Archive for the 'Debates' category

Heading Into Tuesday’s Debate

Oct 06 2008 Published by under Candidates, Debates, Elections, Pandering, Politics

I thought I’d pull out an oldie but a goodie from the 2004 campaign. It’s the Daily Show’s coverage of the Coral Gables debate and “the expectations game.”

No responses yet

A New Endeavor

Jan 08 2008 Published by under Bloggers, Broadband Policy, Cable, Debates, Gadgets, Legislation, Self-Promotion, Technology, Television, The FCC, The Internet

Between work, travel, the holidays, the caucuses and primaries, and another project I’ve been trying to launch, I just haven’t had a lot of time to write, but I wanted to share a new endeavor I’ve undertaken. NCTA (the day job) has launched a new telecom policy blog at CableTechTalk.com.

CableTechTalk will give the industry a voice in the ongoing discussion and debate over telecom policy discussions. Debate over the direction of our nation’s telecom laws increasingly takes place online. This blog seeks to be an active player in that conversation, but it won’t be one-sided. Far from a typical press release and talking points blog, CableTechTalk will invite people with whom we disagree to engage in cross posted debates on the issues – sharing both sides of the argument and letting readers draw their own conclusion.

The blog also gives us the opportunity to share developments in the gadgets that attach to and leverage our voice, video and data platform. This week we’re in Las Vegas looking at the new tech toys on display at CES. We’re looking at the new TVs and set-top boxes, personal entertainment devices, gaming and broadband applications, and all the other things that make life fun.

If you get a chance, I hope you’ll take a look.

No responses yet

Hillary and Obama: A Study in Contrasts

Nov 02 2007 Published by under Barack Obama, Candidates, Debates, Democrats, Elections, Hillary Clinton, Politics

Not that I think Hillary’s gender-baiting rhetoric from the last 72 hours needs more coverage, but I think there is a larger point being lost in this. Sure, it’s sort of ridiculous to keep telling us that a woman is tough enough to stand up to the bullying of dictators around the world, and then squeal about the sexism of her opponents attacking her for being woefully unimpressive in a debate. That’s not what really stands out to me, though.

What really stands out is the difference in Obama and Hillary. Obama could have played the race card against Hillary early on. When he first questioned the coronation process that many argue is taking place, Hillary sent her minions to savage him – to accuse him of breaking some imaginary pledge to run a campaign without uttering her name.

Obama, in turn, could easily have replied that this was an attempt by the monochromatic cast of Hillary’s campaign to keep the black man down. He could have arranged a conference call filled with African-American supporters claiming this was ‘an attempt to make Obama be the white man’s slave.” They didn’t. They didn’t dredge up the imagery of black on white crime. They didn’t try to make the campaign about race. They fought about the substance of the charges, and defended themselves without resorting to stereotypes.

Honestly, it leaves me even more convinced that this race is Obama’s to lose. Regardless of Mark Penn’s pronouncement that women are going to be all over this, I think the more they try to play that card, the worse they’re going to do.

Hillary’s numbers are already very soft with men. A recent poll I read (and forgive me for not being able to find the source) indicated that 40% of men already believe that Hillary is absoutely unacceptable as a candidate. This was before her women vs. men rhetoric kicked in. It’s unlikely that this will earn her more favor among men. That aside, however, I have heard grumblings from a lot of women that this does them all a disservice. That Hillary’s crocodile tears belittle the cause of feminism by hiding behind it.

Perhaps this entire scene was choreographed. Somewhere in the deep bowels of Camp Hillary, they may have seen an eventual stumble as inevitable and believed they could make hay out of a charge of sexism. It would not surprise me. In fact, I suspect that’s the case. It does not change the fact that it is politics of the lowest order.

It will be interesting to see if there is a price to be paid by Hillary for this tactic. Obama doesn’t feel the need to enlist the politics of race to elect the first Black President. Does Hillary believe she has to cry sexism in order to unite a political sisterhood? If so, will it get her enough women who agree to counter the number turned off by her methods?

One response so far

Victory!

Aug 08 2007 Published by under Candidates, Debates, Democrats, Elections, Politics, Republicans

Before beginning my self-imposed exile to help get Fred Thompson’s web operation off the ground, I was actively involved in an effort to free the debates. Lawrence Lessig, Mike Krempasky, Michelle Malkin, myself and a number of others had been seeking assurances from the RNC that they would require the debate footage be made available for public consumption.

The RNC, as is their tendency, was less than accommodating. The request went nowhere. Their spokesperson said they would not get involved in such matters. The coalition behind the call for open debates kept pressuring the networks , and began to see some progress when CNN agreed.

Today, NBC and ABC joined the side of righteousness and agreed as well. My hats are off to them for, albeit slowly, coming to the right decision.

That leaves only CBS and Fox as the holdouts. Hopefully it’s only a matter of time until they come around. When they do, maybe the RNC will finally get around to weighing in.

No responses yet