Missing GOP at Debate

[Parkbandit]

WTF?

I'm not saying you have to be at every single debate when any small group says "OMG WE R HAVING A DEBATE!" but to miss out on this debate is just stupid imo. Top four GOP candidates decided that this debate wasn't worth attending, but how stupid are they individually not to? They HAD to know this would lead to the liberal press insinuating that all Republicans hate minorities.


Sorry for the biased source.. first one that showed up on Google and indicative of how it's being spun.
____________________________

The big story from last night's Republican presidential debate, which was held at Morgan State University in Baltimore and moderated by talk show host Tavis Smiley, wasn't what was said.

It was who said it -- or rather, who didn't.

The four frontrunners for the Republican nomination -- Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson -- all missed the debate, citing scheduling problems. As their lecterns stood empty, Smiley thanked the candidates who did show, characterizing them as "those in the Republican Party who do understand the importance of reaching out to people of color."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/28/politics/main3307438.shtml

[thefarmer]

Does this mean that some Republicans don't care about minorities?

[Kembal]

I think all four campaigns just collectively wrote off getting the African-American vote. Their calculation is that they're either facing Clinton or Obama in the general, and both of them have a hammerlock on the African-American vote compared to them.

That's a fairly stupid caluclation, considering that there is a socially conservative trend amongst African-American voters.

As for the debate itself, from what I read, Huckabee really shined. His responses were good. I think he's probably the best bet for the Republican party to hold on to the presidency. However, I don't think he'll be able to break through to the top tier and get the nomination.

[Apathy]

Well obviously those men are racists.

[Parkbandit]

I think all four campaigns just collectively wrote off getting the African-American vote. Their calculation is that they're either facing Clinton or Obama in the general, and both of them have a hammerlock on the African-American vote compared to them.

That's a fairly stupid caluclation, considering that there is a socially conservative trend amongst African-American voters.

As for the debate itself, from what I read, Huckabee really shined. His responses were good. I think he's probably the best bet for the Republican party to hold on to the presidency. However, I don't think he'll be able to break through to the top tier and get the nomination.


Yea, I think it was a dumb move for all 4 campaigns. They had to know what it would be spun into in the press.. and if you knew the other 3 top runners weren't going to be there.. wouldn't it make you WANT to be there even more?

[Kembal]

Yea, I think it was a dumb move for all 4 campaigns. They had to know what it would be spun into in the press.. and if you knew the other 3 top runners weren't going to be there.. wouldn't it make you WANT to be there even more?

That's the funny part. The classic Prisoner's Dilemma from Economics would suggest all four would show up, none of them willing to take the chance that the other 3 would try to use their absence at the debate against them. But it's like the dilemma worked in reverse or something.

Heh, I read about Tancredo's line at the debate suggesting that he was the most race-conscious of all the candidates, because he also appeared at the NAACP convention. (none of the others did) I gotta admit, if he is trying to show that his crusade against illegal immigation isn't racially motivated, he's taking the right steps.

I'm starting to think that the Republican second tier and below is collectively smarter than the Republican first tier.

[Seran]

What is the point in participating in an African American themed debate when you're going up against a rapping Obama? Any Caucasian hoping on a vote from people 'of color' as the article puts it, is seriously mislead.

[thefarmer]

In case you were unaware, there are black Republicans who don't listen to rap.

[Gan]

That's the funny part. The classic Prisoner's Dilemma from Economics would suggest all four would show up, none of them willing to take the chance that the other 3 would try to use their absence at the debate against them. But it's like the dilemma worked in reverse or something.

Except that there is a level of communication between each campaign, I would hazard to guess, that played a part in colluding not to attend.

[Seran]

In case you were unaware, there are black Republicans who don't listen to rap.

None that're running for President.

[Sean]

None that're running for President.

but that do vote for president.

[Kembal]

Except that there is a level of communication between each campaign, I would hazard to guess, that played a part in colluding not to attend.

You're probably right. Of course, that makes it sound even worse.

[Sean of the Thread]

but that do vote for president.

Florida sets up road blocks so minorities can't make it to the polls.

[Gan]

You're probably right. Of course, that makes it sound even worse.

The open mike issue at an earlier debate between Hillary and Edwards already demonstrates that the different campaigns have a dialogue between each other. It should not be any different between the GOP side in my opinion.

And you're right, it does make it sound worse. The message I get is that if you dont have the fundraising/warchest then it doesnt matter where you stand on the issues or how well you present yourself at this stage of the game.

[chillmonster]

The problem is these guys don't want to be seen at the minority debates. They're not worried about middle of the road conservatives that want to know if they're good at governing. Their worried about the religious right, their new base, and southern red necks.

It's reverse game theory. You'd think the front runners would all show so none no other could pop up and admonish the others for not caring enough to hear issues that are important to black/hispanic voters, but it seems to have worked in reverse. They seem more worried about looking too sympathetic to views they consider anthetical to those of a large part of thier base. Since they all want to seem more socialy conservative that they actually are and they all have problems relating to the Council of Conservative Citizens wing of their base, they're all running away from anything that would tie them blacks or hispanics.

Whatever you say about Rove and their tactics, they made serious progress targeting black and hispanic voters in specific areas. If black voters in Ohio had voted the same way in 2000 that they did in 96, repubicans would have lost Ohio; and if they hadn't done so well with hispanics in Fla, they'd have lost there. I know it's a long way to Fall 08', but if Dems play it right Rudy/Romney may have lost the election right there.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

To me it just seems like a lot of bad planning/judgment but I don't think it means that OMG THE CANDIDATES ARE RACIST!!one1

On the other forums I frequent a lot of the liberals are crying out about this and are all butthurt (to put it bluntly). Frankly, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me- as others have pointed out, you'd think at least one would have shown and capitalized on the absence of the others. I can speculate as to why they all missed this debate but, in the end it would only be just that- me guessing why. I am pleased enough with the republican candidates that I really don't see the point in freaking out over it. Yeah, it's messed up, but it's not like the other side hasn't ever fucked up either.

[chillmonster]

To me it just seems like a lot of bad planning/judgment but I don't think it means that OMG THE CANDIDATES ARE RACIST!!one1

On the other forums I frequent a lot of the liberals are crying out about this and are all butthurt (to put it bluntly). Frankly, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me- as others have pointed out, you'd think at least one would have shown and capitalized on the absence of the others. I can speculate as to why they all missed this debate but, in the end it would only be just that- me guessing why. I am pleased enough with the republican candidates that I really don't see the point in freaking out over it. Yeah, it's messed up, but it's not like the other side hasn't ever fucked up either.

Ok. You're missing my point. I'm not saying any of them are racists, and nomatter waht anyone tells themself, this wasn't a scheduling issue. They made a political decision not to attend because they thought it the events would hurt them more than it helped. Maybe they're right. I just disagree.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Ok. You're missing my point. I'm not saying any of them are racists, and nomatter waht anyone tells themself, this wasn't a scheduling issue. They made a political decision not to attend because they thought it the events would hurt them more than it helped. Maybe they're right. I just disagree.

And you're missing my point. I wasn't directly referring to you but rather to other people- I was saying that there are plenty of reasons why they may have missed it but I don't feel that it's because they are racists.

[Kembal]

Uh....I could've sworn Narcissiia's player was a Democrat. She voted for Lamont in the Conn. primary last year.

:question:

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Uh....I could've sworn Narcissiia's player was a Democrat. She voted for Lamont in the Conn. primary last year.

:question:

I am a registered Democrat, yes.

Doesn't mean I won't vote for a Republican if they better suit my overall views.. I don't hardline agree with everything that the Democrat party endorses nor does it mean I agree with what other liberals say/do automatically. As I said, I'm pretty happy overall with a lot of the front-running republican candidates. I think there are a lot of reasons why there was a no-show, and while some of it sounds/looks bad I really don't think it's due to racism.