Timing of these debates and speeches... Why?

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Seriously.... Who is in charge of scheduling this stuff?

Obama gives a "jobs" speech up against the NFL season opener. And now the R's are holding a debate against a Monday Night Football double header.

These guys can't be that dense, can they? It's almost like they don't want anyone to watch them. Or is it possible that they are so arrogant they believe the average American will forego the opening week of football to listen to them drone on and on about a jobs bill or who should be the guy to run against Obama?

Any ideas? Because this makes no sense to me.

 

[dank69]

Seriously.... Who is in charge of scheduling this stuff?

Obama gives a "jobs" speech up against the NFL season opener. And now the R's are holding a debate against a Monday Night Football double header.

These guys can't be that dense, can they? It's almost like they don't want anyone to watch them. Or is it possible that they are so arrogant they believe the average American will forego the opening week of football to listen to them drone on and on about a jobs bill or who should be the guy to run against Obama?

Any ideas? Because this makes no sense to me.

They do not want John Q. Public to have any idea what they are doing or saying.

 

[K1052]

It's almost like they don't want anyone to watch them.

Given the sorry state of both parties and the abysmal approval ratings all around...I think this is the idea.

Let the people be distracted by the games rather than the real issues at hand. A political strategy that's older than dirt and one that still works.

 

[nageov3t]

the debates were scheduled months ago by the organizers.

 

[brandonb]

They do not want John Q. Public to have any idea what they are doing or saying.

Exactly.

I remember hearing a story from someone, not sure if its true or not. But at the peak of the Roman empire, the Romans created the gladiator shows to entertain the public so they'd become oblivious to the world around them. The politics behind it, and the wars going on that may keep people unhappy. It worked. It was a great distraction.

Sports are the same. If people care more about Football than politics, then they are some messed up individuals. Who cares if your favorite team wins or loses, does it make any different in your life one way or another? I can't wait for them to go extinct. Or atleast lose popularity so only stupid Joe Sixpacks are the ones who watch it.

 

[theeedude]

Doesn't really matter. People who want to watch the debates and speech can do so on youtube at any time. People who don't want to watch them aren't going to, even if there is no football on.

 

[a777pilot]

All politicians think they are important.

 

[BoberFett]

the debates were scheduled months ago by the organizers.

I'm willing to bet that the NFL season was known last year.

 

[randomrogue]

It was probably cheaper. Nobody wants to go up against football so those slots are probably dirt cheap. Anyone who is interested will watch it on youtube later or record it.

 

[Nintendesert]

I'm willing to bet that the NFL season was known last year.

Not like there was a lockout or anything.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

My question would be, why two Republican debates only 5 days apart, more than a year before the election?

 

[Pens1566]

Not like there was a lockout or anything.

Schedules were created well before ...

 

[lokiju]

My question would be, why two Republican debates only 5 days apart, more than a year before the election?

I'm wondering that also. I didn't even know there was another one today and figured this was referring to the past one.

It's 14 months until the election.

Why two debates in a weeks period?

 

[BoberFett]

I imagine it has something to do with the color green.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

the debates were scheduled months ago by the organizers.

Yeah but it wasn't a secret that their debate would fall on the first week of MNF.

Not like there was a lockout or anything.

Lockout or not, NOBODY believed the league wouldn't get its act together in time for the start.

So why not schedule it for Tuesday? Why not schedule Obama's speech for Friday or Wednesday? Why go head to head with a program that guarantees you won't be seen?

I don't know... maybe I'm still stuck in the mindset from when I was a kid and the debates/presidential speeches would take over all three channels available. (4 if you count PBS)

 

[dank69]

My question would be, why two Republican debates only 5 days apart, more than a year before the election?

I'm wondering that also. I didn't even know there was another one today and figured this was referring to the past one.

It's 14 months until the election.

Why two debates in a weeks period?

Primaries.

 

[Moonbeam]

One thing you can be sure of is that if they knew that Whoozyerdaddy was going to be upset they would never have scheduled it like they did.

 

[Genx87]

Politicians are simply that out of touch with the American public.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Primaries.

Which are still five months away. This just seems wildly excessive to me.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Which are still five months away. This just seems wildly excessive to me.

Probably trying to weed it down to two major contendors early. That way when they get to Iowa they can ignore RP, Bachman, et al. Less wear an tear on the two guys left if they don't have to address the other eleventy candidates.

 

[BoberFett]

Probably trying to weed it down to two major contendors early. That way when they get to Iowa they can ignore RP, Bachman, et al. Less wear an tear on the two guys left if they don't have to address real issues and can simply repeat the talking points which get the best response from their nearly brain-dead base of voters.

Fixed

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Probably trying to weed it down to two major contendors early. That way when they get to Iowa they can ignore RP, Bachman, et al. Less wear an tear on the two guys left if they don't have to address the other eleventy candidates.

For better or worse it seems to already have happened. I actually don't think this is wise on the part of the GOP to the extent it's intentional (which I don't think it is). In 2008 the Democrats really benefitted from having a relatively late, lively race for the nomination, both because it helped President Obama burnish his debate skills and platform against a formidable opponent, and because it get them a lot of publicity relative to the GOP, whose race resolved much sooner (and remember, the GOP really didn't even have a front runner until Super Tuesday - McCain was in fifth place at the start of 2008).

As far as I can tell the big difference between 2008 and 2012 is that many of the best GOP contenders didn't run this year because President Obama's reelection seemed inevitable (a decision I bet some of them regret, since he does look somewhat vulnerable now). Honestly I can't imagine being happy with these choices as a Republican - two of the top three contenders seem to be going out of their way to go full retard every chance they get, and the other one is a Mormon former governor of Massachusetts and spiritual father to the dreaded Obamacare. The President must laugh at his good fortune when he looks at the Island of Misfit Toys lining up to try to unseat him. It's 2004 all over again, with the parties switched.