GOP Overplays Hand (Again) in Debate-Complaint Department

Mediaite.com:

It's amusing to listen to the president and DNC chair offer advice on being tough in debate settings, as Mr. Obama never had to participate in a debate with Fox moderators (who proved to be tough to Republicans despite predictions of softballs going back to August), nor has DWS ever allowed one on that network as DNC chair. And you know what they say, if you can’t handle those guys (and girls), I don’t think the Chinese and Russians are going to be too worried about you (no worries, they’re already not).

Back to the Republicans, any coalition they tried to hastily put together has already fallen apart, with Christie, Fiorina and Kasich wisely dismissing the GOP letter proposing debate changes. If you’re negotiating this moving forward, the solution is fairly simple: instead of allowing pundits/opinion folks, pick and choose print reporters to be moderators instead. Remember, these debates have drawn record numbers for Fox, CNN twice, and CNBC. Moderating such an event only raises anyone’s brand (and, for example, if done correctly like Anderson Cooper did with CNN’s Democratic debate, gravitas). But if a political print reporter is in that moderator spot, the look-at-me element goes away, and in the process, substantive questions without editorial grandstanding come in its place.

So for the debate slot open on February 26th with the RNC (for now) booting NBC, Jim Oliphant of Reuters and Julie Pace of the Associated Press would be two down-the-middle, solid, veteran political reporters to strongly consider to handle that debate if placed elsewhere. Sorry… Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh ain’t the answer here.

In the meantime, the GOP needs to cease complaining about the CNBC debate. It’s already old news. Fix the problem (quietly and without multiple campaigns negotiating, which redefines the definition of herding cats) and move on. Calling out media bias will get some applause at rallies, yes. Right-wing radio will cheer, yes. But in the end, the voters that really count in the general aren’t going to care very much.

Given the scrutiny the CNBC debate received, it’s a safe bet to assume future moderators will be careful to avoid editorializing in their questions given the microscope that’s on them now. And hopefully, finally, we’ll get some real answers when real questions are asked, which would make everyone–the candidates, voters–happy if entertainment isn’t solely the goal.

Give us an inch, we’ll take a mile. Republicans sure know how to turn a positive into a negative quickly. But given there’s still 370 days to Election Day, there’s still plenty of time to cut through the noise and controversy to get… you know… an actual, detailed message out.

RELATED: Megyn Kelly: Let’s face it, those debate demands from Republican candidates were absurd