I had been planning to live blog today’s Fox News Republican presidential debate. But after my experience on Monday, I’ve decided against doing it. In fact, I am going to do everything I can to avoid even seeing the debate. And I know: I’ll miss out on a few good moments. And Trump might be a lot of fun. But I’ve been through this before. It’s a lot of time to waste just waiting for the occasional Oops! or Let him die! It is mostly just the candidates being in absolute unanimity about even the most extreme of positions.
Think back to the 2012 Republican debates. Bret Baier asked the candidates, “Say you had a deal — a real spending cuts deal: ten to one… spending cuts to tax increases… Who on this stage would walk away from that deal?” Not one them would. Not even the supposed reasonable guy, Jon Huntsman. No, the Republicans are the party of “all or nothing.” They are a revolutionary group where no one is allowed to disagree on policy. They are only allowed to disagree on how loud they shout about it. If the Republicans weren’t such authoritarians, they would have split up into endless factions by now.
Consider how that would have gone at a Democratic debate, “Say you had a deal — a real tax increase deal: ten to one… tax increases to to spending cuts. Who on this stage would walk away from that deal?” Well, they might all walk away from it, but not because they didn’t think that was enough of a compromise. Of course, the question doesn’t make much sense either way. The question was originally just to hammer the point that Republicans will never raise taxes. Baier could have made it a million to one and at least six of the eight would have walked away — and very likely all of them.
The mistake I made before was remembering back on previous general election debates. In those at least, there are two sides. On Monday, I watched in horror as candidate after candidate talked about how Planned Parenthood was selling fetal tissue without even a hint of push back, much less any actual truth being presented. And that was true of just about every issue. The only thing that was ever pressed was what the candidates might do about all the problems and non-problems they were whining about. And they had no answers. It was the same old stuff that they want to do for different reasons. There was no Democrat to counter any of the nonsense.
But there is something else that was missing: alcohol. During the 2012 general election debates, I was always drinking. That helps a great deal. And in that regard, let me recommend Matt Terzi’s article, The 2016 GOP Presidential Debate Drinking Game! But let me caution you: the drinks have to have a low alcohol content. The rules are such that if you were drinking hard alcohol, you would be passed out after five minutes. For example, you are supposed to drink once when someone mentions “Obamacare.” That alone is likely to result in 40-50 drinks. I really liked this part of the game:
- Confuses socialism, fascism, or communism, in any combination
- Compares the Republican Party or themselves to one or more civil rights leaders
- Mentions President Obama’s birth certificate in any way
- Argues that they’re more like Ronald Reagan than another candidate or multiple other candidates
- Promises to shut down Planned Parenthood
So be careful if you play the game. As for me, I’m planning to go to the fair that day.