Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Boom – RNC drops NBC from Super Tuesday debate after CNBC debacle

Boom – RNC drops NBC from Super Tuesday debate after CNBC debacle

Great job CNBC!

Remember the debacle at the CNBC Republican debate in October, where the moderators were horrendous in their treatment of the candidates?

I suggested at the time GOP needs to make an example of NBC News:

The GOP has a long history of subjecting its candidates to abuse by debate moderators.

From George Stephanopolous to Candy Crowley, debates are a time for network journalists to earn their battle badges by damaging Republicans.

And the GOP just sucks it up and takes it….

NBC News issued a statement saying it hoped to work with the RNC to resolve any differences.

Don’t let it.

The GOP has stumbled, almost blind, into a way to harness the anger of the Republican electorate while also resetting the relationship between the GOP and the hostile media.

Make an example of NBC News.

It’s a winning issue. No one likes journalists. The profession is not well respected and is viewed widely as biased. Who is going to come to the defense of NBC News?

So why would the CNBC moderators have thought the most recent Republican Primary debate should be any different? …

I don’t think all networks should be shut out. Divide them against themselves.

Will CNN turn away the largest audiences it ever had and the massive paydays to defend NBC News? Let the others profit from NBC News’ loss. They’ll get the message.

Turn the narrative around from the GOP needing the media to the media needing the GOP.

Ted Cruz scored a good soundbite off the moderators:

Reince Preibus commented at the time:

I expected the RNC to chicken out and strike a deal with NBC to be nice next time.

Much to my surprise, the RNC has struck back, as CNN somewhat gleefully reports, NBC replaced by CNN for GOP’s Super Tuesday debate:

The Republican National Committee has decided to sever ties with NBC News for February’s Super Tuesday debate and will instead partner with CNN, it was announced Monday.

“The Republican National Committee has decided to move forward without NBC’s participation in our February debate in Houston, Texas. The RNC has awarded the debate to CNN, who will broadcast it on Thursday, February 25th in Houston at a location to be decided,” RNC Chairman Reince Priebus wrote in a statement.

Priebus said that the debate will include Telemundo, the NBCUniversal-owned Hispanic media company that had been scheduled to co-host the debate; National Review, NBC’s original conservative media partner; and Salem Communications, CNN’s conservative media partner in previous debates.

The decision comes two-and-a-half months after the RNC suspended its partnership with NBC News because of CNBC’s handling of the third GOP debate in October, which the Republicans said devolved into a series of “gotcha’ questions.

More, please.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I’m not sure this is an improvement.

While I question going with CNN, especially since FOX has more viewers, I am glad that they made and example out of NBC. The “debate” in October wasn’t a debate it was an attempt to discredit the republicans to boost Hillary’s slim chances.

    Estragon in reply to Gremlin1974. | January 19, 2016 at 1:53 am

    Giving another debate to Fox would just feed the leftist meme about Fox & GOP. CNN was not so bad, much closer to fair, seems the better choice to make the point about NBC.

It’s about time. I think Trump and Cruz made it clear to the MSM that this time it is different. Nice to see a bit of backbone. The Republican debates seem to be big money makers for the networks. I hope this sends a message.

    Is that some sort of skin disease that turns you orange? Or a follicular disorder that causes your hair to all swoop forward in an embarrassing comb-over-forward effect?

      great unknown in reply to Paul. | January 18, 2016 at 9:35 pm

      Perhaps you would be embarrassed if you suffered from such a disease. Mr. Trump obviously is not – in fact, it his trademark.

      But of course, the sensibilities of an extremely successful businessman, Wharton graduate, and now politician who is mopping the floor with establishment politicians and pundits are not something to value.

      Consider this – if despite his “physical defects” he still is by far the most popular GOP candidate, imagine if he didn’t have those deformities: he would win by acclamation.

    Ragspierre in reply to VotingFemale. | January 18, 2016 at 11:39 pm

    Levin reminded listener to not forget who the real enemy is: The Democratic Party represented by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Sen. Ted Cruz was once unanimously considered a hero of conservatism, a fighter against the Establishment, only now to have his words twisted and to be cast as a foe.

    Levin believes the American people don’t have to be dragged into such stupidity.
    – See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/01/levin-im-sick-and-tired-of-stupid-talk#sthash.7siYPbnq.dpuf

    #Trump effect…

The Friendly Grizzly | January 18, 2016 at 8:56 pm

Many news readers, interviewers, and commentators have used nicknames on the air, yet they still sounded professional and dignified. Examples, including some of the pioneers of television: Clete Roberts. Chet Huntley, Dave Garroway. Sam Balters. Johnny Carson. Steve Allan. Jack Paar. Connie Chung (before she went militant).

I may be old fashioned, but I just could not take someone seriously who uses the name “Candy” as her on-air name. She has proved herself every bit as ditz-y as her name makes her sound.

So, when every network in turn has used the debates to take pot shots at Republican candidates, then what? The networks have the RNC over a barrel – there are only a few networks and they’re the only games in town. The RNC has to play ball with at least one of them, no matter how roughly its candidates are handled.

    great unknown in reply to DaveGinOly. | January 18, 2016 at 9:45 pm

    That is precisely what Trump, Carson, and Cruz have declared to be incorrect. It would not take much to have the debates on C-SPAN, and not only would it cost nothing, it would provide carriers much desired viewership numbers.

    Of course, with enough money and organization [Trump, anyone] an independent broadcast could be set up. Or a webcast – which worked very well for the NFL London game this year.

    The networks are hemorrhaging subscribers at a massive rate. Trump wasn’t kidding when he said he should charge them for appearing at the debates. As in so much of the loss of establishment control of information distribution, this is finally allowing truth to sneak out to the public. And the public is disgusted enough with the media to seek out the truth.

    You fail to realize when the debates have Trump and 20MM plus ratings it is the RNC and campaigns that have the leverage.

Long overdue. Keep kicking the GOPe in the a** and they may gradually learn a few things.

Wait! National Review and Salem Communications are CONSERVATIVE allies?
In what world?

The ONLY reason the RNC made this decision is Donald Trump!
Election after election the GOP candidates were slimed by the media and nothing was done.

Trump changed that with some help from Cruz.

There is a new game in town today. Let the idiots in the media play their stupid game. We are not listening now!

Notice to the media and the establishments republicans we are done with you!!
TRUMP 2016

I have never understood why the RNC would have Debates on the Enemy network. There are many neutral sites that can be used. We are all tired of these ” Gotcha,” questions claiming to be Debates. First, the RNC has too many candidates. They always start with a room full, as political favors being in play. There should be no more than a Parties top 4 Candidates. When someone has 30 seconds to answer, how can we know what they really stand for on the subject.

buckeyeminuteman | January 19, 2016 at 2:03 pm

Why doesn’t the GOP hold a debate on a network I can pick up with my rabbit ears? Some of us don’t waste our money on satellite or cable TV and have no way to watch these things. Just as the MSM shouldn’t get to decide which candidate has a chance by limiting the debate stage to candidates who meet made up polling criteria, the MSM also shouldn’t get to limit candidate exposure to those who are willing to pay exorbitant prices for 200 channels with nothing on them.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend