RNC pulling all Candidates out of Presidential Debates?

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

UrbanCowboy1

Some cowboys gots smarts real good like me.
Aug 8, 2006
4,023
2,001
1,743
Phoenix, AZ
#4
Haha! Touché Dr. Ford.
I lol'd at it.


Reading a bit more into this, this is less about R's vs D's than than it is about intra-party power struggles. Dem's have this issue too, I think. Apparently the debate commission deals with the represented campaign and NOT the party leadership. My guess is if they approve then the party's will just deal directly with each other and the campaigns will just have to go along. It's consolidation in the entities that have more staying power.

All-in-all I don't think it's a great move as I like decision making power being put into transitory groups. Leaves less chance for corruption.
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
26,396
10,982
1,743
Earth
#5
They are pulling them out of debates that are sponsored and controlled by "the Commission on Presidential Debates" because they feel it's partisan because of the moderators they use...that doesn't mean they are pulling them out of all debates.
 

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
7,266
3,068
1,743
47
DFW
#6
They are pulling them out of debates that are sponsored and controlled by "the Commission on Presidential Debates" because they feel it's partisan because of the moderators they use...that doesn't mean they are pulling them out of all debates.
Like that hyper-liberal Chris Wallace? I agree that’s probably their reasoning. It doesn’t mean they’re right.
 

UrbanCowboy1

Some cowboys gots smarts real good like me.
Aug 8, 2006
4,023
2,001
1,743
Phoenix, AZ
#7
They are pulling them out of debates that are sponsored and controlled by "the Commission on Presidential Debates" because they feel it's partisan because of the moderators they use...that doesn't mean they are pulling them out of all debates.
Disagree. Your bolded sentence is what they are saying is the reason, but this is much more about the party leadership keeping power to themselves. See my post above.
 

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
7,266
3,068
1,743
47
DFW
#9
New York times....

You can always count on them to misrepresent anything Republican.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Did you even read the article? It’s pretty objective, if you ask me. It’s written by Maggie Haberman, who constantly got roasted by liberals on Twitter for giving Trump too much favorable coverage. Trump, meanwhile, didn’t think she was fair to him. Having both sides upset with you can be a sign you’re doing something right.
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
12,617
4,624
1,743
#10
New York times....

You can always count on them to misrepresent anything Republican.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Did you even read the article? It’s pretty objective, if you ask me. It’s written by Maggie Haberman, who constantly got roasted by liberals on Twitter for giving Trump too much favorable coverage. Trump, meanwhile, didn’t think she was fair to him. Having both sides upset with you can be a sign you’re doing something right.
Look at the headline. That is what matters most. Many people won't read past that headline. They make it seem like they will not participate in any debates. If you ask me it's more a negotiating tactic to try and get more impartial moderators and to get ones that won't give away questions before the debate like they did with Hillary.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

UrbanCowboy1

Some cowboys gots smarts real good like me.
Aug 8, 2006
4,023
2,001
1,743
Phoenix, AZ
#11
Look at the headline. That is what matters most. Many people won't read past that headline. They make it seem like they will not participate in any debates. If you ask me it's more a negotiating tactic to try and get more impartial moderators and to get ones that won't give away questions before the debate like they did with Hillary.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Oy vey, dude. The times reporter wrote down what the RNC leadership told them. This is the story the RNC wants published and it's exactly how they want it published.

The reasons behind the vote are explained in the posts above. This isn't a media bias issue. Those exist all over the place - but this isn't one of those times.

You: