Kristi Noem Has a New Explanation for Why She Shot Her Dog
Can the Current Universities Be Saved?
A ‘Morning Joe’ Exclusive Column: It Was One Long, Problematic Morning Indeed at...
Joe Biden, Dearborn Shahid, Commits Political Suicide via Hamas Appeasement
The Public Doesn't Trust the 'Democracy-Saving' Media
Taxpayers Are Subsidizing College Extremism
Radical Leftists Claim Oil Companies Are Committing Climate Murder
Inflation Reduction Act's Dirty Little Secret: Largest Premium Increase Ever for Medicare...
Biden Administration Continues to Misdiagnose and Mistreat the Violent Crime Problem
A Lack of Imagination
Democrat Unity on Border Crisis Showing Signs of Cracking
Did the House of Representatives Just Outlaw Quoting Parts of the New Testament?
Blinken, the Terminator
RFK Jr. Offers Odd Pledge to Joe Biden in Attempt to Get Him...
Wait Until You Hear What Iran Is Offering Expelled US College Students
Tipsheet

Now Reporters Can "Swiftboat," Too

I've got to give Hugh credit for pointing out something that has escaped other political observers. He is essentially arguing that the YouTube debate allows the MSM to get the benefit of attacking candidates -- without being punished for it.
Advertisement


In essense, this is similar to what political candidates do when the "Swiftboat" (or IAFF) somebody. By finding surrogates who are willing to attack their opponent, these candidates get to keep their hands clean, and stay above the fray. (Of course, they've always been able to do this through quotes -- but now they can embarrass a candidate during a debate and put him on the spot).

I still think Republicans ought to participate in a YouTube debate. But if I were an advisor for one of the frontrunners (who have the most to lose), I'm not sure I'd feel the same way ...

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement