CNN Asked Undecided Republicans Who Won The GOP Debate, And Got A Very Surprising Answer

By Joe Rothstein
Editor, USPolitics.einnews.com

November 30, 2007

After the Republican CNN/YouTube debate ended, and after CNN's pontificators were well into their who-won, who-lost analysis, the network switched to a group identified as undecided Florida Republicans who had watched the debate together.

The CNN reporter present tried mightily to get anyone of them to declare that the debate had moved his or her vote to (fill in the blank). Finally, a woman tentatively raised her hand and said the debate had probably made a difference to her.

And who did you decide to vote for? the reporter asked.

"John Edwards," the woman replied.

She might have said, "none of the above." With their silence, that's what most of her fellow Republican panelists were saying.

What more was there to say after watching two hours where:

--One candidate (Ron Paul) agreed with a questioner that there is a dark movement afoot to essentially merge Mexico, the U.S. and Canada into a European Union type of mega-government----and that we need to be wary of it.

--And another candidate (John McCain) accused Ron Paul of favoring the type of isolationism that brought Hitler to power---because Paul doesn't think the U.S. has any business keeping troops in other peoples' countries.

--And where Giuliani and Romney went at it, toe-to-toe, over whether Romney as governor had undocumented workers doing yard work at his residence.

--And where Romney couldn't bring himself to consider water-boarding torture.

--And where Giuliani had to defend using New York taxpayers' money to pay for his security team to protect him on romantic weekends with his then girlfriend.

--And where all candidates had to explain whether they considered every word of the Bible as divine revelation.

--And where the first thirty-five minutes went by with the debate focused entirely on the immigration issue.

In fairness, it wasn't the candidates' fault that not a single question was asked about health care, education, trade policies, job losses, stagnant incomes, $100 oil or global warming.

It wasn't the candidates who decided not to offer any questions that might have resulted in a serious discussion about what's going on in the Middle East, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, or with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. The debate took place in Florida, where there might have been a lot of interest in U.S. policy toward Mexico (other than building a fence) and Central and South America. Not to mention an emergent China, a nuclear Korea, or deterioration of relations with Russia.

No, it was CNN that decided to end its show by asking Giuliani why, as a Yankee fan he rooted for the Red Sox to win the World Series---a question on the same plane with the one that closed out the recent CNN Democratic debate: "Hillary Clinton, do you prefer gold or pearls?"

Not to minimize the importance of the immigration issue, or the sensitivities surrounding issues like abortion, gay rights and gun control, but these simply are not the defining issues of the day. A lot more is going on in the world with a lot more potential impact on people's lives.

Not one of the Republican candidates took his 90 seconds of answer time to tell CNN it was essentially making a mockery out of the most important decision U.S. voters can make. Wouldn't it have been welcome and refreshing if any one of the candidates had refused to play CNN's lets-all-be-political-pygmies game?

On the other hand, the God-guns-gays and immigration questions did closely mirror what most of the candidates themselves have chosen to highlight in their personal campaign appearances and on their web sites. Political writers have excused this myopia by telling us that these are the issues that most concern the GOP's voting "base."

Some believe that the Republicans are in trouble going into 2008 because of Iraq, big deficits, corruption scandals and failure to address a range of problems most people consider important. All of that is surely an anchor on GOP chances. But worse is the dismal vision of the GOP candidates looking ahead. Not only do they seem barren of ideas, but they also seem oblivious to the problems.

Almost to a man they are advocating---without mentioning his name----four more years of President Bush's regime, both at home and abroad. No wonder CNN's undecided Republican panel sat mute afterwards, unwilling to say that any of the party's candidates won their hearts, minds or votes.

When John Edwards is declared the winner of a Republican debate, the Democrats could not hope for a more fertile political battleground.

Joe Rothstein, editor of US Politics Today, is a former daily newspaper editor and long-time national political strategist based in Washington, D.C.

See all previous articles by Joe Rothstein here.