Republican National Committee Dumps NBC Partnership for GOP Debate

Republican National Committee Dumps NBC Partnership for GOP Debate

“The Republican National Committee has decided to move forward without NBC’s participation in the February debate in Houston, Texas. The RNC has awarded the debate to CNN, who will broadcast it on Thursday, February 25 in Houston at a location to be decided. The RNC is ensuring the partnership with Telemundo and conservative partners National Review and Salem Communications will continue as planned” said Priebus in the statement.

The official decision to sever ties with the network follows Priebus’ vow to suspend NBC in a letter to the network sent days after the highly criticized GOP debate on October 28[SUP]th[/SUP] hosted by CNBC. He said CNBC’s “questions were inaccurate or downright offensive.”
At the conclusion of the CNBC debate, the RNC chairman released a statement praising the way the candidates handled the situation despite the “extremely disappointing” performance by the moderators.

Click to expand...

Republican National Committee Dumps NBC Partnership for GOP Debate | Fox Business

I know, I know, it is from Fox but they are the only ones that mentioned any reasons for the cancellation in the report. Politico and others ran about 3 paragraphs with no reason attached.

Good deal. I guess it was all fun and games till someone got poked in the eye. NBC will lose the millions that CNN is going to make.

RNC's circus
so RNC gets to decide who interviews the clowns

NonoBadDog said:

Republican National Committee Dumps NBC Partnership for GOP Debate


Republican National Committee Dumps NBC Partnership for GOP Debate | Fox Business

I know, I know, it is form Fox but they are the only ones that mentioned any reasons for the cancellation in the report. Politico and others ran about 3 paragraphs with no reason attached.

Good deal. I guess it was all fun and games till someone got poked in the eye. Now NBC and lose the millions that CNN is going to make now.

Click to expand...

Which is not really a good thing, because they've only ensured that more weak debates will be held by CNN. It was Tapper's CNN debate that set the tone for the rest of the debates. The first debate hosted by Fox was actually a decent debate, when you consider the time constraints that come with that many bodies on stage. But the Tapper debate went with all of the personality bickering that goes with a Bravo-distributed reality tv series. Thereafter, each debate has gone the same way. CNBC's only true additional fault was having moderators who were still in character. I have come to believe guys like Jim Cramer have no souls, because they act like toys and cartoon characters rather than human beings. Is there a moment where he doesn't act like a cocaine-induced rent-a-broker?

Fiddytree said:

Which is not really a good thing, because they've only ensured that more weak debates will be held by CNN. It was Tapper's CNN debate that set the tone for the rest of the debates. The first debate hosted by Fox was actually a decent debate, when you consider the time constraints that come with that many bodies on stage. But the Tapper debate went with all of the personality bickering that goes with a Bravo-distributed reality tv series. Thereafter, each debate has gone the same way.

Click to expand...

I think it is a good thing after the last hack job NBC did. I want a debate about issues that Republicans and conservatives are concerned about. If it was the presidential debate it would be different. I think the best debate so far was the last one with Fox.

NonoBadDog said:

I think it is a good thing after the last hack job NBC did. I want a debate about issues that Republicans and conservatives are concerned about. If it was the presidential debate it would be different. I think the best debate so far was the last one with Fox.

Click to expand...

It was CNN that did the hack job first. It was the quintessential opposite thing that the RNC wanted in their primary debates--at least if we are going be their internal and public surveys a couple years ago (the latter which I participated in).

They're attacking CNBC because it's NBC and MSNBC's family, not because they truly were disgusted by the tone of the debate.

If you want a serious debate "about the issues," you've only had one. All of the others were trash tv, whether it was Fox, CNN, or CNBC.

Fiddytree said:

It was CNN that did the hack job first. It was the quintessential opposite thing that the RNC wanted in their primary debates--at least if we are going be their internal and public surveys a couple years ago (the latter which I participated in).

They're attacking CNBC because it's NBC and MSNBC's family, not because they truly were disgusted by the tone of the debate.

Click to expand...

I guess we are discussing which hack job was the worst. :cheers:

NBC was terrible. I could have done a better job and I am an old mechanic.

NonoBadDog said:

I guess we are discussing which hack job was the worst. :cheers:

NBC was terrible. I could have done a better job and I am an old mechanic.

Click to expand...

Almost all of them have been utter ****e. Any time you let Trump waste an hour of our lives talking about how much the world wants to blow him and worship his image (and conversely, how the world would be destroyed by anyone but Trump), you lose any sort of clout in claiming that the Party is being "serious."

Fiddytree said:

Almost all of them have been utter ****e. Any time you let Trump waste an hour of our lives talking about how much the world wants to blow him and worship his image (and conversely, how the world would be destroyed by anyone but Trump), you lose any sort of clout in claiming that the Party is being "serious."

Click to expand...

I would rather listen to Trump than Shrillary. I am not a Trump fan. I don't trust the guy. If he is nominated then I will just hold my nose and vote for him.

NonoBadDog said:

I would rather listen to Trump than Shrillary. I am not a Trump fan. I don't trust the guy. If he is nominated then I will just hold my nose and vote for him.

Click to expand...

And that is precisely the whole problem with this primary.

For 7 years Republicans have correctly said that Obama was too inexperienced, we cared too much about the "wow factor," and "had no substance."

Republicans for years had been able to point to a whole back bench of experienced, competent, serious Governors that will overturn the Democratic Party's mandate on governance. They certainly have become a force to be reckoned with.

For 3 years, the RNC correctly pointed out that the Republican primary in 2012 was too long, had too many candidates, and focused entirely too much on personal bickering rather than a differentiated, but still unified front against the Democratic Party and the President.

And then all of those experienced Governors and experienced Senators come out to announce. The kind of bench the Republican Party hasn't seen since before Ronald Reagan...and what happens?

We have conservatives, libertarians, populists, and so on accept the notion that Donald Trump--a man with zero political and government experience, who stands for nothing at all but his grotesque image, throws nothing but gloriously delusional candy to the masses, insults damn near everyone, and has no plan at all--could or would be the nominee and that it's okay to "hold their nose to vote for him." Christ, Aaron Burr would come off looking like a goldmine in comparison to this scourge.

I'd vote for Hillary in a heartbeat, and I was pretty damn convinced until this summer that there was little chance that I was not going to be voting for the GOP nominee.

Where is the seriousness of this Party? If Trump becomes the nominee, the Republican Party deserves blowback.

Fiddytree said:

And that is precisely the whole problem with this primary.

For 7 years Republicans have correctly said that Obama was too inexperienced, we cared too much about the "wow factor," and "had no substance."

Republicans for years had been able to point to a whole back bench of experienced, competent, serious Governors that will overturn the Democratic Party's mandate on governance. They certainly have become a force to be reckoned with.

For 3 years, the RNC correctly pointed out that the Republican primary in 2012 was too long, had too many candidates, and focused entirely too much on personal bickering rather than a differentiated, but still unified front against the Democratic Party and the President.

And then all of those experienced Governors and experienced Senators come out to announce. The kind of bench the Republican Party hasn't seen since before Ronald Reagan...and what happens?

We have conservatives, libertarians, populists, and so on accept the notion that Donald Trump--a man with zero political and government experience, who stands for nothing at all but his grotesque image, throws nothing but gloriously delusional candy to the masses, insults damn near everyone, and has no plan at all--could or would be the nominee and that it's okay to "hold their nose to vote for them."

I'd vote for Hillary in a heartbeat, and I was pretty damn convinced until this summer that there was little chance that I was not going to be voting for the GOP nominee.

Where is the seriousness of this Party? If Trump becomes the nominee, the Republican Party deserves blowback.

Click to expand...

It's called anger. People are angry at the establishment, politicians that are there for their own benefit, politicians that say they are going to do one thing and then do the opposite and angry at the people in the other party. The Republican politicians have been doing this for decades and it is biting them in the ass. Trump says what they want to hear. People, regardless of side, vote emotions and have no idea what the president actually has to be in order to be a good president.

NonoBadDog said:

It's called anger.

[...]

Trump says what they want to hear.
[...]

People, regardless of side, vote emotions and have no idea what the president actually has to be in order to be a good president.

Click to expand...

But you will take the plunge right along with them.

A substantial portion of the GOP think that the President should be judged on the exact same basis as they do with their television and talk radio pundit. They've taken that phone book like from Buckley to the literal extreme and for some there's no going back.

This is why the GOP debates have been a damned travesty.

And that is why I will be voting for the Democrat if Trump becomes the nominee.

Fiddytree said:

But you will take the plunge right along with them.

This is why the GOP debates have been a damned travesty. A substantial portion of the GOP think that the President should be judged on the exact same basis as they do with their television and talk radio pundit. They've taken that phone book like from Buckley to the literal extreme and for some there's no going back.

And that is why I will be voting for the Democrat if Trump becomes the nominee.

Click to expand...

What choice do I have? Hillary? No ****ing way. She belongs in jail. She is the most dishonest hack that has ever been elected into any office. She just hasn't been charged.

NonoBadDog said:

What choice do I have? Hillary? No ****ing way. She belongs in jail. She is the most dishonest hack that has ever been elected into any office. She just hasn't been charged.

Click to expand...

Even Hamilton could find it in himself to make movement for Jefferson in order to prevent Burr.

What does that tell you?

Fiddytree said:

Even Hamilton could find it in himself to make movement for Jefferson in order to prevent Burr.

What does that tell you?

Click to expand...

It tells me that I am still not going to vote for Hillary.

Fiddytree said:

But you will take the plunge right along with them.

A substantial portion of the GOP think that the President should be judged on the exact same basis as they do with their television and talk radio pundit. They've taken that phone book like from Buckley to the literal extreme and for some there's no going back.

This is why the GOP debates have been a damned travesty.

And that is why I will be voting for the Democrat if Trump becomes the nominee.

Click to expand...

while i will not pretend the quality of the debates has been elevated, that speaks to the quality of the debaters
i do find the debates have been other than a "travesty"
because they have compared and contrasted each of the candidates' positions
to that end the RNC debates have been found quite effective

allow me to speculate that what you actually find lacking is the quality of the candidates engaged in the debates

justabubba said:

RNC's circus
so RNC gets to decide who interviews the clowns

Click to expand...

No, they get to decide who moderates the debates. Any network can interview any candidate by inviting them and having the invitation accepted.

fmw said:

No, they get to decide who moderates the debates. Any network can interview any candidate by inviting them and having the invitation accepted.

Click to expand...

and the moderators DO interview the candidates
have you not noticed that their role is that of one who asks questions of the interviewee/GOP clown
your post mistakenly presents that moderators do not conduct interviews. and yet they do. in this instance, as part of the RNC circus

justabubba said:

and the moderators DO interview the candidates
have you not noticed that their role is that of one who asks questions of the interviewee/GOP clown
your post mistakenly presents that moderators do not conduct interviews. and yet they do. in this instance, as part of the RNC circus

Click to expand...

I guess it went right over your head.

justabubba said:

and the moderators DO interview the candidates

Click to expand...

That isn't what a moderator is supposed to do.

jmotivator said:

That isn't what a moderator is supposed to do.

Click to expand...

i see them asking each candidate/GOP-clown questions
what do you see differently

justabubba said:

i see them asking each candidate/GOP-clown questions
what do you see differently

Click to expand...

And actual debate would be the moderator (only need one) giving the panel a viable topic and then letting each candidate have their say, and then let them mutually discuss it.

Moderator questions would be like "Give me your opinion of the Iran Nuclear agreement and how you would proceed with it as President", each candidate gets 2 minutes, and then allow 1 minute rebuttals where the candidates ideas are at odds.

This is not how the current debates are being run. The GOP events are not debates, they are confrontations.

Fiddytree said:

Big long accurate rant

Click to expand...

Outside of the voting for Hillary thing, I pretty much agree with you on everything you said. It's become clear that for many GOP voters, most of their complaints about Obama weren't actual complaints but simply low hanging fruit to complain about because he had those traits AND a D next to his name.

NonoBadDog said:

It's called anger. People are angry at the establishment, politicians that are there for their own benefit, politicians that say they are going to do one thing and then do the opposite and angry at the people in the other party.

Click to expand...

So people are acting like hypocrites because they're upset about hypocrites.

How delightfully ironic.

jmotivator said:

And actual debate would be the moderator (only need one) giving the panel a viable topic and then letting each candidate have their say, and then let them mutually discuss it.

Moderator questions would be like "Give me your opinion of the Iran Nuclear agreement and how you would proceed with it as President", each candidate gets 2 minutes, and then allow 1 minute rebuttals where the candidates ideas are at odds.

This is not how the current debates are being run. The GOP events are not debates, they are confrontations.

Click to expand...

they are group interviews

justabubba said:

they are group interviews

Click to expand...

And they shouldn't be.