vainglorious
Member
lol Straight talk. We learned that there were no WMD's in Iraq before Bush was re-elected in 2004. No one gives a shit about Bosnia.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
DNC Debate - worst ratings so far in this debate season
- Thread starter noshten
- Start date
- Status
lol Straight talk. We learned that there were no WMD's in Iraq before Bush was re-elected in 2004. No one gives a shit about Bosnia.
Veritigo_X
Member
Same example you gave last time... If there's so much history of dishonesty to pull from why fall back to this one again?
Democratic debates never drew large audience, afaik even with the awkward scheduling, this year's debate were some of the highest watched ever for the democratic debate.
So relative to the republican ones, it might seems low but overall more people are watching the debates than ever before.
So relative to the republican ones, it might seems low but overall more people are watching the debates than ever before.
Overall DemDebates are likely to finish with under 40 million total viewers - compare that to 2012 GOP debates which on average drew much lower ratings but were still able to bring the debates total to 100 million. The main issue with DemDebates isn't even how skewed things are towards Clinton but the fact that DNC is limiting exposure to actual policies which need to have mainstream focus and also they fail to provide a counterweight to the circus on the other side on mainstream media.
There's also the very real possibility that Republicans aren't even bothering to watch the democratic debates, while democrats are watching the Republican debates because they're morbidly interested in knowing what's going to happen in a scarier alternate universe.
Regardless, Hillary fans, if she doesn't get elected, you're to blame for this. From the condescension and haughtiness exhibited on this board to the DNC, calling it early is the most rookie mistake in the book. Hillary gets by on name recognition, her voting record and experience has been less than stellar.
You forget that otherwise undecided voters still need a reason to vote for her, and even the staunchest O'Malley or Bernie fans may humanize her with repeated viewings.
Regardless, Hillary fans, if she doesn't get elected, you're to blame for this. From the condescension and haughtiness exhibited on this board to the DNC, calling it early is the most rookie mistake in the book. Hillary gets by on name recognition, her voting record and experience has been less than stellar.
You forget that otherwise undecided voters still need a reason to vote for her, and even the staunchest O'Malley or Bernie fans may humanize her with repeated viewings.
That, in addition to the scheduling, is a huge factor. Even if they were getting prime time slots, they'd still trail in ratings. Not by quite as much, but it's just not as much of a draw, unfortunately, as the Republican debates.
Question: who is paying for these debates? Solely the sponsors, or does the DNC help shoulder the load? I feel like I read something recently about the DNC having some financial issues. Perhaps that's why they can't swing a decent time slot.
His poll is consistent with all other polls. Democrats LOVE her. Her favorability ratings amongst Dems is well over 90%.
Maybe policy discussion is not boring. Maybe none of the candidates are able to interest viewers or quite possibly are not discussing policies that most Americans feel will impact them and thus interests them. Both are potential danger signs.
I just continue to get the overwhelming feeling that Democrats are taking the election for granted.
I just continue to get the overwhelming feeling that Democrats are taking the election for granted.
Yeah, any criticism of Clinton, just accuse them of being Benghazi truthers, that'll work!
Hillary and her husband are ghastly people and sly, cunning politicians. She hasn't made a sincere statement in decades let alone any real achievement
I do too, but I'm curious to know what policy talk is missing that would earn them views? Is substantive policy talk the reason Republicans are getting so much attention? Is it the fact that they're totally content with talking about the Middle East for like two hours straight?
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
The point is that the only chance Bernie or Martin have is to drum up widescale support through the debates. Hillary has the name recognition that will carry her without any further exposure.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Banned
The fact that you're apologizing, or dare I say cheerleading, the DNC's disgusting practice bothers me.
As a newcomer to politics, this whole DNC debacle with Schultz corruptness being so out in the open and people accepting and apologizing for it, just shows me the DNC is just as bad, if not worse, then the RNC.
It was up against a free UFC on FOX fight and a Cowboys - Jets game. It was never gonna do well.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
I haven't been able to watch a single Democratic Debate because they schedule them at the worst times for me. Meanwhile the garbage Republican Debates have been at the perfect time.
Its the issue currently in the news and that will continue to be until the election. Certainly the public do not seem to be wondering what their apparent next Clinton President has to say. Which tells me its far from a certain win. Americans take the most interest in Presidential Elections; but their only watching one side just now.
It may be the lowest so far, and they may be lower than the GOP debates which have been earth shattering as far as ratings, but aren't the debate ratings all around really unprecedentedly high compared to past years? Even on the dem side?
As far as the republicans benefiting from more exposure on TV.. Anyone not in the GOP base is going to be pretty disturbed by the shit that comes out of their mouths, so I'd think it probably helps to put them in front of a mainstream audience.
As far as the republicans benefiting from more exposure on TV.. Anyone not in the GOP base is going to be pretty disturbed by the shit that comes out of their mouths, so I'd think it probably helps to put them in front of a mainstream audience.
Hopefully this doesnt backfire on the dems. Sure Republicans are a bit crazy, but their their getting people to watch and listen, which is basically more mind-share. Combine that with more media attention, people parroting and the black-swan (aka Trump) and you got some potential fire ready to catch various pockets of people who could swing either way. I'm in NH and there are people leaning Trump simply because there being bombarded with guys face and name. No joke these are past 2 time Obama voters.
They move (vote) with whatever the media seems to say has the most attention and gives the most attention to. I bet there is large amount of people like this across the USA (mostly white).These folks are going to make their decision on a handful of sound bites, GUT FEELING and the energy created by repetitive mind-share and media.
They move (vote) with whatever the media seems to say has the most attention and gives the most attention to. I bet there is large amount of people like this across the USA (mostly white).These folks are going to make their decision on a handful of sound bites, GUT FEELING and the energy created by repetitive mind-share and media.
Ive watched only one DNC debate, and it was largely dull.
Its not just Trump who makes the republican ones great, sure he is a major part of it. But seeing Jeb fall apart, watching Ted Cruz eyebrows lower themselves for sympathy (and votes), Rubio telling you about his grandfather and coming to Murca, Carson looking lost on stage and speaking as if he was trying to put a 8 month year old baby to sleep, its all good stuff, Fiorina trying to cut a WWE promo on Hillary on how she will take her on, its all good stuff.
Its not just Trump who makes the republican ones great, sure he is a major part of it. But seeing Jeb fall apart, watching Ted Cruz eyebrows lower themselves for sympathy (and votes), Rubio telling you about his grandfather and coming to Murca, Carson looking lost on stage and speaking as if he was trying to put a 8 month year old baby to sleep, its all good stuff, Fiorina trying to cut a WWE promo on Hillary on how she will take her on, its all good stuff.
Allowing Republicans go unchecked has also allowed bigots, racists and crazies to come out of the woodwork. This type of rhetoric gaining national acceptance without being challenged is dangerous - simply calling it crazy while it has profound effects of how minorities live in certain communities is just underlining the danger.
If a police officer does something wrong, quite logically he should be suspended for the duration of the investigation, no?
So why is the DNC suspending the Bernie campaign's access 'openly corrupt', when it was clear Bernie's campaign engaged in wrongdoing? I don't think anybody particularly likes the current chairperson of the DNC, but in that situation I don't see what was so corrupt about the decision.
They have contractual obligations, what Sanders's team did was not in anyway a criminal activity and if you were to follow the pre-determined contractual obligations you'd have to give his team 10 days notice before taking away the access to the database or remove access to the database for all campaigns for as long as there is still lapses in the security.
DWS overstepped her bounds and thus the actual suit from Sanders's campaign has not been dropped, they have called for an independent audit of the security of the vendor and all breaches that have occurred prior to this one.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/21/politics/bernie-sanders-data-breach/
VendettaRed07
Member
Scummy of the DNC to schedule the debates the way they did honestly.
But then again O'malley and Sanders have done virtually nothing during the 3 debates to show that there should be any more. They keep saying the same things over and over and divert to their catch phrases as much as possible. The debates, while they've been good on substance, have done nothing to show that the boat is being rocked in any way or that either candidate is doing enough to over throw the queen. Public opinion likely wouldn't change at all even if they were scheduled differently
But then again O'malley and Sanders have done virtually nothing during the 3 debates to show that there should be any more. They keep saying the same things over and over and divert to their catch phrases as much as possible. The debates, while they've been good on substance, have done nothing to show that the boat is being rocked in any way or that either candidate is doing enough to over throw the queen. Public opinion likely wouldn't change at all even if they were scheduled differently
Veritigo_X
Member
I'm just going to assume your first link is a joke. Who she was named after... really?
Your second link is only fact checking part of her quote. Here's the entire thing: "We can have this Jesuitical argument about what exactly was meant. But when Chuck Hagel, who helped to draft the resolution said, 'It was not a vote for war,' What I was told directly by the White House in response to my question, 'If you are given this authority, will you put the inspectors in and permit them to finish their job?' I was told that's exactly what we intended to do."
I think the bolded is a more relevant defense for her Iraq vote than the fact that Hagel didn't actually draft the resolution.
DNC's scheduling has been pretty shitty, and all of the 'excitement' is on the GOP side (may the gods help us all)
That's like your opinion man... also just because you know O'Malley and Sander's position doesn't mean that the public at large is familiar with their platform or watched previous debates.
For me last debate signaled another new position for Sanders when tackling the question of opiate dependency and drug being either a legal or health hazard - he had previously not really tackled the subject in such a sweeping manner. Although previously he did talk about the legality of marijuana but the stance on the drug war and criminalizing addicts instead of providing treatment is something that was only touched upon in this debate.
aspiegamer
Member
Yeah... I wouldn't worry about the attention the GOP debates are getting being the "good" kind that a party wants millions of extra eyeballs to see. Their debates are circuses and are mocked the world over. I'd venture more people watch for entertainment and curiosity than for any actual interest in choosing a candidate or intent to vote for that party.
And as covered, yeah, even if the Democrats had more debates the ratings would just get worse. You can't create fake interest in your party's candidate pool, especially when the average person views the process as a formality this cycle. Were there 10 Democrats on stage trying to out-crazy one another in desperate cries for attention it would draw a larger audience, too! Not going to deny that I'd prefer more debates overall even if it's just for the sake of having them, but despite the fewer in number I'd have to guess each Democrat candidate has gotten more talking time than a Republican counterpart. This is not something the DNC needs to worry about with the RNC a trainwreck right now.
And as covered, yeah, even if the Democrats had more debates the ratings would just get worse. You can't create fake interest in your party's candidate pool, especially when the average person views the process as a formality this cycle. Were there 10 Democrats on stage trying to out-crazy one another in desperate cries for attention it would draw a larger audience, too! Not going to deny that I'd prefer more debates overall even if it's just for the sake of having them, but despite the fewer in number I'd have to guess each Democrat candidate has gotten more talking time than a Republican counterpart. This is not something the DNC needs to worry about with the RNC a trainwreck right now.
We keep calling the Republican party a train wreck yet they keep dominating in state and local elections. I think we need to revisit our definition of "traiwreck." The Democrats are in a very precarious situation.
I'm curious to know how many liberals from conservative parts of the country are falling in to the "entertainment" trap of the Republican debates vs the amount of liberals from liberal places who are fascinated by them. I fall in the former camp and I don't understand the intrigue. Any of these debates has essentially been a standard discussion around the office water cooler to me. Plus trump, of course. I've just heard his brand shit too many times to care.
I'm curious to know how many liberals from conservative parts of the country are falling in to the "entertainment" trap of the Republican debates vs the amount of liberals from liberal places who are fascinated by them. I fall in the former camp and I don't understand the intrigue. Any of these debates has essentially been a standard discussion around the office water cooler to me. Plus trump, of course. I've just heard his brand shit too many times to care.
Thequietone
Member
I couldn't watch it because I was at a Christmas party that night. I imagine many people had the same excuse.
Dixon's Jet
Banned
The first is Hillary telling an inspiration story about how she got her name (which is also a lie) and the second is a bit more notable because she and Bill tried to walk back her support for the Iraq war by suggesting that her vote for war was somehow less than a vote for war and perhaps a bluff to make Saddam play nice.
aspiegamer
Member
The RNC is a trainwreck, as a I said. In plenty of states they do have things on varies levels between "under wraps" and "rigged" depending on your perspective, yes. The huge rifts within the party are largely unimportant or even non-existent on the state and local levels.
It only means so much. You don't win culture wars at the state levels. You don't change widespread public mindset or mentality on a state level. Your party's history-altering actions don't happen on a state level. Some anti-Muslim legislation passed in Arkansas doesn't get put into history textbooks; The Supreme Court decision that overturns it does. Even if you can pull off things the party establishment thinks is awesome (such as blocking efforts at gun control) it's still not popular with the average American. The small wins are ultimately meaningless and dragging on the inevitable.
Dixon's Jet
Banned
I have to admit that I really hate this kind of response. I'm not a Republican and I have ignored the Benghazi hearings but there is still an abundance of things to dislike about Hillary Clinton.
I also think it is all too obvious that she has taken advantage of hysterical and idiotic Republicans so that opposition can be compartmentalized as 'republican fear mongering' and then discarded.
titiklabingapat
Member
Even if it was on a better time slot, it wouldnt really change the dynamics of the race since Hillary Clinton has been winning the debates so far. The only thing that can throw a wrench in that situation is if she flubbed and those flubs were repeatedly shown on social media. The timing of the debates wouldn't have mattered then.
Re: Democratic exposure. As I've said above, the only thing that can drastically change the course of a race this far out is a mistake somewhere that will be repeatedly played on cable, news sites and social media. The less debates there is, the less chance you have of producing ammo for the other side. Most party insiders know this, and most party insiders know this is only a one woman race now. Why risk it? For practice? Well, Hillary already got plenty of practice in the last three and she is still sharp as ever.
Re: Democratic exposure. As I've said above, the only thing that can drastically change the course of a race this far out is a mistake somewhere that will be repeatedly played on cable, news sites and social media. The less debates there is, the less chance you have of producing ammo for the other side. Most party insiders know this, and most party insiders know this is only a one woman race now. Why risk it? For practice? Well, Hillary already got plenty of practice in the last three and she is still sharp as ever.
Our House and Senate are an accumulation of all these small, irrelevant local/state victories. I don't see where democrats are closing that ground. This isn't something to scoff at. The legislative branch of our government is very red. They're winning battles and, although the electoral map gives them an uphill fight for the presidency, I think them taking the White House isn't exactly an impossibility.
NullPointer
Member
People who find actual debates boring can't blame the debates for that.
They're fucking debates.
Tune in if you want to see the candidates trying to sum up their ideas into pithy statements and arguing for their proposals, otherwise just go back to your sports.
They're fucking debates.
Tune in if you want to see the candidates trying to sum up their ideas into pithy statements and arguing for their proposals, otherwise just go back to your sports.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
This is all 100% intentional.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
Lol
vainglorious
Member
Then don't use republican talking points and smear tactics as the basis for your arguments?
Howard Dean, where art thou?
yanipheonu
Member
Republican debates are a comedy of billshit it's good fun.
Democrat debates are like watching a forgone conclusion. Yes, Clinton us going to be president, why did we come here again?
Democrat debates are like watching a forgone conclusion. Yes, Clinton us going to be president, why did we come here again?
The Clintons don't want debates, therefore the DNC schedules their debates in a way to prevent any other candidate from getting exposure.
It's a hilariously transparent process. There is no democracy in this country.
Clinton will win the nomination, because she has the money and her power within the party makes the entire primary process a sham.
It's a hilariously transparent process. There is no democracy in this country.
Clinton will win the nomination, because she has the money and her power within the party makes the entire primary process a sham.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked