Yes Hell you need to turn up the thermostat because after watching the replay of the Wednesday night CNBC GOP debacle. err I mean CNBC GOP debate Hell has gotten a bit colder as I’ve come to the conclusion that I actually agree with Ted Cruz on the point of mistrust in today’s Media
Even though Cruz’s ire was cast towards that of the CNBC moderating crew, he really needs to be all inclusive to ALL MEDIA, not just one brand. It’s they, ALL MEDIA that’s racking up ratings with the past 4 debates (GOP and DEM alike) by averaging 15 million viewers so far. We’ve already been told that CNBC’s rating were around between 10 to 11 million but the excuse for the low number was due to the NBA’s season opener and Game #2 of the World Series, which is excusable as there’s a greater interest in those events then a bunch of guys talking about how they plan to change the US.
OK, maybe I’m not in full agreement with Cruz, who truly is so rehearsed in every step was simply waiting to mock the CNBC debate on the coattails of Donald Trump’s earlier statement that this debate was going to be “unfair.” Trump had stated CNBC “was going to be unfair” well before the event even started, some 6 hours prior to kick-off to be exact. Trump’s “unfair” debate accusation comes solely on the notion that he did not agree with the recent polling that placed him in second place which means he would not be center square on the debate stage.
Um, you can’t be the center square when there are 10 people on stage.
But let’s stop here as I have a confession to spout. This blog isn’t going to be about mocking the GOP candidates, but about the debate process all together. I had all intentions of writing a review of the first DEM debate a few weeks back but I could not subject the reader to a blog of non-interest as the debate itself was a complete sham and a waste of three hours, as most first “get to know me” debates are. However, it perfectly intertwines with the past three GOP debates in that the product and rules suck. And when I mean suck I mean all of it; from the rebuttal rule to the greeting/salutation remarks to uncontrollable behavior of the candidate and moderator. You can decide about the characterization of the candidate by yourself.
So here I am some many hours later reading about how awesome it was that Cruz slapped the media (again he slapped CNBC, not all) for producing a debate that turned into an uncontrollable free-for-all for the viewer. It’s easy for me to point out how the candidates are a group of knee jerk “reactionists” to everything another had/had stated.
RNC Head Reince Priebus is quoted as saying “While I was proud of our candidates and the way they handled tonight’s debate, the performance by the CNBC moderators was extremely disappointing and did a disservice to their network, our candidates and voters.”
Wait a minute there Reince. The prime time candidates aren’t innocent in this debate disgrace. Yes the moderators did a poor job of umpiring this anarchy but when you’ve got grown men acting like children talking over each other, crying that they deserve more rebuttal time because someone looked at them or insinuated their name without actually saying it is nothing to be proud of.
The same could be said for CNN’s Anderson Cooper allowing Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton to go way beyond their allotted agreed upon time only to keep cutting off Jim Webb three words into his statements. The campaigns agree on the terms of each debate with hopes that the moderators will be able to control the candidates. Well unless the moderators are allowed cattle prods and shock collars, all the candidates will keep running over each other to get added camera time.
Normally the candidates stand still and make little hay out of the debate program, but not with CNBC as from the moment the ending credits rolled, the prime time candidates have been sandbagging CNBC with Ben Carson calling all campaigns to voice opposition to the “Gotcha” questions and to step up to a higher level of debate.
Hm, ok Dr Carson let’s shake it up because hater gotta hate hate hate..
Damn you Taylor Swift!
But let’s play the game and crash the debate dynamics to end these shenanigans.
First and foremost let’s change the debate stage and only allow “5” candidates on stage at one time. We can keep the “polling ranking” to decide who’s on stage and when. It’s simple math; 5 candidates debate for 60 minutes. That gives each equal time of 12 minutes/each. Truly I believe let’s go further and do away with the “poll ranking” and let’s go by job description. Wouldn’t be awesome to see all the Governors, Senators and business folk in their own respective categories to debate within their grouping?
Grouping like Governors Christie, Jindall, Kasich, Pataki and Bush debating policies they legislated in their states could give the viewer/voter a better idea of how they could fair governing the country.
Secondly, change the rules with two simple swipes; kill the rebuttal and kill the mic. The rebuttals are what’s truly destroying these debates as I’ve stated earlier and to do that you kill every mic till called on. They want to act like children, well treat them as children. Imagine a candidate able to speak without having to worry about another interrupting their talking point. Again, this would help the viewer/voter make a solid decision.
And finally, only one moderator, please!
Unfortunately simple changes like this need to be presented by the Media to the political party heads of Reince Priebus and Debbie Wasserman Shultz. The fact is the campaigns have to agree on the debate format before stepping on stage and we’ve already seen some wanting change by petitioning CNBC prior to the debate to shorten the time frame from 3 hours to 2 hours.
But ALL MEDIA is not to blame for the debate debacles, we the viewer/voter have a part. People want to see the candidates fight over whose better, but it also depends on what source people get their news from. If you’re a constant FOX viewer, yes you will complain about the moderators on CNBC/MSNBC as too liberal and vice verse. Same goes if you’re a Trump fan, you’ll think he won the debate (according to immediate polling he’s won all three thus far) and someone like Chris Christie was horrible. But were you actually listening or just discounting another candidate’s words because you just don’t like them?
Maybe that’s why I watch the debates twice; once for the initial view and the second for truly paying attention. By doing so, I can honestly say Christie has been better than the leading candidates these past two debates, as have been Marco Rubio and Lindsey Graham. Yes I said Lindsey Graham and as much as I mock the Southern Bell, he does deserve a main stage soapbox over Kasich/Paul/Huckabee. But to get there, people really need to listen.
YAWN! No one will ever be happy with the moderators, whom go about their business until there’s that one moment the viewer doesn’t like the question and BAM! the moderator becomes a target on the dart board, or in today’s world a quick mock on Social Media. Talk about leading the public, as their family and friends are heavily guaranteed to agree with that opinionated Social Media post and repost on their own page.
The day after is usually a nauseating day for the average viewer as that network spends the next 24 hours debating and dissecting the previous night’s performance while the competing other networks are busy critiquing the highlights.
And now this current blog has become nauseating and I need a drink
That’s it, Slap the tap on some “Ass Kisser Ale,” pay your non-flat tax political tab and turn up the heat because it’s cold inside CNBC studios until the next scheduled debate debacle is viewed.
CHEERS
