IAP Political Forum

This Wednesday's the night for the debate and I've taken the time to note what is likely to happen during the  debate:

-Paul will get at least 4 questions.
-Tancredo will bring up his platform on immigration.
-Thompson will try too hard to be funny.
-Romney will get a question about being a mormon.
-Guiliani will mention 9/11 multiple times, because it's his dearest ambition to constantly remind everyone of what he did that day.
-McCain will remind us of his stance against torture.
-Someone will ask something completely irrelevant to politics or the debate and we will all sit here wondering why the hell did they allow this video in.
-The audience will applaud a ridiculous response from one of the top candidates.
-Should there be a text message poll, Paul will win and someone will try to discredit the poll because one of the lesser-known candidates didn't win and then they'll come up with the usual "he rigged the phones" or "the spammers did it" or some other shit.

This Wednesday's the night for the debate and I've taken the time to note what is likely to happen during the  debate:

-Paul will get at least 4 questions.
-Tancredo will bring up his platform on immigration.
-Thompson will try too hard to be funny.
-Romney will get a question about being a mormon.
-Guiliani will mention 9/11 multiple times, because it's his dearest ambition to constantly remind everyone of what he did that day.
-McCain will remind us of his stance against torture.
-Someone will ask something completely irrelevant to politics or the debate and we will all sit here wondering why the hell did they allow this video in.
-The audience will applaud a ridiculous response from one of the top candidates.
-Should there be a text message poll, Paul will win and someone will try to discredit the poll because one of the lesser-known candidates didn't win and then they'll come up with the usual "he rigged the phones" or "the spammers did it" or some other shit.

Students Join GOP Debate Via YouTube
Nebraska teacher encourages his class to submit questions to the candidates for debate Wednesday

When eight Republican presidential candidates meet Wednesday to answer questions coming from citizen videos, the audience will include political activists, local VIPs and Ray Keller, a Nebraska teacher.

Keller, 36, got his coveted ticket to the St. Petersburg, Fla., event because executives of YouTube, co-sponsor with CNN of the debate, see him as an exemplar of what they hoped to achieve with the forum's innovative citizen-driven format.

According to Steve Grove, head of news and politics at YouTube, Keller is among scores of teachers who have encouraged students to submit questions to the candidates via the online video-uploading service. The student questioners run the gamut "all the way from middle school to graduate school," Grove said. One entry is from a class of Harvard University medical students.

The student questions helped fuel a big surge of interest in the debate, which drew nearly 5,000 video questions by Sunday's deadline, CNN spokeswoman Edie Emery said. That's up from approximately 3,000 submissions for the Democratic debate in July.

Keller, who teaches government at Papillon-LaVista South High School in suburban Omaha, said that debate gave him the inspiration to use the GOP sequel as a project for his 120 students. "I thought, man, that's a really cool way to get kids interested," he said.

He said he proposed making GOP debate videos on the students' first day back at school and "it really sparked their interest." The students are juniors and seniors, and Keller estimates that at least 30% will be old enough to vote in next year's election.

The students' enthusiasm for the participatory video format is in contrast to the initial reaction from some in the GOP political establishment, who were cool to one of the clips used in the Democratic debate. That clip featured an animated snowman who asked a question about global warming.

"I think the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than having to answer questions from a snowman," Mitt Romney told the New Hampshire Union Leader.

Romney plans to participate tomorrow. His campaign spokesman, Kevin Madden, said scheduling issues were the only reason his appearance was ever in doubt.

David Bohrman, CNN's executive producer of the presidential debates, said candidates are "a little out of their comfort zone when it comes to this debate." Organizers, who plan to come up with a list of about 80 potential questions, promised the candidates that the selected videos "would be respectful," Bohrman said. There were 39 questions asked during the Democratic debate.

Still, organizers aren't ruling out the offbeat.

"We did not promise there wouldn't be a snowman or some sort of non-human character," Bohrman said.

Keller's students, working in teams of three, submitted 39 questions for the candidates. One group appeared on the school stage to ask a question about the future of arts programs in schools, Keller said. Several cheerleaders dressed in uniform to ask a question about combating obesity.

Continued...

The students have engaged in a lively discussion about their questions and politics on a class blog. The newfangled technology turns out to have had a salutary effect on good old-fashioned grammatical skills. "Their spelling gets better and better the more they post," Keller said. "Peer pressure makes them proofread."

Keller's students will be watching the debate -- and exchanging blog postings with their teacher -- at a high-tech center run by their school district. "They're very excited," Keller said.

That's exactly what debate organizers hoped would happen when they opened the floor to citizen videos. "This is their first taste of political action," Grove said of the student questioners. "We hope it will keep them in the battle, certainly for the fall, but hopefully for the rest of their lives."

This Wednesday's the night for the debate and I've taken the time to note what is likely to happen during the  debate:

-Paul will get at least 4 questions.
-Tancredo will bring up his platform on immigration.
-Thompson will try too hard to be funny.
-Romney will get a question about being a mormon.
-Guiliani will mention 9/11 multiple times, because it's his dearest ambition to constantly remind everyone of what he did that day.
-McCain will remind us of his stance against torture.
-Someone will ask something completely irrelevant to politics or the debate and we will all sit here wondering why the hell did they allow this video in.
-The audience will applaud a ridiculous response from one of the top candidates.
-Should there be a text message poll, Paul will win and someone will try to discredit the poll because one of the lesser-known candidates didn't win and then they'll come up with the usual "he rigged the phones" or "the spammers did it" or some other shit.

Romney and Guiliani going at it. Like rock-em-sock-em robots.

Guiliani is getting booed for being a douchebag.

ARE YOU SERIOUS??!?!?!?! :o :o :o :o :o :o

Is it possible....that...this debate is showing...what the top tier candidates are really like? Could it be that the people are realizing that they suck because they're either assholes or that they have zilch credibility?

Too bad Huckabee completely copped out with his response to the 'what would Jesus do' question.

Education and health care issues were ignored, as well.

The retired general who asked about gays and lesbians serving in the military at the CNN/YouTube Republican debate on Wednesday is a co-chair of Hillary Clinton's National Military Veterans group.

Decent debate, I wish Thompson would do better but he keeps disappointing.  As of right now I like Huckabee the best but I still don't think he has a shot at the nomination.  I really wish Giuliani and Romney were not in the lead.

It was mostly a snoozefest but I think they did ok considering they were in hostile territory.

Here's a surprise, the gay general that they gave more time to then any other questioner works for Hillary.
LINK (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/7085.html)
Comedy matches reality - CNN used to be called the Clinton News Network.

At least AC didn't act like too much of a douche.

Abraxas, are you seriously trying to defend the apparent planting of questioners by Democrats, in cahoots with CNN, at a GOP debate?  That doesn't strike you as a bit dirty or unfair?

Apparently there may have been more:
Abortion questioner is declared Edwards supporter (and a slobbering Anderson Cooper fan); Log Cabin Republican questioner is declared Obama supporter; lead toy questioner is a prominent union activist for the Edwards-endorsing United Steelworkers.
LINK (http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/29/digging-out-the-cnnyoutube-plants-abortion-questioner-is-edwards-supporter/)

IF this is true it's pretty lame.

WRT the religious talk.  I don't think you are their target audience.  Just a guess.  However, most of the rest of America wanted to know where these people stood on those issues.

So...  Just so I'm clear, you're saying that you have no issue with Democrats planting questioners, while working with CNN, because you can "guarantee" the GOP has done the same?  That's a lovely relativistic view.

WRT the religious talk.  I don't think you are their target audience.  Just a guess.  However, most of the rest of America wanted to know where these people stood on those issues.

In the next segment — the debate between Romney and Mike Huckabee over Huckabee's college scholarships for the deserving children of illegal immigrants — I noticed something really distressing: When Huckabee said, "After all, these are children of God," the dials plummeted. And that happened time and again through the evening: Any time any candidate proposed doing anything nice for anyone poor, the dials plummeted (30s).

deserving children of illegal immigrants

That one pretty much answered itself. How about deserving children of AMERICAN CITIZENS!

And that happened time and again through the evening: Any time any candidate proposed doing anything nice for anyone poor, the dials plummeted

Did I miss it? Or was there not one single question about health care, the single most pressing domestic issue of our day?

Was there a question about Israel/Palestine?

Or Iran?

Or Pakistan?

I see that questions about the Bible made it, though.

Oh yes, I forgot. This was a Republican debate... Roll Eyes

The one big issue with last night's debate is this General, an instance that CNN has apologized for. The rest were basically Democrats asking Republican candidates questions... no different then Republicans asking Democrats questions. Are you saying that didn't happen in the Democratic YouTube debate?

You're right... cause I'm sure NO ONE cares about Education. But I'm glad they spent 20 minutes on who's more religous. Yeah, that'll DEFFINATELY rake in the votes.

I'm not sure you people understand what you're upset about.  On one hand you don't seem to mind that the Dems planted questioners, through CNN, on the other hand you wanted other topics discussed.

I heard about the apology, and that's great, but is that supposed to make it ok that they helped the Dems plant a bunch of questioners?  I'm not saying the GOP is innocent from this tactic and if they are caught doing it I would treat the behavior with the same disdain but I never saw a report about it.  You keep talking about it but haven't shown any proof...

Yeah, because that's what I said... This was one of several debates.  Last time they spoke about the economy.  The time before that I think it was national security.  I'm sorry they didn't talk about what's important to you.  As Neu suggested, drop a line to Hillary and maybe she can have the question brought up at the next debate... you know there are going to be more right?

WHAT the question was is of little consequence to me personally.

Important to me? Just me? What about what's more important to the country? You think their religion is more important than the future of Education in this country? Are you seriously going to argue that their faith is more important than their views on this country's Education? Please tell me I'm seeing things. Please.

I know there are going to be more debates, but as you well know politician's are prone to "flip flopping" so keeping them consistent is the important. Not only that, but what if their methods bring up more questions? Will there be enough debates to flesh them out?

Instead you would rather watch them pander to Christians and Evangelicals.

Whatever.

I think you're missing the point of the dishonesty of both the Clinton campaign AND a news network...CNN. They were almost certainly in concert with one another to plant a questioner. THAT alone should make everyone uneasy. WHAT the question was is of little consequence to me personally.

Early on at Wednesday night’s CNN debate for Republican presidential candidates, a young woman in Huntsville, Ala., asked the field what they would “to repair the image of America in the eyes of the Muslim world?” Given the current of state of international diplomacy, it seemed like a reasonable question.

But last night, far-right activists discovered that the woman who asked the question was, at some point in the past, an intern for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Therefore, conservatives now argue, the question was a “plant,” and evidence of negligence and carelessness on the part of CNN.

I realize that every few weeks, the right needs to find something new to get hysterical about, but all of this is painfully silly. Conservatives have worked themselves into high dudgeon since late Wednesday night, but I can’t quite figure out why they’re so apoplectic.

Apparently, some of the selected YouTube clips aired during the debate came from people who are Democrats. The retired general who asked about DADT supports Hillary. A young woman who asked about product-safety works for a union. A young man who asked about farm subsidies once worked as an intern for a Democratic congresswoman. All of these constitute, in the minds of a wide variety of right-wing activists, “Democratic plants” at a Republican debate.

Let’s take a deep breath here. Say, hypothetically, we here at The Carpetbagger Report decided to host a presidential forum, and I invited readers to submit questions for the candidates. Once I had a complete list, I’d go through them and pick the ones that seemed interesting, provocative, policy-oriented, relevant, etc. The goal would be to produce a spirited, though-provoking discussion.

Would I do background checks to see where the questioners interned years ago? Probably not, because it doesn’t matter. Whether questions came from candidates’ harshest critics or their own family members is largely irrelevant — the point is to consider the questions themselves on the merit.

That’s what CNN did. Republicans are, in response, demanding that heads should roll.

The LA Times went back and looked at some of the questions used at the Dems’ YouTube debate four months ago, and found “at least two of the citizen-interrogators had clear GOP leanings.” Guess what? That doesn’t matter either. Republicans asking questions or Dems; Dems asking questions of Republicans — it’s all just public discourse.

I'll defer to Neue's excellent comment for the first part of your post.  I'll only add that this general was not the only apparent plant.  The mountain of the mole hole is primarily driven by the fact that you don't seem to grasp what happened here.  If you responded as if you understood the implications then we could all move on.

To comment on your response to Neue - So... you can't see a motivation for planting an enduring character that just happened to pimp a position right in line with the Hillary position?

As with before, I never said that their religion is more important then their position on education, please try to stay focused on what I actually type.  I'll reitterate my point for your benefit.  The debates are generally topical, they have had several debates on different issues in the past and will have more debates in the future on different issues.  I too hope that they will cover healthcare but for whatever reason CNN and the Democrats didn't want to ask them about it in this debate.

The LA Times went back and looked at some of the questions used at the Dems’ YouTube debate four months ago, and found “at least two of the citizen-interrogators had clear GOP leanings.” Guess what? That doesn’t matter either. Republicans asking questions or Dems; Dems asking questions of Republicans — it’s all just public discourse.

They whine and bitch and complain they aren't being treated fairly

Probably there were no questions on health care because everyone knew that the Republicans have nothing to offer in that area anyway, except more of the same-o same-o.

Honestly, it doesn't because if he was indeed a plant, and if it was indeed a ploy by the Clinton's or CNN there HAD to be some kind of motivation. Some reason. Some benefit they think they could get.

Micfranklin, I'd like to get your thoughts about one of the questions from the debate.

The questions is Here (http://youtube.com/watch?v=XZBXJ4UL8GI&feature=related) and to summarize, it says that black people hold many views in line with the GOP but they don't vote GOP.  Can you please let us know why you think that is?

Cause they took a question from someone who works for her?

The question wasn't iligitimate and it isn't something Hillary has been presented with. And both the military and gays were unhappy with Bill Clinton's "Don't Ask Don't Tell". What I'm sayin' is that Hillary doesn't have a lock on this issue. In fact, no one has even really shared a position on this issue... so I fail to see how this benefits Clinton the way you think it does.

To be fair, she should be asked the same question and we'll see how she does.

Chances are good she will now.


Cooper? I like him.

I'm a bit late and maybe this was covered. But let me say this. At this point in time they have are having PRIMARY debates. They are specifically meant for people in that party. Democrats have no rights to be asking questions if it is a Republican primary (and vice versa). When the Republicans finally nominate someone, go wild. But until then it isn't any of their business as it is not their party.

Figuratively or legally speaking?

I mean nothing by this question except idle curiosity. I'm not trying to make a point.

I don't believe there is a law that says "If you're a Democrat you cannot ask a Republican a question during a primary". So I guess that would be a figureatively?

The reality is, the only reason a Democrat would be asking a Republican a question is to probably try to embarrass them. Because they'll have no control over who wins the Republican debate. Now once the primaries are done, go wild. Because then you can actually vote for either candidate. But until then, let the people that are going to be making the decision have the microphone time. I'm sure there are plenty of Republicans out there who have questions.

I don't believe that. Some? Yes, I'm sure there are some who would do that... but why can't a Democrat vote for a Republican? Wouldn't they have an invested interest in getting to know them? And this goes both ways. I don't see why a Republican can't ask a question in the Democratic primaries... which you would be crazy to think didn't happen.

Like BBW said, I just don't see the point in seperating the field like that. It just creates the problems and bickering that most of us here usually complain about.

Come on you two, learn to read now.
Like I said, once the candidates for each party are chosen, everyone can have free reign. Democrats can voter Republican, and vice versa. But the reality is Democrats have no power when it comes to the primaries. They cannot vote in the Republican primaries, and vice versa. That means that Republican party members should get the mic time because they are the ones making the decisions.

Seperating the field? OPPOSING PARTIES HAVE NO POWER IN THE PRIMARIES ANYWAYS! I don't see what's so hard to understand here.

I simply don't believe that. Yeah, it's the Republican's candidate and it's their decision... but what if I'm a Democrat and I don't like any of the Democrats? What if I'm a Republican and don't like any of the Republican candidates? What if I want to know the other guys?

Are Independents in the same category as the opposing party? How do they ever choose "a guy"? Can they not support a campaign until each party chooses a candidate? Can they not ask questions to better understand them?

I understand your reasoning... but I just disagree with it.


And I don't see what's so wrong with parties crossing the isle to ask the questions. After all, it's not likely a Republican debate would EVER mention gays in the military unless a non-Republican party member asked it.

It creates those awkword moments that help us better understand the candidates. Is it so bad that this is happening on the Primary level?

It's all about gaining support from a certain group of people - not wanting to change America for the better. All they care about is who's most likely to vote for them. This system is muffed.

Absolutely.

Why I think a lot of black people share the same GOP viewpoints but don't vote for their party is because they view Republicans as racists and bigots, but what they don't know is that back then up until the 30's blacks almost always voted Republican, it was the Democrats who were bigoted. So I would assume that people don't know their history or don't care about it and make false accusations.

I know, but the whole idea of Red Team and Blue Team is dumb. You can't seperate change by good/bad. The only thing that makes you a Republican is what you register as.

Thanks for your input, it's unfortunate the situation is what it is.  Most of my black friends are more conservative then I am but they still vote Dem.

Abraxas, BBW, I'm still not understanding why you think it's ok for opposing parties to sneak into debates and attempt to sabotage people in them.  I can understand that you are angsty but is this just a general desire for anarchy or what?

But people register for a certain party because that party encompasses a certain set of beliefs.

More like least common denominator. Anyone who thinks an "idea" like being a Dem or Rep stands for what they believe in deserves to have their private little lairs infiltrated.

No. That is the reason people join parties. That is their purpose.

Once the primaries are over, go ahead and ask your question on gays in the military. Because at that point, you'll actually have the power to choose.

Abraxas, BBW, I'm still not understanding why you think it's ok for opposing parties to sneak into debates and attempt to sabotage people in them.  I can understand that you are angsty but is this just a general desire for anarchy or what?

You don't see asking one of the final candidates a question as helpful? So then how is it helpful during the primaries? The only difference is you actually know who stands a chance at becoming president.

On a side note, it's funny he's asking Republicans about 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' when Clinton is the one who signed it.

Of course asking your question to the final candidate is helpful. But what harm is there in asking a Primary candidate? If it further illuminates the person to the electorate, it's ALWAYS a good idea.


EXACTLY!

That bill enraged homosexuals and military personel alike, going too far for the latter and not far enough for the former. It wasn't an agreement... it was politics... and by menioning it, the general is only reminding everyone of how flawed the whole thing was. If anything, it's bad press for Clinton.

don't do it lucky. she'll destroy the us!

  it just reminds me of 04.
all the pathetic candidates were up against Bush.
almost like they knew he would win so they just retreated for 08.

it seems like this is the republicans year to retreat with garbage.

trust me
if a republican nominee were to promise affordable health care for all i would vote for them.


i despise clinton..... i really do
but bill clinton didnt destroy us, so i dont think hillary will either.

hopefully hillary care is put in place during her 1st term
then i would gladly vote her ass out of office

  How can you decide on who you will vote for President on one issue? 

I've asked him the same question. If I remember, it has to do with the fact that he cares about this issue 1000000000 times more than every other issue.

Abraxas, I feel like buying you a beer- except you're underage and half away across the country. Oh well.

i dont like clinton and i am regreting my vote even though i havent cast it yet.
but every single american deserves healthcare.
i guess im driving by the fact my wife is sick and needs healthcare but cant get it. (she isnt dying or anything but it sucks to be her without insurance). but what about the people who are dying? this is something that needs to be done imo.
and im voting for the canadite who promises it.

God, that's awful. I'm sorry.

No one deserves that. Here's a pretty good give-and-take between whose plan, Clinton's or Obama's is better:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119681696156513818.html?mod=hps_us_editors_picks (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119681696156513818.html?mod=hps_us_editors_picks)

You know what would be a hoot? A IAP convention, where we all show up and sit around and shoot the shit and try to figure out who we are by our IAP names. I think I'd recognize Patton pretty quickly, and perhaps Citizen4Progress and Illy and Fred and Totino. The rest would be harder.

Then see how long it is before fights break out.

Your fears are justified.  In OH, which I also live in, you can only vote for your party's candidates in the primary and if you are a registered independent, you can't vote in either primary.  You can still vote, but only on ballot issues.

thank perrin 8)

Who suggested that health care was going to be "free?" Anyone?

Easy with the true colors, buddy....somebody might see!


I have zero dollars...How do I fit into Universal healthcare?

I also have brain cancer and just spent what money I had by having Van Halen play at my birthday party....anyhoo...i'm ready for my treatment...Where do I sign?

Well the brain cancer does explain why you would want Van Halen to play at your birthday.  It also explains why you have no money in the health care world of today.

You're right, cause I want a third of my paycheck to go to a program I don't support. Even more motivation...

It would also explain, or at least highlight the stiff cost of insurance and the vast difference in people's insurace vs. financial health...and their freedon...that's right I said it... to make a choice between the two.

By spreading the cost to all, we reduce the cost overall.

You know what would be a hoot? A IAP convention, where we all show up and sit around and shoot the shit and try to figure out who we are by our IAP names. I think I'd recognize Patton pretty quickly, and perhaps Citizen4Progress and Illy and Fred and Totino. The rest would be harder.

Then see how long it is before fights break out.