Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
From Byron York's column in this morning's Washington Examiner:
Everyone knows why Texas Gov. Rick Perry wants to skip some of the coming Republican presidential debates. He's a lousy debater, and the biggest single factor in his fall from front-runner to back-in-the-pack has been his poor performance in a number of high-profile debates.
That said, Perry has a point when he suggests there are just too many debates scheduled in the rapidly dwindling number of days before voters go to the polls in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and other key primary states.
There are at least a dozen GOP debates scheduled between Nov. 9 and the Florida primary on Jan. 31. A few more are in the works but not yet confirmed. Given that there will be breaks in the debating for Thanksgiving and Christmas -- nobody expects voters to pay attention then -- that's a lot of debates in very little time....
Until a few weeks ago, there seemed to be lots of time for debating. The Iowa caucuses were set for Feb. 6, with the other contests after that. Then Florida upended the Republican schedule, setting its primary Jan. 31 and forcing the early contests to move to earlier dates. The Iowa caucuses will now be Jan. 3. More than a month of campaign time has been lost; debates that were in the planning stages have been squeezed into a smaller period of time.
I'll be interested what other Ricochetians make of this, of course, but a dozen debates between now and the Iowa caucuses strikes my own little self as about 11 too many. We're not electing a British prime minister, one of whose most important requirements is to command debate in the House of Commons. We're electing a president. You'd want him to preside over some sprightly debates in the Cabinet room, but that's about it. Making his case in speeches, by working crowds, through the judicious use of television time--that's what an American chief executive does. Let the Republican candidates start demonstrating those skills right now.
Enough with answering questions from Anderson Cooper--enough. Let the candidates spend time in Iowa taking questions from ordinary voters. Let them campaign.
Yes?
- Comment (43)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Aug '11
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Yes! Though maybe nine too many rather than 11.
But it's not just the number of debates, it's the number of candidates. I would have hoped to see the group narrowed down a bit by now, but they're all doggedly sticking around. (Except Tim Pawlenty, who has now stated he wished he hadn't dropped.)
I think part of the reason I'm excited about the Cain/Gingrich debate (aside from the fact that I would prefer one of these two above any of the others) is because it's just the two of them. And I think it's going to come as a great relief for viewers.
Oct '11
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Yes. Let the candidates move among the voters to develop and fine-tune an optimistic narrative to contrast with Obama’s message. B.O. is being petulant and pessimistic – suggesting that it’s us, not him, who are failing. It’s time to focus on the president as the problem and to send him packing for Carter country.
Oct '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
1) There are too many debates. I already have all the debate data I need on each candidate to judge each of them.
2) Perry's not a good debater, while Mitt Romney's won them all.
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Like it or not, one of these yahoos is going to have to debate Obama. So yes, some debate exposure is useful in the "vetting" process. (As of right now, do you really want to see Perry in that role?) But twelve?? That's overkill beyond overkill. Two or three or maybe four debates in the run-up to the primaries -- that should be it. In addition -- for both parties' candidates -- I think it would be useful to develop some mechaism whereby each major candidate gets to give one nationally televised "major speech." See how they "connect" with a national audience. And I'd like to see each candidate, individually, put through the rigors of a "press conference" or "town hall" type Q&A grilling. See how they think on their feet and how they answer tough questions. Couldn't we just dispense with a few weeks of "Dancing with Celebrity Rehab Survivors" or some such and slot these events into prime time in the fall every four years? (Yeah, I know -- a pipe dream.)
Oct '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
I want to see candidates opt out of these debates. There's no need for Romney to show up anymore on some of the remaining scheduled debates.
OTOH, Cain, Gingrich, Bachmann and Santorum are all just trying to get attention on their vanity campaigns or trying to sell something, so they'll keep showing up.
Oct '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
The debate tempo has struck me as much more aggressive than with past primary campaigns. While I do appreciate having more exposure to these candidates than I normally would have here on the East Coast, I think it's a bit excessive. I can only imagine how much time the candidates have to spend doing debate prep that could be better used for other campaign functions. Maybe half of number next time around would make better sense. Too few debates means that a poor debate performance could harm an otherwise good candidates if they have a bad night so there is an advantage to having more than a handful.
As we have previously discussed here on Ricochet, I think it's long past time to move away from the media centered model where you have people like Anderson Cooper masquerading as objective journalists moderating these debates. I'd rather see a partnership model where a media outlet acts as the broadcast partner and institutions like Hoover and Hillsdale provide the moderation staff.
Edited on Oct 28, 2011 at 7:39amAug '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
It would be interesting to see how many unique voters watch each debate. Is it the same audience watching every debate or do a significant number of viewers differ from debate to debate? If it's the former than the number of debates is excessive. If the later than it makes sense.
One positive aspect of the debates is that it allows people in states other than Iowa and New Hampshire to see the candidates. It also allows candidates with little money or no campaign organization to rise to the top tier. You Herman Cain supporters should be huge advocates of the debates as your man would have had no chance of gaining the spotlight without them.
May '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
The problem is that the final debates next fall will be about the only time those who rarely pay much attention to politics, and yet are the determining "swing" voters in every election, WILL be paying attention. A lousy Republican candidate's performance in the debates could lead to four years of national destruction.
It's not fair...but, as my dad always said, "life isn't fair."
Man up, Rick.
Dec '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Excellent points.
Explain “fair share” or “income inequality” and how your policy works better than what the other candidates offer, better than what Democrats offer, in 60 seconds. Those are the rules of engagement in this sound bite format.
Why has 999 made Cain so popular? Because he explains the micro- and macro-economic strategies making it so effective in 59.99 seconds? No, he repeats it nine times in under a minute.
When a candidate says his policy is different from hers, stop the debate! She has 30 seconds of rebuttal to explain how her policy has just been mischaracterized and also rectify the record. Now that’s debate!
Image eight Richard Epsteins on the stage. That's entertainment.
This farcical charade ends when the first real vote for top gladiator takes place in the state of Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin, the same two senators who have been serving Iowa for the past 36 years each. The last time Iowans made a decision in that race was in 1975, just when the Viet Cong overran Saigon. The Iowa caucuses? Is that what most people call a vote?
Start campaigning in FL, NC, VA, PA, OH, MI, WI, CO.
Apr '11
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Too many debates and too many candidates, but what are you going to do. Politics have become a kind of entertainment industry, and debates are the show. A series of debates with only a subset of the candidates would be interesting....how about a bracket. We can seed the candidates from 1 to 8 and then set up either a round robin first round followed by subsequent elimination rounds, or go elimination down the line. To get down to a final battle for the national debating championship...cup?ring?
Dec '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
This is not the first time the question has been asked. There is more to a campaign than just debating. If we were to decide our nominee solely on debate performance then Newt would already be wearing the laurel (he'd kind of look natural in a toga, too, but I digress.) Perhaps the problem with the debates is that they can only destroy and not build up a candidate at this point. All the pundits agree that Romney has won the debates, and such a stellar performance has moved his poll numbers exactly zero. All that being said, it may be as Cobalt Blue explained. Positions, performance, and presentation must be multiplied together instead of summed, and any zero brings the product to nothing. Hopefully that analysis will keep us from picking any empty suit as well as an preventing us from picking an empty mouth.
Feb '11
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Peter Robinson
From Byron York's column in this morning's Washington Examiner:
I might quibble with Byron just a bit. Lousy debate performances may be the biggest factor in Perry's fall, but let's not forget that his meteoric rise to the top was fueled mostly by hype and anti-Romney sentiment, since he was basically an unknown. His perch was always tenuous, waiting for him to solidify the spot. He never did, and ditching debates looks to me like like admission that he can't back up the hype.
Jun '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Another debate isn't going to change the fact that Mitt Romney is the candidate of establishment republicans. Another debate will only confirm that Rick Perry has marbles in his mouth. Another debate won't change the fact that Herman Cain is charismatic but inexperienced. Another debate won't magically absolve Newt of his personal baggage or make him seem any more brilliant. Another debate won't confer executive experience on Michele Bachmann. Etc., etc., etc.
From here on out I'm an ABBO - Anybody But Barack Obama.
Feb '11
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Too many debates? Not to me. I agree that the formats and moderators aren't the best and that the field needs to be winnowed, but I say fix what can be fixed and debate away. The candidates should be glad for such national coverage too. We should all be glad to get a better feel for the candidates outside of their websites and campaign propaganda too; haven't any of you gained any useful knowledge of these candidates' characters and inclinations from these debates?
Feb '11
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
~Paules: Another debate isn't going to change the fact that Mitt Romney is the candidate of establishment republicans. Another debate will only confirm that Rick Perry has marbles in his mouth. Another debate won't change the fact that Herman Cain is charismatic but inexperienced. Another debate won't magically absolve Newt of his personal baggage or make him seem any more brilliant. Another debate won't confer executive experience on Michele Bachmann. Etc., etc., etc.
From here on out I'm an ABBO - Anybody But Barack Obama. · Oct 28 at 6:57am
True, but more debates might give candidates who've had ineffective campaigns up to this point some time to find a winning formula before Iowa. Why should one candidate's shortcomings be more disqualifying than another candidate's? Self-aware candidates can still come back to prove that they deserve the nomination despite a slow starting campaign.
Mar '11
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
I can picture the Michelle Bachmann ads now:
If you change your mind, I'm the first in line
Honey I'm still free, Take a chance on me
Sep '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
While the format of the debates leave much to be desired and probably need to be changed dramatically, I disagree with York. It is true that most issues have not been explored in depth during the debates, but this is because of the shallowness of today’s journalist and the format of the debates. I’ll be interested in the upcoming Newt/Cain debate. I favor more and better debates not controlled messaging, which is what you get in ads and campaign appearances. Modern electoral politics has devolved into image marketing which explains why you get Presidents like Bush and Obama. Debates at least hold out the possibility of escaping the morass.
Feb '11
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Whoever pays for the airtime almost always determines the debate or other format and moderator(s), but candidates do need the exposure and each challenge hopefully improves their skills -- or reveals their deficiencies -- all to the good. FOX is doing a real service with its one-at-a-time interviews by the regular panel on air and continuing online. Huntsman, for example, came through very impressively. Candidates still have plenty of time to interact with folks on the ground, but "connection" these days, like it or not, is mostly through TV. It's an imperfect sifting process, to be sure. If Obama had all those debates in 2008, would he have sailed through to the nomination?
Jun '10
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
Casey
I can picture the Michelle Bachmann ads now:
If you change your mind, I'm the first in line
Honey I'm still free, Take a chance on me · Oct 28 at 7:26am
I said, "ABBO," dammit, not Abba!
Aug '11
Re: Rick Perry Has a Darned Good Point
John Marzan:
. . . Mitt Romney's won them all.
No, really . . . he didn't.