Nevada Democratic Party Response On Fox News Debate
The Beacon figured out what the obscure Western Majority Project is. What we haven’t heard is anything from the State Democratic Party about the movement to boycott the debate sponsored by the WMP and Fox News. And the Gleaner gives us a bit more background on what this might be all about (fair and balanced it may not be). Oh, and Matt Stoller just found out. See the update in the bullet just below.
“FOX News’ viewership in Western states and across the country does not always get to hear directly from Democrats in an unedited and uninterrupted fashion. The August debate in Reno will allow the Democratic Presidential candidates to speak to the Fox audience who may be hearing from them for the first time for ninety minutes unfiltered and directly.”
“The Nevada Democratic Party and the Western Majority Project believe it is critical for Democrats to engage people, especially those who have heard too little from Democrats in the past. We believe the more people hear from Democrats, the better chance a Democrat will win the White House in 2008.”
That’s certainly a reasonable argument. Could it really hurt? Sure they might have a banner that says “Democrat Party” rather than “Democratic Party,” and they might summarize the debate in a negative way, but most of those who watch Fox News on a regular basis won’t vote for a Democratic candidate anyway or expect it to be unbiased. Isn’t that what they would be doing and saying anyway? But what if some viewers are inspired to change their minds? It could happen. Or am I being too much of a Pollyanna (something that’s not like me at all)? I would hope that the Democratic Party demanded a certain amount of control over how the debate will be staged and produced, who moderates, the format, etc., and that this will mitigate most of Fox News’ usual nonsense. Not doing the debate at this point is like saying that it makes sense not to ask any Republicans for their vote–no matter what the big blogs say. Let’s also remember that the Western Majority Project is not a sole project of Nevada. I mean, if you’re going to call us dimwits, you better call everyone involved dimwits and that includes the Governors of Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico (and throw in a few senators while you’re at it including netroots hero John Tester. In fact, I hope Ann Coulter moderates instead of the most boring man alive, Brit Hume. That has the potential to be stimulating or even satisfying, if not hilarious–particularly the exchanges between Clinton and Coulter. It could be a couple hours of payback for the last 10 years.
Update: if you think I’m crazy, you can sign a petition against the debate here. Obviously I wouldn’t have a problem if the news organization involved with the debate was changed.
Enjoy this post? Leave a comment below or subscribe to my feed. You also can sign up for email delivery by clicking here.
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
[...] They always say that to get attention you should be controversial, and I guess I’ve accomplished that today if you can believe the comments from visitors like weinerdog43 on my post about Nevada’s presidential debate set to be broadcast on Fox News in August 2007 (weinerdog43? Seriously? You should watch who you’re calling a dimwit with a name like that). Let’s just say that the statement by the Nevada Democratic Party in support of the debate (and my mother hen defense) was not well received by the liberal blogosphere. [...]
[...] Fox Noise will host Nevada Democratic debate, Harry Reid on drugs Is there an “enemy within” the Democratic party, or are Nevada Democratic leaders clueless? Fox? They’re actually going to let Fox host the debate? CNN already declined, but there’s always C-SPAN, MSNBC or ABC. But Fox? The Nevada Democratic Party says that it’s an outreach tactic to appeal to conservative voters/viewers. This is the “news” channel that is specifically designed to smear Democrats and progressive causes by providing spin and false information, as well as to sell the ideas and policies of President Bush and his GOP cronies in the House and Senate by censoring out the negative aspects of said policies. Furthermore, Fox tries to size up its credibility as a factually accurate media outlet by applying trademark labels to itself such as “Fair and Balanced”, the “No-Spin Zone” and “We report. You decide.” With pundits, hosts and commentators like Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, alan colmes (definitely not a liberal), Neil Cavuto and others, the right-wing Ministry of Propaganda is never short of cannon fodder to launch off-the-wall smear tactics on everything from teachers unions, moderate Muslims, atheists, liberals, Democrats, John Kerry’s military service record, Barack Obama’s educational history, war critics, science, Nancy Pelosi’s “request” for a military plane, secularists and anyone else that’s on Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes’s hitlist. It’s only right that we sign here and here so Reid doesn’t risk costing the Democrats the single most important seat in American politics. [...]
[...] A response from the Nevada Dems is here. [...]
[...] Instead of seeing the Nevada State Democratic Party co-sponsored Fox News debate controversy as a bad thing for the Nevada Democrats, I think we are actually seeing some positive outcomes. And while Sven at Turn Tahoe Blue mentions that Tom Collins resigned before the controversy, but I’m not sure that’s true since the controversy began on Tuesday of last week–the day before the Carson City forum. I also think that is was nice of Collins to take a stab at talking to the Dkos crowd but he should’ve known that that would never work with that crowd. And the good news is that people are talking compromise on the Fox News debate. For instance, it might work if there is a good balance of moderators or it is simultaneously aired on Air America. Anyway…. [...]
[...] In response to the furor caused by the state party’s decision to allow FNC to host the debate, the Nevada Democrats issued a statement in defense of the decision, citing an “unfiltered” forum for Democrats to speak to the FOX viewership. (Nevermind that the vast majority of FOX’s viewers are most likely not voting for a Democrat in 2008.) [...]
[...] remember the Western Majority Project don’t you? The Western Majority Project was the vague sponsors of the infamously canceled Fox News hosted Democrati… last year. In the past week, I believe I’ve received three equally vague email announcements [...]
Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
FNC’s viewership do not get to hear Democrats directly because the network has faux liberals/Democrats on to give weak points so they can bolster the opposing side.
Furthermore, the FOX Network will cut down the candidates any way they can so they can please their largely conservative viewership that won’t vote that way anyhow.
Yes, you are a dimwit. And anyone else who thinks they’ll get a fair shake at Faux. IT IS NOT REAL NEWS!
Yes, let me repeat weinerdog43’s admonition here. You are idiots and dimwits if you think Faux news is going to do anything buy twist and spin the Murdock/GOP angle. First, you major assumption is so stupendiouly wrong it has to make me question anyone that is tied to his and I don’t give a damn what name from the Democratic Party you drop - - FOX NEWS IS NOT A REAL NEWS ORGANIZATION. Get it? They are fake. They are a propaganda arm. Sample question to expect from Brit Hume: “Which of you are not backers of terrorists?”
Jesus, I’m clinching my teeth here trying to work for the Dems with all I’ve got down here in Florida and then the Neveda Dem Party piroutes and enables the Faux news/GOP line. I feel like I’m swimming in a barrel of molassas…..
You’re a dimwit. There is no good reason for Democrats to go on Fox News.
Jeez, who thought people would get so personal—tsk, tsk….No one argued that Fox news is legitimate. duh. And no name dropping, just thought it would be nice for people to see what the official response was from the party.
Come on! KOS is RIGHT. We dems should not be doing ANYTHING that gives faux news any sense of legitimacy at all. Dems shouldn’t be going on faux news and we shouldn’t be doing debates on faux news. They need to be frozen out. It’s what republicans would do and we should learn the lesson.
Myrna, I would have no problem with Fox News hosting a debate in the general election, but this is the primary election. Fox News viewers won’t be voting in the Democratic primary. It doesn’t matter if every last Fox News viewer is inspired by what Hillary Clinton has to say, they’re not voting in the Democratic primary. There’s no point to it being on Fox, then.
Funny enough, Myrna, I think you might actually be onto something here. Your logic is at least worth exploring, but offering yourself as a dimwit made it too easy for those other guys to get personal. It might also be that since this debate is in August - six months before the caucus and about eight months before the nominee will be clear - nobody cared about covering it except Fox. Six months is a really long time before any decisions are actually made, and I can’t imagine people will be clamoring to cover something that far out form the real election season. Just a guess, though.
I didn’t offer myself up as a dimwit, but those organizing the debate. But, I think you’re right about the timing.
I suggest you folks take a good hard look at the last time FAUX hosted a Democratic debate, 2003 in Baltimore I believe. YA’LL ARE NEXT!!
This is one of the dumber ideas to come down the Dem pipe in a long time. FAUX will use this as an opportunity to make the Dems look bad. That is the only reason they would host a Dem debate, to expose the weaknesses of the Dem candidates. Remember, this is a primary debate, so no republicans / FAUX viewers will be voting anyways.
Immediately fire the folks in the Nevada Dem party that arranged this! SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!!
All candidates should boycott, in a blatant attempt to marginalize what little credibility FAUX has left.
Let’s say we assume a couple of things about Fox hosting this debate. These both came from this discussion. 1) Fox will take every opportunity to make the dems look bad. 2) Nobody watching Fox will vote dem anyway.
If you assume both, then who cares? And why all the anger? Myrna’s original point was that there is a possibility that maybe some of the people watching will see something they like and vote Democrat. If you’re already assuming that’s never going to happen, then why spend so much energy on this hatred? I happen to think she’s right and that it’s entirely possible this is a good thing for the dems to do. Especially if nobody else will host the debate.
If I’m wrong, then fine. But you can’t have it both ways. Either Fox will kill the dems AND there is a possibility to sway some otherwise hopeless voters, or nobody watching will give a rat’s ass and you’ve lost nothing. Also, it’s really funny to hear people talking about a news organization not possibly giving a fair shake while dismissing every single thing said news organization does. And you guys say the repubs don’t get irony.
MY TV HAS AN OFF BUTTON AND I USE IT.
If the serious Dems want to take this country back, let them start in Nevada by standing up to FOX and just saying NO. Turn them off and leave them off. Plenty of legitimate networks will give the Dems air time.
Debates are run by organizations, not the networks. All Fox will do is operate the cameras. But I guess in the conspiracy world of the left blogosphere, Murdoch will order cameraman #2 to catch Hillary picking her ass and Gravel dozing off.
For God sakes you have posters here complaining that Fox will expose the weaknesses of the candidates. Gee, isn’t that what the media is suppose to do?
All your bitching and moaning about Fox is the same thing conservatives have been saying about ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, HBO, etc., etc. for decades. But you notice they don’t cry like a bunch of sniveling babies when Ted Turner hosts a GOP debate.
Maybe Fox will dump you ingrates and then Reno can run the debate on public access or some shopping channel at 2 a.m. to an audience of adoring and self-righteous dozens.
Bravo is much better than cable access..
mrjerz:
“Myrna’s original point was that there is a possibility that maybe some of the people watching will see something they like and vote Democrat.”
That’s vote “Democratic”… nice try pal.
Faux Noise will NEVER, EVER, EVER give Democratic candidates a fair shake… EVER, PERIOD, end of discussion.
Get a freaking clue.
It’s like trusting Lucy to hold the football for Charlie Brown’s kick one more time or asking the Fox to guard the chicken coop.
Insanity is doing the same stupid thing over and over again expecting different results.
The Man:
“All Fox will do is operate the cameras.”
Like they do regularly on the rest of Faux Noise?
What Hannity and his puppet Colmes, John Gibson, Chris Wallace, etc. some time.
Watch how they stack “questions” simply to elicit policital damage.
They could give a fuck about real issues.
What = Watch
David,
I believe it is you who needs to get a clue. Fox and Hannity won’t be asking the questions in the debate. It will be like every other canned “debate” foisted on a public that doesn’t watch them anyways. All the questions will be given to the candidates before and carefully crafted by the Western Majority Project so as not to offend anyone.
The simple fact is, if a candidate is so scared to go to a debate put on by Democrats, with questions crafted by Democrats, for the simple reason that it is airing across the country on Fox, they don’t deserve to be president.
But I’m sure to a blindly rabid partisan like yourself, “Faux Noise will NEVER, EVER, EVER give Democratic candidates a fair shake… EVER, PERIOD, end of discussion.” this is just another republican ploy.
David, as if you plan on returning to read this, one does not say, “vote democratic” when imploring their friends, as I assume you do, to follow their will. They do, however, say “vote Democrat.” Again, the irony is lost. Someone corrects me for using propaganda speech while saying FAUX news. Actually, I’m sure you get it. How very clever. Congrats on getting inundated with crazier people than me, Myrna.
That’s right, mrjerz. The DNC put out a bumper sticker that said: Enough is enough! Vote Democrat!
and I have a t-shirt that the UNR Young Dems sold that says: Had enough? Vote Democrat!
RE this whole flap - geez, if our Democratic candidates can’t take the heat of Fox news, how the hell are they going to take the heat of the oval office?
The fact of the matter is… Fox Noise and the right are ABSOLUTELY relentless and ruthless and unyielding… that’s what they do.
Their books, the plethora of columnists and Reich-wing media are a NON-STOP Democratic party and “liberal” (read, moderate) basing machine… 24/7.
They don’t talk issues they just try to crush dissent.
Their goal is nothing less that total, absolute power and control… ideally for a thousand years (per Tom Delay).
This just exposes the character flaw of those of us that are left of Hitler, we are always expecting a somewhat fair fight.
We expect a focus on fact and truth, anything less is propaganda.
Outside of Greta and Shepard, haven’t you smart folks noticed that anytime you flip to Fox Noise they ALWAYS in full attack mode?
But thanks for your ideas on how Democrats should run their affairs, I’m sure you people mean nothing but sweetness and light.
PBS should sponsor this thing if you want fair.
That’s just my opinion.
Fox and Hannity won’t be asking the questions in the debate.
Maybe not, but as soon as the debate ends the spin will begin on Fox and it will feature Fred Barnes, Brit Hume, Bill Kristol and other Fox News “analysts” who will be equally venemous toward the “Democrat Party”. Maybe they’ll even get some comments from their shiny, new “analyst”, Tom DeLay.
If they invite anybody to speak as a Democrat it will be somebody like Tammy Bruce. You know, a “Fox News Democrat”, the kind who pose as Democrats but hate the “Democrat Party”.
Then, the discussion can continue as they move on with their regular programming. An hour of Bill O’Reilly, featuring Michelle Malkin, followed by Sean Hannity with special guest Ann Coulter.
This is a stupid mistake by the “Democrat Party”.
“Maybe not, but as soon as the debate ends the spin will begin on Fox and it will feature Fred Barnes, Brit Hume, Bill Kristol and other Fox News “analysts” who will be equally venemous (sic) toward the “Democrat Party”.”
Wouldn’t they be doing that even if they didn’t host the debate? Don’t they already do that 24-7? As someone above pointed out, people don’t really watch that stuff anyway.
I have to admit, this is my first real experience with a coordinated effort by you netroots people. It’s definitely entertaining to see all of you screaming “FAUX News isn’t real” at the top of your fingertips. Is there a handbook I can take a look at so I know what to expect next time?
P.S. David, you’re awesome. Nazi references are always welcome and pretty much never inaccurate or hyperbolic.
mrjazz, my apologies.
No doubt that reference WAS over the top… you’re right.
However, IMHO, the “screaming” against Fox was a tad bit extreme also.
It’s simply an empirical fact Rupert Murdock and Roger Ailes have assembled, in Fox News, a GOP propaganda spinning machine with the primary intent on damaging those with different points of view.
Go to ANY far right-wing website, talking head, or media source… do they talk issues or do they talk smack?
Fox News is no different.
It’s all about control baby.
A very important debate among Democratic Presidential contenders should not be controlled by the far right-wing.
Think the right would ever do a debate sponsor by The Nation?
It doesn’t matter if the right would do that debate. That’s not the question. The question is, “What do the Dems have to lose?” As I see it, and you should too if you’re reading what everyone besides me is writing here, they have nothing to lose. They do, however, have something to gain. What we all need to know is whether anyone else even cares to cover this debate that is happening six months before the caucus. If there is someone else, then it’s completely up to the people running the party to ditch Fox and go with the others. But if they’re somehow contractually obligated, you’ve got a beef. But we don’t know that at this point. Stop looking at it as Fox vs. Democrats and start looking at it as what can we gain here. The easy answer is nothing, but that’s also the blind-to-the-truth answer.
You still don’t get it David. The debate is being broadcast by Fox because nobody else wanted it. The debate itself will be ran by an organization that’s not Fox. The audience will be a couple hundred thousand that want to watch the debate, not quibble about what network it is on. And yes, David, probably Fox commentators will point out some things you consider bad after the debate, just like they would if it was on CBS or CNN.
And I love your “Go to ANY far right-wing website, talking head, or media source… do they talk issues or do they talk smack?” comment. God knows the left never, ever spends their time talking smack and whining about something.
As for the GOP doing a debate “sponsored by The Nation,” the difference is The Nation would never ask, while Fox did.
The Man:
“David, probably Fox commentators will point out some things you consider bad after the debate, just like they would if it was on CBS or CNN.”
Uh huh.
Just like Fox News and the world of the right-wing is commenting on the decrepit, shabby conditions our wounded troops are facing at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.
http://www.newshounds.us/2007/02/22/fox_glosses_over_white_house_statements_on_walter_reed.php
“As for the GOP doing a debate “sponsored by The Nation,” the difference is The Nation would never ask, while Fox did.”
And it’s plain friggin nuts for them to accept.
But hey, thanks for being civil.
I wish you well in all you do.
Yes, Fox is underreporting Reed according to the left. You mean, just like Newsweek buried the Lewinsky story and CBS went with the forged National Guard papers story?
In the world of pointing fingers at media bias, you guys are a couple decades behind the curve. Conservatives have been doing it for years.
“Lewinsky story and CBS went with the forged National Guard papers story”
Whoa, hold on a second there pal.
No doubt those issues WERE scandalous and frankly I’ve always considered Dan Rather a arrogant sh*tbag (Brit Hume too, fwiw) so don’t be surprised when I say that I agree with you.
I’m not a con nor a lib… imagine that.
I know there is always a tendency for one side or the other to have a comparable tit-for-tat… but come freaking on now.
For you to compare those issues with how our wounded soldiers are being treated by our government, WTF????
Imus is saying it best.
http://imusblog.com/imus-calls-for-court-martial-of-general-kiley/
It has nothing to do with the actual story, so don’t get all righteous. The point is, for every story that the left points to as “proof” of Fox bias, the other side can point to many more showing a slant from the MSM.
Surprisingly, I actually liked Rather. Of all the talking heads he was about the only one that actually went out in the field and paid some dues.
Still, virtually all the studies of media coverage point to most outlets being left-of-center to varying degrees. So Fox is a little to the other side, it hardly balances out the big picture. The problem is the left is confusing basic coverage with all the “opinion” shows Fox runs. Yes, they are more conservative, but that is what people like and tune in for.
The only thing DUMBER than the Nevada State Democratic Party trying to do business in good faith with FOX is…hmmm, let’s see…oh yeah, ordering our troops to get into vehicles and drive through the streets of Bagdhad and see if snipers will shoot at them!
IT IS JUST STOOOPUD!
I think Democrats have more to lose
than to gain.
Fox viewers won’t be persuaded,but
others could be sucked into the Fox
line if they decide to try out the
Fox network after watching the debate.