Sorry, Newt is wrong on this one. This isn’t a town meeting, its a Presidential debate. Now we are going to have every primary and general election debate be a clap fest with the candidates packing the audience. Yuck.
I’ve got no interest in winners being chosen by applause meter.
It’s a party primary debate. its supposed to be about activists and the base.
If we aren’t part of it, then you might as well not have one.
It’s a party primary debate. its supposed to be about activists and the base.
If we aren’t part of it, then you might as well not have one.
“Sorry, Newt is wrong on this one. This isn’t a town meeting, its a Presidential debate. Now we are going to have every primary and general election debate be a clap fest with the candidates packing the audience. Yuck.”
Your point is very well taken.
But if it hadn’t been for “the cheering in South Carolina”, Newt might not have turned things around so decisively in the short time he had to do so. Like it or not, it was those who _watched_ the debate, heard the cheering, and perhaps had their logic jostled by it, who went to the polls and made the difference.
Newt has stated his thoughts on this quite well — that is, the media has no monopoly on free speech and the ability to express it.
By controlling audience response, guys like Brian Williams (and the guys behind him) are trying to control the atmosphere and tenor of the arguments. It’s like the old “Outer Limits” intro — “sit quietly, and WE will control what you see and hear.”
Newt shouldn’t have said he’d skip the debates, though. He should wait until the issue comes up again -IN- one of the debates, and then use it right then and there as a “teachable moment of truth” before the audience that is watching. To wit, the response should be something like “No, Mr. Williams, I will not accede to your demands that the audience not respond to the candidates, because for too long Americans have been told to take what government gives them and keep quiet about it!”
If the mainstream media is so out-of-joint that a conservative candidate could rouse a debate audience into cheering during a broadcast, perhaps they should only have future debates in a studio with only cameras, moderators and WITHOUT an “audience”.
Otherwise, I’d tell ‘em right on camera to go to hell.
Folks, cheer away!
Sorry, but these aren't Presidential debates. They're presidential primary debates, which are quite a different thing.
When the general election debates begin between Obama and the Republican nominee, those will be presidential debates, and I'll agree with you that the audience participation rules should be different.
I think the people should be participants in the nominating phase of the contest. If we're prevented from participating, then the only others involved, are the elites and the media. That's just wrong.