RNC changing primary rules

[SwimExpert]

Remember when Obama appeared on Fox or took question from Fox?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URJUSlfTgGU]Obama's Contentious Fox News Interview - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sv7q_E84LB0]Full Interview Bret Baier Barack Obama Fox Special Report Part 1 - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IdVvz2Qeco]Barack Obama Addresses Syria Concerns In Interview w/ Chris Wallace - September 9, 2013 - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwu2-StjbNY]Obama on Fox News - Awesome Obama interview - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sndt0ndLn_4]Barack Obama Interviewed on Fox & Friends! - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BEF4qdtwDs]Barack Obama calls out FOX and Hannity for being hateful - YouTube[/ame]

 

[AVG-JOE]

Remember when the Democrats had Hannity, Limbaugh and Levin moderate their primaries?

​

Ummmmmm... no.



I'm sorry I missed that. That would have been "Must see t.v."

 

[JakeStarkey]

The mainstream GOP policy makers certainly are not answering the questions of a JoeB or worrying about the comments of a Pennywise.

 

[Pennywise]

Fer sure.

They'd try to "out-conservative" each other.

It'd be awesome.

As opposed to now where they try to "out democrat-lite" each other from loaded questions by biased moderators.

False dichotomy.

You don't know true versus false or what a "dichotomy " is, otherwise you wouldn't have bothered responding. Not my fault you can't decipher an apt analogy.

 

[hunarcy]

For entertainment purposes, all moderators should have to be subject to a conservative means testing so that only real conservatives get to question the candidates.

I, for one, would love to see Anne Coulter as a moderator.

Could she do worse than Candy Crowley?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh, yeah.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"There is a definitely a consensus for Reince's objective to have less debates and have control over how and who we have run our debates, rather than just turning it over to X, Y or Z network and having a guy moderate who's going to just dog you for two hours," said the Republican, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive and not-yet-finalized rules changes.

Telling.

Less information, more control over what little information is provided.

Why bother to have ‘debates’ at all. The GOP is more interested in a staged political event than a ‘debate.’

Clearly GOP bosses are afraid someone will say something ‘republican.’

 

[SwimExpert]

As opposed to now where they try to "out democrat-lite" each other from loaded questions by biased moderators.

False dichotomy.

You don't know true versus false or what a "dichotomy " is, otherwise you wouldn't have bothered responding. Not my fault you can't decipher an apt analogy.

No. It wasn't an apt analogy. It was a false dichotomy. But hey, it's not my fault that you're so small and weak minded that you can't understand a spectrum with more than two options.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“…rather than just turning it over to X, Y or Z network and having a guy moderate who's going to just dog you for two hours," said the Republican…

‘Dog’ you about what?

The facts? The truth?

Heaven forbid.

 

[Derideo_Te]

First on CNN: Republicans moving to overhaul 2016 primary process - CNN.com

I assume this marks the end of the clown car festivities?

One proposal being weighed by the RNC members would involve sanctioning a small handful of debates while penalizing candidates who participate in any nonsanctioned GOP debate by stripping them of one-third of their delegates to the national convention.

There is also a "heavy appetite" to have a say over which journalists should be allowed to moderate the debates, said one Republican familiar with the ongoing discussions.

"There is a definitely a consensus for Reince's objective to have less debates and have control over how and who we have run our debates, rather than just turning it over to X, Y or Z network and having a guy moderate who's going to just dog you for two hours," said the Republican, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive and not-yet-finalized rules changes.

Calendar changes approved by the subcommittee must then be ratified by the RNC's Standing Committee on Rules, a vote that could take place as early as January at the RNC's winter meeting in Washington. If approved by the rules committee, the full 168-member RNC must vote on the calendar changes sometime before next summer.

This is a promising start.

Interesting approach. Of course it will simply inflame those who already perceive the establishment GOP as being 100% RINO and they will just seize on this as yet more "evidence" that they are being "persecuted" for being "real conservatives".

Nice article here shows how this is just history repeating itself.

Teddy Roosevelt Failed to Save the GOP From Its Crazies in 1912 - Thomas Patterson - POLITICO Magazine

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The mainstream GOP policy makers certainly are not answering the questions of a JoeB or worrying about the comments of a Pennywise.

Since none of you are Republicans why should they?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Because party growth is a republican objective?

Or is it?

Piece.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Because party growth is a republican objective?

Or is it?

Piece.

Depends on who you ask. The establishment GOP is interested in obtaining a majority in the Senate and the Whitehouse in 2016. The Tea Party is more concerned about the ideological purity of the candidates. Since the former objective requires the willingness to compromise the latter group perceives that as a betrayal of principle. So this is a fight for control of the party.

 

[Rozman]

Good idea....

 

[JakeStarkey]

The mainstream GOP policy makers certainly are not answering the questions of a JoeB or worrying about the comments of a Pennywise.

Since none of you are Republicans why should they?

Since you aren't GOP, I don't care.

We have finally kicked the shrimp TPM in the drawers, forced them into the closet, and locked the door.

Our GOP can sweep left of center to right of center without them yapping.

 

[HenryBHough]

Today's mainstream Republicans have tilted so far to the left that the party is nothing mroe than the wistful wing of The Democrat Party. Truly, Republican In Name Only.

 

[Two Thumbs]

First on CNN: Republicans moving to overhaul 2016 primary process - CNN.com

I assume this marks the end of the clown car festivities?

One proposal being weighed by the RNC members would involve sanctioning a small handful of debates while penalizing candidates who participate in any nonsanctioned GOP debate by stripping them of one-third of their delegates to the national convention.

There is also a "heavy appetite" to have a say over which journalists should be allowed to moderate the debates, said one Republican familiar with the ongoing discussions.

"There is a definitely a consensus for Reince's objective to have less debates and have control over how and who we have run our debates, rather than just turning it over to X, Y or Z network and having a guy moderate who's going to just dog you for two hours," said the Republican, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive and not-yet-finalized rules changes.

Calendar changes approved by the subcommittee must then be ratified by the RNC's Standing Committee on Rules, a vote that could take place as early as January at the RNC's winter meeting in Washington. If approved by the rules committee, the full 168-member RNC must vote on the calendar changes sometime before next summer.

This is a promising start.

Awesome, the rnc power elite are working to control the message to prevent conservative and libertarian views from being heard.

Doesn't tyrannical control just warm the heart?

 

[HenryBHough]

Awesome, the rnc power elite are working to control the message to prevent conservative and libertarian views from being heard.

Doesn't tyrannical control just warm the heart?

Somebody needed more evidence that the Republican Party is now a spavined sub-set of The Democrat Party?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Because party growth is a republican objective?

Or is it?

Piece.

Depends on who you ask. The establishment GOP is interested in obtaining a majority in the Senate and the Whitehouse in 2016. The Tea Party is more concerned about the ideological purity of the candidates. Since the former objective requires the willingness to compromise the latter group perceives that as a betrayal of principle. So this is a fight for control of the party.

moderates want to stifle debate and control the message.

they see their power slipping so they are going to take their ball and go home aka; change the rules so I win or you don't even get to play

 

[Two Thumbs]

Awesome, the rnc power elite are working to control the message to prevent conservative and libertarian views from being heard.

Doesn't tyrannical control just warm the heart?

Somebody needed more evidence that the Republican Party is now a spavined sub-set of The Democrat Party?

I don't think the party is a sub-set of the dnc

The people running the rnc and gop pols most certainly are.