Romney Take Part in a YouTube Debate?
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
1:33 PM
|
Now that the YouTube debate appears to be back on, the question is: Will Mitt Romney continue to hold out?
My guess is he will get in. Here's why:
When two or three top candidates skip an event (such as Iowa), the result is the event is diminished. This is the reason that McCain was so quick to get out the same day Rudy announced he wouldn't participate in the Straw Poll. But when only one frontrunner skips a venue, I think the result is that the candidate is diminished.
What is more, as the only frontrunner to compete in the Iowa Straw Poll, Romney has earned a certain moral high ground (in the sense that he appears to be willing to take on anybody, anytime). Skipping this debate would seem to undermine that image.
So my bet is he gives in and participates in this thing.
|
|
Ronmney was opposed NOT opposed to the YouTube FORUM. He was opposed to taking questions from cartoons (which is goofy don't you think), regardless of how serious the questioner felt the question was. Romney was the first Republican candidate to make an significant Internet presence including YouTube central to his campaign. He has answered questions from YouTube even on TV.
So why do you all keep framing YouTube debate and Romney's reluctance (Giuliani also said NO) as though Romney has an irrational fear of YouTube? Maybe you'll assure everyone that the Republican YouTube Debate will not have the same high School quality of the Democrat UTube Debate?
Please give the winner of the Ohio Straw Pole (by the greatest margin in the history of the poll) the kind respect that his is asking from the UToobers by stating Romney's position accurately.
And why do you think YouTube is the voice of the Republican party let alone the American people? Who decided they were speaking for the all of America?
I've been a Republican all of my 60 years and do not see the melding of brilliant minds on the YouTube. Out of the thousands of submissions, who get's to decide what is important to ask the candidates - and to which candidate? |
|
Matt, I agree with you that if the YouTube debate is back on, that Romney should include himself.
And I believe that he will, despite the fact that CNN's circus atmosphere will include midget clowns juggling bowling pins and squirting water baloons before Santa Claus and The Tooth Fairy get to ask their spurious questions.
But I wanted to address the following which you wrote;
--------------------
"When two or three top candidates skip an event (such as Iowa), the result is the event is diminished. This is the reason that McCain was so quick to get out the same day Rudy announced he wouldn't participate in the Straw Poll. But when only one frontrunner skips a venue, I think the result is that the candidate is diminished."
--------------------
Matt, you're spot on !
Had McCain stayed in the Iowa straw poll, Rudy Giuliani would have singularly been diminished as the "one" candidate who dropped out.
But because McCain feared that by remaining in the Iowa straw poll he would risk getting his rear end handed to him by Team Romney, thus McCain decided to...exit, stage left (!), thereby diminishing the event itself.
What's ironic, is that ever since Rudy and McCain dropped out of the straw poll, you've been playing both sides of the coin.
On the one hand, you were saying that when/if Romney wins the Iowa straw poll, it's not really all that big of a deal because Rudy and McCain weren't there, and nobody cares about the straw poll anyhow.
At the very same time that you were saying the straw poll isn't such a big deal, you were saying that if Romney underperforms or the Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs candidates such as Ron Paul perform well, it could impactfully "change the race."
With the Iowa straw poll, you were saying, "If the coin turns up 'heads,' then Romney's opponents win, and if it's 'tails,' then Romney loses."
|
|
Rudy and John skipped the Iowa straw poll because they can read published polling data. They knew they would lose. They did.
They did not want to be seen as second and third place candidates. This does NOT diminish the importance of the event but it does expose the fear of the mayor and senator of losing to Romney. In the beginning they ALL promised to be there but only Romney, of the three in the so-call top tier, kept his word. Why don't you write about that?
To present it the way you do is intended to minimize Romney's victory and it once again shows a regretable bias in your analysis.
It certainly makes me wonder about the true importance of the YouTube debate. I can only that you assume everyone but Romney will do well. |
|
Rudy has said he will participate in the YouTube debate.
Also, was there a straw poll in Ohio I didn't hear about??? |
|
... isn't about the candidates, it's about giggly exhibitionism by the questioners, and cynical exploitation of them by the news media.
Romney should stay away. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree that the first debate on YouTube was dumb. Why could the questioners just stand in front of a camera and ask their questions? I think the next debate will be more substantive, and should be presented by somnething other than CNN, like CSPAN. |
|
The YouTube technology offers tremendous potential and hope. It COULD be used very effectively to capture real people (and smart ones, too) asking really important questions. The fact that so much stupidity and banality was captured during and came to characterize the Democratic debate was, I suspect, attribute to CNN and only to CNN. I hope they have learned their lesson, but I am willing to bet not.
There is a lot of Republican and conservative thinking being captured, much of it available on the Internet for anyone who is willing to scour, that DOES a good job of letting candidates discuss and elaborate on their platforms and positions. I believe the fact remains -- even if CNN selected intelligent questions from seemingly real, everyday people, no candidate can provide a decent answer to anything in 60 seconds. So, even if the questions get better for the September debate, I'm willing to bet the answers won't be in any more detail. |
|
Will Ron Paul participate in the YouTube debates?
That's what we all want to know. Why are they trying to suppress Ron Paul who is the greatest Presidential candidate since Ross Perot...
Wait a minute, Ron Paul is RP... and Ross Perot is RP... and they were both apparently far and away the better candidates for office in their day... and you never do see the two of them together... |
|
|
The youtube/cnn event was noise. It's hard to get much lower than free public relations and branding using the presidential field. |
|
|
getting younger. Elderly voters care about as much about "YOU TUBE" as they do Paris Hilton's sex life!..........And younger voters will not even show at the polls if they had a party the night before. |
|
Mitt should jump in and make another good showing in the debates. It'd be especially good for his campaign after his successful win in the straw poll.
Ron Paul will probably get about as many votes as Ross Perot as well.
The YouTube debate will be lame like all the other debates. A real debate would allow the candidates to question and discuss directly with one another, but that will never happen. While the current formats are less than desirable, at least we get an opportunity to get to know the candidates better. The more the better. Get in and debate. |
|
I oppose the foolishness in which Presidential candidates have participated since the era when Clinton was trying to be President Elvis. His shameless pandering to the crass degraded the office of the Presidency.
Later, candidates Al Gore and George W. Bush proved that, at least for a time, they were, "two silly little men," as David Letterman referred to them, by trying to be jesters on his program.
Lately, candidates have diminished themselves by paying homage to imbeciles such as Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Jay Leno, and others. It's bad enough that the jokes of these talk show hosts pass for news for most of the American public; it's embarrassing that Presidential candidates lend credibility to the fools by appearing on their programs.
The YouTube debate phenomenon is the latest effort to destroy the decorum that is due the Presidency. Rather than finding men who can measure up to the Presidency, this country seems determined to keep dragging the Presidency down. Voters will eventually be looking to elect a Jerry Springer for POTUS. |
|
|
Its pretty dang funny that a guy who strapped a dog to the roof of his car is concerned about a novel debate undermining his image! |
|
Soothsayer,
If that's the worst allegation anybody can come up with about Romney, he's alright.
I mean, if the Kennedys can't find any dirt on you, then none exists.
Then again, even if the Kennedys found out you got a woman drunk, drove your car into a body of water and left her to drown, it's not like the Kennedys would ever have REPORTED such a thing.
(Ouch)
And it's not like Mitt Romney was snorting cocaine back in the day---like good ol' Barry Obama admits to doing. |
|
|
Certainly, Romney is too sophisicated and mature (I hope) to participate on that cutesy You-Tube juvenile Snowman level. (A Snowman in the sweltering Summertime??) That type of "feel-good" corny fun is totally un-Presidential....though it is a perfict fit for the mental & emotionally stunted feminizied Donkey mentality.... Ignore that tripe, altogether, which would tend to discredit it... |
|
Sorry Matt, I get nervous when I write stuff on these blogs (self-conscious I guess). I meant Iowa not Ohio (you probably figured that out for yourself).
I'm happy to see that you actually read the reader comments - and comment yourself!. Some Bloggers don't seem to bother. They just pull the pin and toss the grenade and see how much damage they can do. Thank you for showing some integrity. It's refreshing.
I was referring to the fact that INITIALLY Rudy Giuliani said, just as Romney did, that he would not participate (and for the same reasons). I don't remember if John did nor not, but that is probably irrelevant. Why the spotlight on Romney - oh ya, he won the IOWA straw poll.
The point is that Romney is no more afraid of YouTube than anyone else. It is that bias I was referring to. |
|
|
Egads ... I did it again. I meant Matt not Mark. |
|
|
Since Romney did NOT strap his family pet to the top of his car your groundless point is childish. Wow, where do you guys come from? I guess you're just one the the pin pullers. |
|
Some bloggers don't read comments because they end up tailoring what they write to appease commenters (and we all know that the folks who comment on blogs are not necessarily representative of the folks who read blogs). So some bloggers intentionally avoid comments, so that they don't fall into that trap...
On the other hand, I find a lot of really good insight in our comments. If you buy the "wisdom of crowds" argument, then reading comments is a must. I also see some blog posts as a way to "focus group" my ideas. Let's say I'm going to go on TV or the radio to talk about an issue. One way to flush out lots of ideas is to engage in a debate with commenters.
In a sense, having folks willing to read your stuff -- and comment on it -- is a tremendous resource that allows one to fine-tune your arguments...
|
|
Matt Lewis wrote;
-------------------
"One way to flush out lots of ideas is to engage in a debate with commenters."
-------------------
Matt, when have you engaged in debate with commenters ?
|
|
What ever you want to call the YouTube event, it is NOT a debate. In fact, there has not been a true debate in this election cycle. Nor has there been one for a long time. The Democratic YouTube event was a joke and a mockery of the Office of the President. I would love to see a true debate between the candidates. Let’s see Sens. Clinton and Obama debate their approach to the Islamofascist war against the USA. Let’s see Mayor Giuliane and Gov Romney debate the roll of the Federal Government in abortion. Seeing these front runners make opening statements and then rebuttals would be a debate.
No well just see how they respond to inane questions from Snowmen about what the Federal Government will do to keep their carrots disease free when interacting with snowwomen of questionable character.
|
|
How's that? He showed he can buy more votes than Ron Paul? That all it takes to win in this modern 'democracy' is money with no ideas, experience, or backbone? That somehow people in Iowa (mostly white Protestant) matter more than people in more diverse communities?
No, he just showed he's the best at racing to kiss the butt of the "base". |
|
|
|
PPP has just released their SC Poll. Thompson 22, Rudy 18, Romney 17. That means Romney will win on the strength of his GOTV. Romney will blitz SC with ads and organization. If Thompson loses SC he has major trouble.
The Straw poll in IA is paying off. The slingshot strategy works.
His leads in IA and NH are also increasing. His national poll numbers are at new highs (CBS 13, ARG 18) and he is with in striking distance of Rudy in the RAS tracking poll at 16. |
|
|
|