ADVERTISEMENT

In case you missed it, the Republican National Committee voted last week to exercise control over the process of sanctioning Republican primary debates, choosing moderators, and linting the number of events in 2016. A move intended to cut down on the 20+ debates we witnessed in 2012, the decision has now drawn criticism from former Speaker of the House and former 2012 Republican candidate for President, Newt Gingrich.

ADVERTISEMENT

Report from the Wall Street Journal:

Nobody capitalized on the endless 2012 Republican presidential debates more than Newt Gingrich, and he’s not happy about the plan to halve the number of such forums for 2016.

“I am very doubtful about any significant limitations on the number of debates and I disagree totally with the absurd idea that the debates are harmful,” Mr. Gingrich said Friday. “The debates are only harmful if you nominate somebody who can’t debate.”

Mr. Gingrich spoke as the Republican National Committee, on a 152-7 vote at its quarterly meeting in Memphis, approved rules to centralize control over the 2016 presidential primary debates to an internal committee that will determine the schedule, media partners and moderators.

Limiting the number of debates from 20 in 2012 to fewer than 10 in 2016, as RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said is the plan, Mr. Gingrich said, will serve to the benefit of well-funded candidates at the expense of those powered by grass-roots supporters.

“A lot of Republican rich people’s complaints are silly,” Mr. Gingrich said. “I would be very concerned if they try to strangle the ability of less-financed candidates to have some voice.”

And Mr. Gingrich said the RNC is putting itself at risk of splitting the party if candidates who consider themselves outside the Republican mainstream elect to appear at unsanctioned debates.

“For the RNC to put itself to have a Washington-centric organization trying to bully candidates for president is very dangerous and I hope that they handle this very carefully because otherwise they create a sense of which insiders can manipulate the system,” he said. “If you get a couple candidates who want to blow it apart, they will. They’ll get more media trying to hold their own debates.”

He continued: “If the establishment says, ‘We’ll teach you,’ the establishment could end up with a conservative third-party candidate. I think they grossly underestimate that problem.”

As mentioned in the article, Newt Gingrich used the numerous debates to his advantage coming out strong and often garnering applause by attacking the media.

However, does the former Speaker have a point about shutting out less-funded candidates from national screen time? Who stands the most to gain from this decision to limit the number of debates and who stands to win?

43 COMMENTS

  1. RINO’s are exactly what the acronym implies – basically Dems in GOP clothing. Limiting Moderators and what press influence, I’m for.

    No cutting down our own, only opposing party! no support from listeners / viewers after a debate – not on docket next debate – A.M.F. – That is Adios My Friend.

  2. I think it’s significant that it’s Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal that’s commenting that the GOP “approved rules to CENTRALIZE CONTROL.”

    Sounds more like a comment that would come from Mother Jones.

    But to answer Nate’s question, the one who will benefit is the front runner, because if there are just a few debates, he can play what Muhammad Ali called “Rope-a-Dope,” meaning just take the few punches their allowed to throw, and continue to the convention.

  3. It’s a RINO design to stop a Ron Paul-like candidate from even running (for they can’t afford one more such Ugly Spectacle as what they did to Ron Paul, his delegates and his supporters, in 2012)!

    Keep in mind that these draconian measures to assure a Faithful Rino for 2016, are not yet in play for the 2014 elections.

    Thus, if enough Tea Party/Libertarians win this year, there could be a redress for 2016.

    If not, it seems that the RNC/GOP/RINO ELITES are willing to LOSE the Presidency, because these scumbag RNC party oligarchs have carved their Fiefdoms, and will NEVER let go of their belly-filling control there (their motto is: “F%#ck the Nation, and F%#ck whoever wins, I’m still GONNA-BE King in my backyard!)

    • What RNC does not want you to see: a Candidate that speaks the TRUTH is their worst enemy, for such a one is the FRIEND of the American People, thus NOT their friend!!

      Dems/Rinos = the same coin of Big Tyrannical US Government, that shoots profits to them directly into their pockets (so they’ll do their best to never allow another one such as Ron Paul ever again)!

      make this video viral! WHY RON PAUL WAS CHEATED FROM THE PRESIDENCY!!!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_WBo4sfmi4

      • Amazing: The hatchet job the MSM media and the RNC “debates” did to the Last Honest Man in America — Ron Paul!

        Another wonderful example is at minute 15:01 — where the winner of the poll (Ron Paul) is shown last on the graph…priceless misdirection by CNN!

        And another at minute 15:12 — CBS shows for New Hampshire: Romney in 1st place at 43%, followed by Gingrich with 9%, Huntsman with 7% and Santorum with 6% — (missing in the picture is Ron Paul — who won 2nd place with 20%)! Kudos for CBS being the New Nazis to ERASE COMPLETELY FROM THE RECORD on National TV the Candidate that won 2nd place!

        (Someone once said that today’s Jews in Media BEST yesteryear’s Nazis in propaganda…could this be true…?!)

        Watch this at minute 15:14 — MSNBC with Rachel Maddow — showing a pic of ALL 5 left in the race (but Ron Paul’s FACE is replaced with someone else’s picture INSTEAD, Pawlenty, that was no longer running, but supporting Mitt Romney at the time)! So 4 real candidates were displayed in this picture, and the 5th, was a “mistake” by MSNBC with Rachel Maddow…LOL, so many mistakes concerning Ron Pal, one would think it a conspiracy (but, since it is said by the media that conspiracies do not exist…it has to be “true”). No matter — Ron Paul has been painted out of this picture, too!

        Gets even funnier at minute 15:29 — FOX News reports:
        1) (picture of Romney) — STATES Romney leads by 35%
        2) (picture of Ron Paul) — BUT … states ROMNEY at 19%
        3) (picture of Gingrich) — States … Gingrich is at 17%
        4) (picture of Huntsman) — States… Huntsman at 13%
        Fox is “better” than MSNBC — they’ll show a pic of Ron Paul, but give 2 wins to Mitt Romney! Just another “mistake” by our controlled media…LOL!

        And the MSM perfidy kept on going by making their bosses happy — TOTAL BLACK-OUT on Ron Paul in their news!

        If you are a Real American — make this video VIRAL!

        *How Ron Paul Was Cheated Out Of Presidency*:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_WBo4sfmi4

  4. The responses about the decrease in debates are an example of the problem with our (too) many debates. Some of you used the opportunity to point out GOP problems, which is the same thing the Republican candidates do in the debates. Rather than attacking each other, they should state their view on the subject and then attack the Democrat view. They hurt each other far worse than the democrats do.

    • Bev: So now, not only do we want to stop the candidates from talking, we also want to stop the grassroots from talking?

      • Sure the Grass Roots should be heard – that’s what I meant about first stating their view on the subject and pointing out how that differs from the Democrat view. They should also point out how it differs from the views of the other candidates. But too many times rather than state “their view” they only state that the views of candidates standing on the stage with them are wrong or stupid or ignorant. That just makes the whole GOP look bad. That’s the job of the Democrats not the Grass Roots.

        • bevh2014;

          Today’s GOP/RNC are called RINOS for a good reason — being no different than the anti-American scum known as Dems!

          The proper term for these Old Fossils should be DINOS — for the Tea Party needs to make them extinct, in order to return the Republican Party back to its original roots of small Gov, respect of the US Constitution and Justice for All (not just against the “little” people, but the Big Shots, too)!

        • Right. There are two gangs who battle back and forth for control and power. They use issues as clubs to beat each other, but their real goal is control and power.

          In fact, they do NOT want to achieve their “goals,” because then they have lost that issue–that club to beat the other gang with.

          So the question becomes, do you want to discuss and fight for your issues, or do you just want “your” gang to win?

          And that’s why I have nitpicked Rand Paul, although I think he is head and shoulders above any other GOP candidate.

          His father stood for issues, and people FOLLOWED him. Rand seems to think he has to CHASE the flavor of the day, to be “popular.” If winning is all that matters, don’t take any stand at all–get out the Etch-a-Sketch and just stand there looking pretty.

        • Bob, I thought we were saying the same things- I want the individual candidates (and their backers) to stop being selfish by trying to win at any cost. I want each to contribute then stop beating up their fellow Republicans. Politics is the art of compromise and decision making (Weber) and I think we have forgotten how to do both.

  5. Here’s a new thought:

    I predict that if the GOP takes over the senate in 2014, they’ll lose the presidency in 2016. AND if Dems keep the senate in 2014, they’ll lose the presidency in 2016.

    Here’s why:

    Americans don’t like one-party rule. Although they say they don’t like gridlock, they also don’t like seeing one party ram things through. That’s what really cost Dems in 2010.

    If Dems keep the senate, people will be sick of the gridlock by 2016, and see both parties at fault.

    But if the GOP takes the senate, people will see that the GOP will have the House AND Senate AND Supreme Court AND most Governorships AND most State Legislatures. And if they don’t do miracles, they will lose next time.

    Also, of course, people perceive that Dems won in 2008, GOP won in 2010, Dems won again in 2012, so if the Senate goes GOP in 2014, there will be a sense that it’s the Dems’ turn again.

    AND, if the GOP takes the House and Senate, I doubt that the people will want all three branches of government totally controlled by one party.

    That’s what I figure.

    • good thoughts – our only option is to take the Senate in 2014 and then do great things with our majority. Force Obama to veto popular bills showing that the Democrats do not have the best interests of American at heart.

      • Bev: Obama won’t veto anything. In six years he has only vetoed two irrelevant bills.

        Nobody has vetoed less since Chester A. Arthur, who left office in 1885. And before him, William Henry Harrison–who was in office for one month in 1841.

        If the GOP passes stuff Obama will just do what Clinton did–claim it was HIS idea, and sign it with a band playing.

        • I agree with your facts but not your reason. He has not been sent any bills that he did not like. I think that is the reason for his not vetoing many. If he chooses to embrace their bills, I hope the Republicans will be strong enough to refute this. I would prefer that they send him bills with provisions that force him to make difficult choices.

          • Bev: In other words, you’d rather bloody his nose than accomplish anything.

            The reason most people remember the Clinton years fondly is that things did work. Yeah, and if Bill said it was his idea, who cares?

            Things work in Washington when you’re more interested in getting something done than in getting credit for it.

            • Goethe – I disagree!! If Conservatives aren’t credited, the it will be assumed by the Low Info’s that the Dems did the good deed or law and the MSM will enforce and re-enforce that it was the Democrats / Liberals that brought the accomplishments. Fact of life, and has been since the ’60’s..

            • Yeah, let’s not accomplish anything, cuz we can’t guarantee that we’ll get 100% of the credit for it.

              Better yet, let’s destroy the world so we’ll never have to worry about losing brownie points ever again!!!

            • Let’s accomplish EVERYTHING in spite of those (like Harry Reid) who want to make the U.S. a pure Totalitarian, Socialist State; let’s enlist the Low Info’s to help save the State from its imploding direction. In spite of the Obama’s, Lapdog Reid’s and Pelosi’s, we, Dems included, Conservatives can make this “one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”. At the turn of the 21st century, we were almost there (80% and on a positive slope).

              Giving credit where credit is due helps the “Don’t Care’s and Low Info’s” (until it affects them) understand what this nation really is and the majorities’ goals and direction. And if those that want to change that direction on which we were founded and grew for more than 200 years unified are dissatisfied with the U.S.A.- they should returning to whence they came or unite and create their own nation elsewhere with the laws and ideology that THEY want.

              Goethe – i guess i just don’t understand your ideology – we are not faceless – but we are a nation of individuals who are joined in loose assimilation and should all have the same core ideologies and goals with only mild deviations in how we achieve being a FREE Capitalistic Democratic-Republic.

            • Sam: And that’s exactly my point You act as if you don’t remember that leftists were saying the EXACT same thing in 2004–that Bush was a dictator who was destroying our nation, that he was building concentration camps, would declare martial law and can so the 2004 election. Yeah, it’s fun to keep saying the sky is falling, but does it get us anywhere? Won’t you ever get sick of that rubbish?

              Neither side is the pure embodiment of evil, and neither side is out to destroy America. That is pure nonsense. Both sides believe they know what’s BEST for America.

              But that’s not even my point. My point is that it is, yes–STUPID–to refuse a good plan just because you won’t get brownie points for it.

              When Clinton was president, he signed a lot of bills he didn’t like. And they went into effect–because Clinton took credit for them. And after taking all that credit, Gore still lost the next time out.

              If you want to kill the IRS, and you have the opportunity to do so, would you really refuse to do so because Obama might take credit???

            • Well Goethe – this is the second time i’ve heard about martial law and Bush-Cheney – I was pretty active politically in ’04 and i was forced to go look it up on Goggle. Actually it started with Reagan – “The Rex 84 Program was originally established on the reasoning that if a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention centers by FEMA.” and then Bush’s concern that 9/11 was not going to be a single event and the insurgency might be much larger and include U.S. citizens as well.

              Reagan or Bush had no intention or changing our basic ideology or the type Government we are – large or small. And certainly didn’t want to circumvent the 2nd / 4th Amendments, or “detain” citizens who professed the Constitution – Just the opposite of Obama / left / liberal / Dems. .

              You should face it Obama wants to make us a second rate Euro-Socialist nation so Islam can have a major impact like in Spain, UK, & France. and that’s why our ancestors fought 250 years ago for freedom and the basically the Bill of Rights.

              I don’t care how you pose yourself,Goethe, but you come across as basically left / liberal and your discussions emphasize that – certainly anti-Republican. That is your right, obviously, but why disguise it, i don’t know. Pursue – http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democrat_vs_Republican and then look at Libertarian ideology which removes personal freedoms from politics, no large government, and increased military. This makes Reid’s & Obama’s head explode.

              Certain laws, such as revised Tax code, would need no heralding of who supported it – even Low-Info’s would get it.

            • Sam: this discussion has really gone insane. My point was simply that there is too much partisanship for the sake of the fight. The crazy things that are being said about Obama are just as insane as the crazy things that were said about Bush. And now, you’re even trying to say nobody said anything bad about Bush!!!!!!!!!

              AND–my main point was that the focus should be on results. You and Bev are both saying you don’t want anything good to happen in this country if you think “the bad guys” could take credit. And I say again, what exactly did happen when Clinton took credit for the conservative agenda items he took credit for? Did the sky fall? Did Dems benefit? No–people elected Bush.

              You can label me all you want. I’m not the one who is being needlessly hostile and irrational.

            • Goethe – the entire Left and MSM constantly badmouthed Bush and his administration for his entire eight years in office and they will do the same if another Republican POTUS and Administration is returned to Office in 2016. As well as the Left and MSM will try to bully Congress if they win the Senate and Keep the House at the end of 2014. I was asking you WHY(?), the reasons, the left and MSM constantly badmouthed Bush, et.al.. It is was because of his policies and in keeping with the traditional AMERICAN ideology. The MSM still controls the politics, but it is much harder for them now with advent of a robust Internet and burst of Social Media where both sides have their leverage.

              Goethe -You know as well as I do that Bev and I want as many GOOD things to happen as possible to the U.S. – But the Conservatives have as much right to claim the event, so that the Low Info’s are not mislead by the MSM. That is why I wish the Koch’s would buy a controlling interest in one of the alphabet networks so that the Main Media distribution would be more equal. Obama already gets much more credit than he deserves and completely deflects any thing negative related to him or the Administration.

              I apologize for pulling your chain as hard as I did, but you will often deflect , similar to a Left / Liberal I come after their crap – similar to Bob Beckel or Juan Williams.

            • Sam:
              “I was asking you WHY(?), the reasons, the left and MSM constantly badmouthed Bush, et.al.. It is was because of his policies”

              –Right. And the right and their media HATE Obama for HIS policies.

              That’s the point. Two gangs of thugs shooting at each other, instead of trying to get something accomplished.

              And that gets back to my original point. You don’t have to compromise. All you have to do is frame an issue so it looks like an agreement won, instead of a battle lost.

              I am amazed that people who have sainted Reagan continually ignore HOW he got things done–with a Democratic Congress. If he had done things the way you and Bev are saying–demanding all the credit–NOTHING would have gotten done, and he would have been a do-nothing president, less than a footnote in history.

            • Goethe – you seem to assume the worst. As Samreusser pointed out (and Abraham Lincoln agreed on 1/12/1848)
              “and if those that want to change that direction on which we were founded and grew for more than 200 years unified are dissatisfied with the U.S.A.- they should returning to whence they came or unite and create their own nation elsewhere with the laws and ideology that THEY want. “

              Perhaps your possible namesake Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s quote of “It is the strange fate of man, that even in the greatest of evils the fear of the worst continues to haunt him.” explains your attitude.

              I may be a Pollyanna because I always assume the best, but ‘so far so good’…. If I had the opportunity to eliminate the IRS (and the VA), I would do so, no matter who got the credit.. I did not say I would not support a plan unless the GOP got credit. I said, “I would prefer that they send him bills with provisions that force him to make difficult choices”. He skates too often.

              Bev

            • Bev – The VA and Military care in general absolutely SUCKS and has for many decades. Military care should be strictly ER and Battleground care and past that, should be as Tri-Care Prime which is basically privatized care who are savagely underpaid. I had quite a few friends die of Cancer under Military care and poor treatment under VA and a couple of deaths. The VA should be privatized like a lot of the Military now is as TriCare Prime..

              I am very, very lucky as been through a few operations and two cancers & I’m still above ground. Even tho 100% disabled I’ve been able to keep my Medicare and TriCare doctors.The sad thing is they are vastly underpaid by those insurances. I am very, very lucky in Denver where Military, VA, Civilian, and Univ of Colorado are all basically under the same roof and all the medical info is on line. But for now I still have all my civilian Docs scattered about SE Metro and associated except they all take Medicare and TriCare as my secondary.

              The only reason everyone is on Obama’s butt is he campaigned before each election he would fix the systemic problem and hasn’t done a God-Damn thing. just as he hasn’t done a single positive for this nation except hi-ball us down to a second rate nation.

              Watch and see – Obamacare, which is a hybrid TriCare which eventually migrate to a full-blown single payer VA as it mutates.

            • Goethe – you seem to assume the worst. As Samreusser pointed out (and Abraham Lincoln agreed on 1/12/1848)
              “and if those that want to change that direction on which we were founded and grew for more than 200 years unified are dissatisfied with the U.S.A.- they should returning to whence they came or unite and create their own nation elsewhere with the laws and ideology that THEY want. “

              Perhaps your possible namesake Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s quote of “It is the strange fate of man, that even in the greatest of evils the fear of the worst continues to haunt him.” explains your attitude.

              I may be a Pollyanna because I always assume the best, but ‘so far so good’…. If I had the opportunity to eliminate the IRS (and the VA), I would do so, no matter who got the credit.. I did not say I would not support a plan unless the GOP got credit. I said, “I would prefer that they send him bills with provisions that force him to make difficult choices”. He skates too often.

              Bev

            • Bev: This whole discussion is insane. Let me restate my original comment:

              It’s amazing what you can accomplish if you get your ego out of the way.

              If you want something to happen, and you can make it happen, WHY ON EARTH would you refuse to accomplish something just out of silly spite?

              The reason the Clinton era was so good for conservatives was that Clinton simply took credit for the conservative issues he signed.

              It is so childish to refuse to get what you want because you didn’t get 100% of the credit.

  6. To all above:

    1) Quoting Lincoln as a source of wisdom is a stupidity — for under his Presidency more Americans died than from both World Wars combined.
    Schoolbooks make out Lincoln as the savior of the slaves — when in reality he was the Greatest Killer of Americans par none!

    2) Reagan was the last republican President that was a patriot.

    3) Under the Bushes the most anti-freedom agenda was restarted (and keeps on growing)!

    4) Impeached Clinton was a putz (scumbag to the N-th degree) — he started a war against Serbia (becoming the 2nd ruler to bomb an European Capitol, Belgrade, since Hitler) and on Orthodox Easter Sunday at that (while no Muslims could be bombed on their religious holidays, according to his foreign policy…in order NOT TO UPSET THEM), just so he could deflect his sexual cheating with Monika! An amazing feat of misdirection by Slick Willy — killing Christian Serbs in order to save Muslims (the ones that want to kill us all) — and Clinton walked away with it without any sanction!

    5) “and if those that want to change that direction on which we were founded and grew for more than 200 years unified are dissatisfied with the U.S.A.- they should returning to whence they came or unite and create their own nation elsewhere with the laws and ideology that THEY want” — if you are talking about Obama-the-Kenyan — than I agree, send him back to his original homeland, and let him restart his socialist Empire in Africa, NEVER HERE IN USA!

    6) But, if it means that the Citizens are unhappy with a Federal US Gov that wants to dictate its unconstitutional mandates to all — than the US Constitution allows any injured peoples (states) the option to SECEDE!

    7) Obama has failed to show his real Birth Certificate — as all Americans need to do to get a job — so must be investigated by the police until he does!

    8) Once Obama is found to be Kenyan born — he must be impeached and jailed for life, and all his “laws” negated!

  7. I need to do more thinking before I comment here. I don’t seem to make my words say what I mean……
    I am backing out of this conversation and I hope to join you again on another subject.
    Bev

    • bevh2014 — wise move.

      Speaking of hand when few listen is just practice, but once published your statements are etched in stone.

      Thus, I never publish anything I won’t stand behind 100%.

Comments are closed.