>


Indeed, Republicans are currently reaching out to networks on their own to propose their own GOP-approved version of debates. One issue that they take particular issue with is the presence of debate moderators

Ahh, there it is. They want to "debate", but they don't want to be called out on their bullshit, or for breaking the decorum of the debate. That's "unfair" to the crybabies. Ultimate cowardice on display, as usual.
"We know there is a high likelihood that our candidate will be a fucking moron, so we don't want a Democrat making them look bad". >

Just look at how DeSantis did against Charlie Crist - a fluffy cloud in human man form - in his one debate.
No way the RNC can risk putting DeSantis up against a tougher opponent. >

DeSantis won big in the election though, so either that debate didn’t matter or the outcome has been misread >

In Florida. Florida is not a great indicator of what to expect from a national election... (thank god) >

People said the same thing about the orange turd. Be vigilant >

We watched the movie, the spinoff would be worse for sure. >

Fine, go ahead and hold the debate with the democratic candidate and an empty podium. Mention once at the beginning of the broadcast that the republican candidate refused to participate then proceed. Keep the same questions and allow the democratic candidate to answer them in full. Basically a town hall. But keep that empty podium on the stage to remind viewers of who showed up.
Edit: In fact, put the LWV back in charge of it like they used to be. >

I think you should keep asking the republican candidate questions, pan to the empty podium and sit on it for 45 seconds or whatever the time limit is. >

Clint Eastwood did that once. >

It worked, too. Obama was a one-term President. >

then explain 2008-2016 >

It was a really long term. >

Double the length of most terms if I recall. >

It is the longest single term to ever term. >

Actually the longest term was FDR's. His term termed for sixterm years. >

and he is why we have term limits.
Cause Republicans were so butthurt from the asskicking they got from a man in a wheelchair. >

The Republican Party is in a death spiral, but it’s probably going to take decades and take a lot of people with it. >

I genuinely fear what the GOP is willing to do once it becomes abundantly clear that they cannot win through normal means. It's no secret that their voters, and even some of their politicians, are already willing to resort to violence. >


I genuinely fear what the GOP is willing to do once it becomes abundantly clear that they cannot win through normal means

I mean, we already have, haven't we? It'll just get amplified from here on out. >

My civics teacher told us this would happen, 23 years ago. Republican unpopularity and their overreliance on gerrymandering and disinformation were already on the front page. Their disrespect for democracy was already obvious to anyone paying attention, even back then. >

Roger Stone that little weasel >

Just listened to the Behind the Bastards two parter on him. As Robert said, he’s possibly not quite as bad as Manifort but he’s still a huge, steamy pile of shit. >

They're doing this because they know their actual positions are repugnant to the average voter and won't stand the scrutiny of a debate. >

“repugnant”
-JFK >

One of the absolute minimum requirements for running for office should be standing up for the beliefs you are running on and defending them in a debate. 
Demonstrate you can hold your own and who you are. If you run on lies and never follow through on why people are voting for you, it should be on record and you should be held accountable. 
We need more quality checks not less. Don't let this be acceptable. It's not. >

In that case the Republican party hasn't qualified for running for office since at least 2010. I can't think of "a deeply held belief" the Republicans haven't turned their backs on at least once in the past 12 years. >

Can’t debate when your platform is nothing but culture wars and grievances about M&M, trans folk and AP African studies. >

Don’t you leave Hunter Biden’s dick off that list now. >

Hunter's Hog is the new Harambe. >

Who would have thought that the party of homophobes would end up being a bunch of dudes obsessed with another man's dong >

Kitara Ravache thought that! >

"If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.”
—David Frum >

I mean they also rejected conservatism. What position of theirs is still small government. >

Conservatism is the defense of the ruling class and existing power structures from changes that occur in society. The idea of a small government was just a slogan to kill off social policies.
Frum was just pointing out something that has already been seen countless times before; that fascism is capitalism in decay. It is the illiberalism deployed to keep capitalism intact so long as the blood flows to the blood god. >

Heaven forbid they address the public they're running to serve. How do you expect your leader to show courage in the face of major obstacles when they're too much of a coward to face the public? >

Actually developing a plan that sounds coherent and helps people is not their strong suit. Of course they won’t debate. It’s easier to keep their supporters if they don’t reveal anything except why the other side is bad, therefore vote for them. >

Their problem is that Trump is basically incoherent and DeSantis is an asshole. So, they can't put either on public display. >

DeSantis’ voice is not very commanding. He doesn’t sound good at all. Even 80yo Biden sounds more ‘manly’ than DeSantis. >

I thought the RNC already announced they will no longer be sending a nominee to any presidential debate back in 2020? >

Yes because trump couldn't make it through basic questions without going of on rambling incoherent rants and had his mic shut down multiple times because he kept trying to talk over biden. >

Never forget >

Of course they are. The Presidential Debates are for people who use facts, and every statement is thoroughly analyzed and fact-checked for accuracy. It also allows for critical examination of people's stances, and Republicans of late don't want to show their voters just how deficient they are at defending their hypocrisy. >

They know they'll be fact checked faster than the fly on Pence's hair. >

Duh.
The fascist forced birthers know their wacko beliefs aren't popular. >


We don't want whomever it is to be exposed as being embarrassingly dumb. Like last time. And the time before. >

Pussies. >

Pussies can take a pounding and push out a baby. They're more like balls that will bring a man to their knees with a simple touch. >

I believe in this context it is used as a shortened form of "pusillanimous," meaning "showing a lack of courage or determination; timid". >

Or pussy cat. Either way, has nothing to do with female anatomy. >

Way to put your failures on blast, RNC >

If their nominee could read they would probably be pissed about this. >

Awesome. Let Biden answer questions unopposed and then show an empty podium when it's the Republican's turn. >

They've lost every argument, so they don't want to  debate anymore. 
They just want a fascist dear leader to lie his way to power and then impose his will on the American people. >

Let's not let them brand this as a boycott. They and their candidate are fucking terrified of actual debate. They are ideologically bankrupt, morally reprehensible, and intellectually impaired. They have no platform, no plan, and no desire to govern. The GOP is a criminal organization intent on ending American democracy and enriching its ruling class while enslaving the people. >

fucking cowards. what more is there to say? >

What a bunch of limp dicked cowards
Give us a show fuckers. You're the party of Reagan, act like it >

If their candidate is too chickenshit to debate, why should they be elected? >

Lol, cowards. >

Calling Biden senile yet being afraid to debate him 🧐 >

With no policies, plans, or programs to talk about, it would be like debating with an empty podium. 
I see your ploy now. >

All their planks are warped outrage over M&Ms and Dr. Seuss and a rainbow and personal issues of others that have nothing to do with them. At all. 
But - here we are some more. >

Of course not, they have no policies to speak of. They haven't come up with a new idea since Newt had them sign that 'pact'...
 Every debate they have is rinse and repeat. 'Tax breaks for the wealthiest, make America a theocracy, cut Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid/Social services and make sure that the mentally unstable have access to firearms.' >

Well then we know they're still a treasonous, unserious party hell-bent on crime. >

don't threaten me with a good time. >

"We have no desire to defend our untenable positions!" >

So many hills to die on...please continue. >

The nominee will almost certainly be mini man DeSantis.
The new norm will be that the GOP will avoid any presidential debates and will shun all but the most far right "news" organizations from their rallies.
I would put a 99% chance on this being the way forward for the GOP.
They have a MASSIVE victim complex in which nothing is ever "fair".
They won't try to appeal to new voters, but instead continue to work so that the voter base they do have is able to go further (redistricting, voter restriction laws, etc.), which is why this approach will work in the short-term. >

DeSantis is the front runner, but I wouldn't rule out Nikki Haley this far out.
She doesn't have the formers baggage to deal with, her own being relatively small compared to his culture war bullshit. 
In current GOP terms shes a lot cleaner. >

They won't debate if they can't win. And with their extreme positions they can't win. Do you support ending Social Security? Yes or no? >

Awesome. Then there should be an empty podium on stage >

As if this is a big deal. Republicans don’t have any policies. trump just lied and attacked. The GQP in a nutshell is all lies and grievance. >

That would be either a strategic error, or a terrifying reality that the RNC no longer needs to participate in critical democratic traditions in order to maintain viability. >

They don't.  They have the support of the Southern Baptist Church and that alone is enough to win elections. >

Fielding candidates like Herschel Texas Ranger why would they even try? >

I've said many times when this sort of thing came up - have the Democratic nominee go anyway with a cardboard cutout of the GQP nominee. Stand that cutout in front of the mic. After answering a question, say "but I would like to hear what my opponent has to say," then wait a few seconds before saying "well as we can see, my opponent clearly does not believe that we, the American people, deserve to know their policy positions." >

Because they're beliefs can't be defended. >

If it's Trump they will stick to their boycott. But if it's DeSantis or another halfway coherent candidate? They will trip over themselves wanting to face Biden on stage. I support Joe, but he wasn't in top form in 2020 in the debates. 4 years later and against someone other than Trump he's likely going to fair much worse. >

They won't stick to any boycott, regardless of who the nominee is. There will be a 2024 Presidential Debate, and there will be a Democratic nominee there. 
If they want to give 2 hours of uninterrupted primetime air to the Democratic candidate I won't argue too much with them. >

As much as I enjoy watching debates towns halls are starting to grow more on me. >

I suppose they could still hold a debate and have an empty podium for the no-show, then. Let the other candidate have the WHOLE time to themselves on TV, and pan periodically to the empty podium for rebuttal. >

Lol. Just invite the Libertarians then. Stop doing business with the Republican Party completely. >

When crazy decides it isn't going to show up, the solution is not to invite a different form of crazy to replace it. >

Wtf is happening to my party >

The continuation of everything since (at least) Gingrich >

R candidates can't survive outside their own media bubble.  Exposure to facts causes them to melt. >

The Real Presidential Debates, with your host, \^&*er Carlson, only on Fox ! >

I remember a time when conservatives at least relished in the debate and exchange of ideas, and weren’t just brainless rubber stamps for whoever their anointed leader was. >

That's what happens when you have a religious voting base.  Cults know how to cult... and little else. >

We have a weekly TV panel show in the U.K., “Have I Got News For You”, where a mix of comedians, politicians and other celebrities answer questions about the weeks news, preferably in a humorous manner.
The Labour Member of Parliament, Roy Hattersley, didn’t show up for a recording, cancelling at the last minute for - I believe- the 3rd time- so they replaced him with a tub of lard, which occupied his seat throughout the filming. >

Went down in history as one of. Funniest episodes ever, also the tub of lard proved to be much more insightful, intelligent and interesting than Hattersley could ever be >

The fact that DeSantis would do horribly in a real debate, pretty much means he must be kept carefully presented with in the right-wing media bubble.
Debates were out of the question as soon as he began to look like their guy. >

Ha ha that's because their nominee will be an IDIOT AND A LIAR!  THEY CAN'T WIN A BATTLE OF WITS SO THEY FOLD! >

It’s probably for the best. Having your candidate display their ignorance on national television does not instill confidence or gain votes. >

Remember - Walker was close.
:/ >

No plans, no goals and all thin-skinned 
No wonder. >

Well, how many ways can you say, "our platform is the same as it was in 2016 and 2020...own the libs"? >

Have him debate the Libertarian candidate then.    They get a national platform and suck off votes from the Republicans >

Hold it anyway.  You’ll get about as much sense out of the empty podium as you’d get out of the nominee. >

If the networks had any balls they would just say "Cool then your opponent gets all the screen time for himself" >

There's no point having debates with people who don't deal in facts. >

Our ideas are so good we don’t want to discuss them or let you hear them!  - GOP, probably >

Wants to run the free world but can't handle a debate. Pathetic. >

They don’t really want to run anything. They wouldn’t know how. >

Is it because they are too stupid to debate? Lol >

Hold the debates anyways. They don’t have to show up >

Republicans have no policies other than obstructing the Democrats. Nothing to debate.