GOP’s unsolvable debate mess: Why RNC’s new reform plan is doomed
The right is convinced that biased debate moderators made their candidates look bad. Here's its brilliant solution
Topics: Debates, 2016 Elections, Reince Priebus, RNC, Fox News, Media, CNN, Editor's Picks, The Right, GOP, Russia Today, Media News, Politics News
Mitt Romney and Rick Perry speak during a Republican presidential debate, July 8, 2013. (Credit: AP/Chris Carlson)The Republican National Committee came to a firm conclusion following the 2012 presidential primaries: The more its candidates are on public display with each other, the worse it is for the party. They should be credited for this realization. But will limiting the number of debates, as the RNC has voted indirectly to do, change the effects of the debates that survive?
On Friday, the RNC gave final approval to chairman Reince Priebus’ plan for comprehensive debate reform. It’s a modified carrot-and-sticks approach, by which we mean there are no carrots. (It’s a sticks approach.) Politico reports:
A group of 13 RNC members, essentially operating under the control of party Chairman Reince Priebus, will choose the timing, location and media partners of the 2015-2016 Republican primary debates. They will insist that conservative panelists join moderators from the mainstream media.
To make it stick, the plan would crack down on candidates who participate in debates that aren’t sanctioned by the party — by barring them from ones that are.
There are two goals, then.
The first is to reduce the number of primary debates, of which there were approximately 20 in the previous cycle, which allowed the debate winner/most vociferous screamer to win whatever primary happened to come up immediately afterward and extend the calendar aimlessly toward its inevitable coronation of Mitt Romney. Priebus’ plan should certainly achieve that. It’s unclear what the final tally will be but one RNC meeting attendee tells Politico they’re thinking “six to 10.”
Then there’s the other, harder to enforce goal: reshaping the content of those debates by “[insisting that conservative panelists join moderators from the mainstream media.” Priebus insists that this complaint comes from the “grass roots,” who are tired of the secret liberal MSM questioners playing agents provocateurs and launching intra-GOP quarrels.
“Any speech you give nowadays to the grass roots, there’s no bigger applause line than when you say, ‘This time around, we’re going to have something to say about the moderators and debate partners,’” Priebus said in an interview. “People go wild!”
“They want good moderators that aren’t in the business of playing gotcha, and it’s our responsibility to become the custodian of the nomination process,” he added. “The last couple cycles, the RNC forgot about their responsibility of being the custodian of the nomination process.”
So they’re thinking of having Rich Lowry or Bill Kristol onstage to ensure no questions cause any sort of debate or friction within the party. Sounds journalism-y to me … does it sound journalism-y to you?

