Republican presidential candidates are attempting to boycott or sidestep a YouTube style debate on network television. In many ways this is an intelligence test for these Republican candidates, and they are failing in a very public and dramatic fashion.
The YouTube debate that the Democratic candidates agreed to, and participated in was a revolutionary moment in media. McLuhan's observation that the medium is the message still holds true. The next president will debate with the technologically savvy public, not the Washington media lapdogs whom they find so comforting.
The YouTube debates revealed a citizenry who were smart and hip and who weren't going to allow for a moment for the weasel word answers they've been hearing from Washington for so many years. Republicans in particular need to relearn public speaking.
The flatland of politics as usual was intersected for the first time in history by a medium that was not passive, but active, entertaining, and powerful. More importantly, it is so compelling that the candidates who choose to marginalize or ignore the phenomenon will soon regret it.
The YouTube style debates are raising the quality of public debate and maybe, just maybe, forcing the quality of the candidates to be exposed in ways a democratic society will require in the 21st century.
Article comments
1 - RJ
The YouTube debate was largely inane. I mean, a snowman questioning Presidential candidates? Gimme a break.
But there is a better reason for the GOP to dodge this debate than mere inanity. This debate is to be hosted by CNN, a lib-left cable news network. And CNN gets to hand-pick just which YouTube questions will be asked. So, it's quite possible that many/most of the questions they pick will be little more than personal and/or ideological attacks, with a question mark at the end. (Kinda like push-polling.)
And CNN will be able to get away with stacking the deck in this manner by saying "Hey, they weren't our questions. If the Republican candidates have a problem with the questions, they need to take that up with the average American citizens who asked those questions."
Such a defense by CNN would be highly disingenuous, but it would be difficult-to-impossible for the candidates to rebut that argument without seeming hostile to the electorate. So, lib-left CNN gets to use YouTube loons to humiliate (and therefore politically damage) Republican Presidential candidates without taking any of the blame for their partisanship.
So, yeah, I can definitely see why the GOP candidates would dodge this debate. (Just like the Dems recently dodged a debate that was to be hosted by FoxNews...)
2 - Dave Nalle
As of this afternoon there was only 1 candidate who hadn't signed on for the YouTube debate. I think it's a bit soon to write them all off as dinosaurs.
Dave
3 - RJ
Dave:
Cite? Which candidate has refused? Which candidates haven't given a response yet?
4 - Dave Nalle
Giuliani and Romney had not officially signed on as of a Washington Post article on wednesday. I think Romney doesn't like the format and Giuliani hadn't officially signed on yet, but I think he was going to.
Dave
5 - Baronius
I dunno. I like my Democrats gimmicky and desperate for youth voters, and my Republicans curmudgeonly and out of touch. The old days, huh?
6 - krasicki
"The YouTube debate was largely inane. I mean, a snowman questioning Presidential candidates? Gimme a break."
RJ,
Give me the break instead. We have a president who thinks god has spoken to him (and given him the advice to perpetuate a concentration camp on Guantanamo, torture prisoners, and execute a plan of perpetual war). We have a vice-president who didn't think he was part of the executive office. We have an Attorney General whose nose grows every time he's asked to tell the truth. We have a Secretary of State who has so botched up foreign relations that Michael Moore is considered more dangerous than the madmen who are being paid to be our allies in Iraq.
And you think answering the question of a snowman is insulting to the office of the presidency? That snowman was a conservative.
7 - Arch Conservative
"This debate is to be hosted by CNN, a lib-left cable news network. And CNN gets to hand-pick just which YouTube questions will be asked."
Exactly....when the Dems agree to a debate hosted by Fox News then maybe the Repubs will go to a debate hosted by perpetrators of bullshit leftist propaganda.
8 - Lee Richards
LIBERAL:(the word Arch--and others--fear and hate so much)--
"Favorable to progress or reform;in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom;favoring freedom of action;pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocrcies or monarchies;free from prejudice or bigotry;open minded and tolerant;characterized by generosity;free."
A real conservative debates ideas and issues, instead of always spinning stereotypes and slinging brainless labels.
9 - Lumpy
Lee. arch did use the quite accurate term 'left' rather than 'liberal' in his last comment, so maybe he is seeing the light and realizrs that republicans are liberals too.
10 - Arch Conservative
A real conservative debates ideas and issues, instead of always spinning stereotypes and slinging brainless labels.
Yeah and real liberals aren't afraid to go on Fox news and debate their ideas slapnuts!
11 - zingzing
"slapnuts?"
come on, archie. that's from 1995 or something. get some new material.
but good on you proving his point.
12 - Jonathan Scanlan
I have to admit I find the comments rather confusing. I mean, isn't it cowardice to avoid a debate of your ideas in general? Regardless of who it is with.
I'd have thought that offering contrary ideas to your viewership was a positive thing for long term politics and fosters genuine debate and discussion.
Are ideologies and party aliances so entrenched in US politics that swinging voters don't count?
13 - RJ
I think I pretty much called this one:
But there is a ... reason for the GOP to dodge this debate ... This debate is to be hosted by CNN, a lib-left cable news network. And CNN gets to hand-pick just which YouTube questions will be asked. So, it's quite possible that many/most of the questions they pick will be little more than personal and/or ideological attacks, with a question mark at the end. (Kinda like push-polling.)
And CNN will be able to get away with stacking the deck in this manner by saying "Hey, they weren't our questions. If the Republican candidates have a problem with the questions, they need to take that up with the average American citizens who asked those questions."
Such a defense by CNN would be highly disingenuous, but it would be difficult-to-impossible for the candidates to rebut that argument without seeming hostile to the electorate. So, lib-left CNN gets to use YouTube loons to humiliate (and therefore politically damage) Republican Presidential candidates without taking any of the blame for their partisanship.
So, yeah, I can definitely see why the GOP candidates would dodge this debate. (Just like the Dems recently dodged a debate that was to be hosted by FoxNews...)
The only thing I got wrong was that CNN got BUSTED for their hand-picked questions, which included queries from Clinton campaign plants, Obama supporters, Edwards supporters, liberal union activists, etc.