The American Mind

Mitt “The Presidency should be held at a higher level” Romney would be wise to recall the last time a Presidential candidate thought a segment of the population was “beneath” him. George Bush Sr. refused to be interviewed by MTV for months until he realized that he was losing the youth vote badly to the sax-playing, Arsenio Hall-appearing, rock-n-roll Bill Clinton.

In the big picture if candidates don’t go to the CNN/YouTube debate it won’t hurt them. Democrats abandoned Fox News with only right-wingers like me calling them “chicken.” If the Republican nominee avoided a YouTube debate next fall that would be a bigger issue (and mistake).

I’m of the camp that you have to go where the voters are. Putting clips on YouTube does that.

Isn’t kissing babies a little “demeaning?” Yet a candidate won’t stop that even if there’s a chance he or she will get puked on (see The War Room). A YouTube debate would be slanted and loaded with hit questions, but a skilled politician could side-step his way through the attacks. A really good politician would turn the stacked deck into an advantage. Imagine Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan in one of these debates?

This one’s a tough one - Hugh Hewitt is right about one point - leaving CNN’s left-leaning screeners of the questions could be a recipe for disaster. While there may be a backlash against CNN if they only ask highly loaded, lose-lose type questions, the damage will already be done to most or all the GOP candidates.

At this point, the candidates have to be considering how they can best win the vote of the GOP base that will be involved in the primary. Getting served up “And when did you stop verbally abusing your second ex-wife, Mr. Giulani?” types of questions will be pretty counter-productive.

And let’s not think these types of questions will only come from anti-GOPers. Those who ignore history may be doomed to get hit with a question with the negative impact of the push-polling done to McCain by the Bush campaign in 2000.

If CNN producers try to get them with hit questions the candidates should brush it aside. They need to be pro-active instead of reactive. That would look more Presidential than what Biden and Obama did.

I agree with Sean on his last point. A candidate should be able to reframe a question to fairly present his or her own point if they are an able debater.

For the R’s to blithely say, “YouTube is a biased medium,” and ignore the debate would be a grave mistake. Calling an open source space like YouTube “liberal” seems a tad disingenuous. If they can walk the line and somehow are willing to write off CNN as the Dems seem willing to write off Fox then they might be able to score a point or two.

Otherwise, they’re writing off a lot of young voters.

Please. The Demo UTube “debate” was quite possibly the most inane politcal exercise since… well, I can’t say actually because I can’t possibly know them all. But within memory, it ranks with stuff like Dukakis riding in a tank and Kerry’s “Can I get me a huntn’ license he-ya?”

Good Lord, is this the way we should frame serious discussion?

Mr. Bill Saturday Night Live ‘toons?

And if anyone thinks CNN won’t load the Qs I must suggest that they are either ignorant or already lefties who lap up CNN slant like lunchtime soup.

Did anyone hear a new, never-before asked question?

Sean, I think your analysis and some of others’ which you use to support your position is a mite off. Let’s take a look:

>>> “There were a few video clips that were worthless.

And so a good amount of time was spent for… what? Entertainment (read: CNN ratings) puposes. If I want to be entertained I’ll watch Austin City Limits, thank you. I want straight answers and positions without the slapstick sideshow.

>>>”That’s the wrong way to look at it.”

To the contrary, Romney’s take is exactly the way to look at political discussion.

Is it not true that what we’ve heard over the years is the need to change the political discourse, to take out sound bites and frivolity?

And have not our conservative friends suggested that America has way to much focus on all things Hollywood-ish?

Yet here we are witnessing a whole new gimick. Call it “Politainment”. And it’s not Rush or Michael Moore or Hannity or Geraffalo participating in the schtick.

It’s the pols themselves.

Romney, on this point at least, is quite right.

>>>”… but after every video Anderson Cooper asked the question to help the candidates figure out what the YouTuber was trying to get at.”

So what, exactly, was the purpose of the UTube clips?

>>[Patrick Ruffini] “..only Sen. Biden looked like a fool”

Um, they all looked like fools… just for being there and sitting through it.

>>[Patrick Ruffini]”hard to attack Democrats for avoiding Fox News if Republicans avoid YouTube.”

That’s just silly. Nobody - repeat - NOBODY will care if the repubs don’t show up to do two-hour UTube commerical.

I must say this whole UTube Debate thing strikes me the same way as “educators” who are always clamering for the latest-greatest flashy fad tool “to keep kids engaged”.

The question one might ask is; if there are all these savy young netheads out there, why can’t they just mosey over to the candidate’s websites and compare position statements?

That’d be, like, work or something.

If Republicans can’t stand up to YouTube, how can they stand up to Osama?

…not that Chris Matthews would ever actually ask that. I mean, no matter how often Republicans turn out to be idiots who don’t know anything about America’s enemies, their “credentials” are always beyond question, right?