I watched part of the GOP presidential debate last night.
Clearly, ten candidates is way too many participants for a general issue debate. The organizers should either split the field in half and have two debates (not a practical solution) or they should limit the issues (e.g., a foreign policy debate) so the candidates can offer more substance.
This is pretty funny:
President Bush’s name was invoked by Republican candidates only once during yesterday’s 90-minute debate, in response to a question about Scooter Libby’s pardon. By comparison, Ronald Reagan’s name was cited 19 times.
The Bush record was the elephant in the room, so to speak.
I thought the moderators had a few interesting questions which got at the big-government conservative/libertarian divide. I also think the show of hand questions can be used as an effective change of pace. But note to moderator: if you are going to ask for a show of hands, take the time to acknowledge who is raising his hand. It’s pointless exercise if viewers don’t get to see who has his hand shot. A two second side view of the candidates doesn’t cut it (this happened in the Democratic debate, too).
Speaking of pointless, how was this Chris Mathews question:
But let me ask you about something else that might be a negative in the upcoming campaign. Seriously.
Would it be good for America to have Bill Clinton back living in the White House?
A stupid and loaded (“negative”) question. What a waste of our time with that silliness. A GOP candidate would just as soon burn an American flag on stage as answer “yes” to that question. What’s the point of asking? How is that supposed to enlighten the audience on the candidates’ philosphy?