The GOP debate will be critically assessed if for nothing else because one of the candidates will eventually emerge from the pack and get the party nod to challenge the, at this point, likely Democratic presidential contender, Hillary Clinton. Debate number 1, is not the terrible waste that many think and say.
Rand Paul was always an unlikely contender for the GOP presidential nomination. But the decline of his campaign has been astonishing. As Politico recently chronicled, it's close to ending practically before it started. Recall that before Trump, it was Paul who was briefly a media darling.
This will work out to a total of about 10 minutes for each candidate over the life of the show. Sounds more like an extended high school musical audition than any sort of serious effort to identify the policy proposals and positions, and test the temperament, of the persons now seeking the presidency on the GOP side.
The general public is disgusted with politicians and has been seeking an alternative to politics as usual, yet sadly, the only substitution available seems to be Donald Trump. I was discussing this with my friend Jim at our weekly lunch, where we always talk about life's vagaries along with a large slice of politics for dessert.
Donald Trump has broken the political contract with my party. The RNC should return the favor and bar him from the debates, even if it costs us the election
Given the seriousness of the global climate change threat, the tremendously strong scientific consensus about it, and the critical role that the United States must play in any international agreements about national and global responses, it is vital to know how the next President would address this issue.
Let's face it. The Republicans will have quite a time trying to sift through their thicket of candidates. So many angles and issues and characters to consider. Do I like the clean-cut union-busting Wisconsin governor or the clean-cut anti-choice former Senator from Pennsylvania?
A bevy of Republican candidates get shut out of national primetime by Fox, but not Trump.
For Trump, August 6 in Cleveland is just one more installment of a reality TV show that has been a ratings phenom all summer long. So how should the others approach Trump?
As the noise from the rhetoric of an ever-growing field of presidential candidates reaches an ear-splitting din, there is an announced candidate outside the two-party system that deserves to be heard.
If the last three weeks of presidential politics have proven anything, it's that Donald Trump is one of the nation's first "metamodern" politicians. What this means is that Trump is neither sincere nor ironic, optimistic nor cynical, authentic nor false. Instead, he somehow manages to exist outside space and time.
Some people think science is dry or boring and has nothing to do with their lives. Still more believe that science has become so complex that politicians are incapable of talking about it, that no one but scientists can discuss it. But science is now so integral to every aspect of our lives that it has to be talked about by those who wield power.
Imagine a different way of launching the campaign. Suppose a scientific sample of the entire electorate was gathered to engage the candidates in-depth on the issues for several days. It would put the country in one room under conditions where it could think.
In the upcoming performance art piece called the GOP presidential debates the candidates will try to one-up each other showing their base who's best at crushing labor unions, disciplining the poor, and striking fear in the hearts of America's enemies.
The idea was to prevent chaos. Instead, efforts to control this season's Republican presidential primary debates have injected greater uncertainty into an already volatile process. With somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 candidates jockeying for position, the upcoming series of jousts is already beginning to resemble a survival-of-the-fittest reality show.
Brandon Rittiman and Kyle Clark are political reporters at KUSA-TV, the NBC affiliate in Denver, which says it has "adopted a 'pro-fact' philosophy." I'd love to see them go all pro-fact on Scott Walker, Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush, and on Hilary Clinton too, the way they did with Cory Gardner and Mark Udall in Colorado.