What does the world cost? Oh well, then we'll just take a small coke.

Monday, April 30, 2007

Dems Debate; Few Notice

WASHINGTON DC (FCN) – In a move that failed to garner the notoriety of any respected news organization, several candidates for the Democratic Presidential Nomination squared off in an issues debate held three-quarters of a year before the first voting begins in the Iowa Caucuses. At least eight candidates (eye witness accounts varied as to the exact number of speakers) conducted an amicable debate about such momentous issues as the war, health care and guns.

Despite the gravity of the topics, the biggest news coming from DC Thursday seems to be that few cared or even paid attention to the debate.

“I was actually pretty well blind-sided by the whole thing,” said Democrat National Committee Chair Howard Dean after the debate. “The candidates normally consult the political nucleus before debating and the interactions are generally carefully choreographed; we don't like surprises. To see these guys go off half cocked without much direction was disappointing, to say the least.”

Some six hundred reporters were credentialed to cover the event, but only a handful showed up; and those that did have wide variance in their accounts.

“The Obama [D-IL] guy says Obama won; the Clinton [D-NY] guy says Clinton won. About the only person who everyone can agree actually lost is MSNBC, the network that aired the debate.” explained media analyst Jakob Tecknorati in an online interview. “The fact of the matter is nobody knows who the heck won or lost anything because nobody watched.”

One fact that we can be fairly sure about the debate is that President Bush was bashed by all.

“It was more like Conan O’Brien than a Presidential debate; every other line was derogatory,” said former Chief of Staff Andrew Card who saw cell phone clips of the debate on YouTube and spoke publicly about his disgust with Tim Russert on Meet the Press. “If I wanted ‘Bush Bashing,’ I’d have gone to college.”

Republican strategists say they aren’t surprised by the debate’s lackluster following. Some point to apathy in the electorate while others say the Democrats didn’t bring enough big ticket names.

“If you’re not from Alaska and you’re not a nerd, you’ve never heard of Mike Gravel [D- AL] . Who wants to watch a guy named after a collection of small stones speak?” Asked Presidential advisor Karl Rove in a post-debate conference call. “Other ‘big names’ included Dennis Kucinich [D-OH], a first degree loon, and Chris Dodd [D-CT], the guy who ‘runs on hope.’ Please.”

The presence of Nancy Pelosi was postulated but never confirmed.

MSNBC, which lost four million dollars airing the program, remains optimistic about future debates. “When we get closer to the caucuses and a couple of gnarly scandals break, I guarantee folks will be eating our programming up like nothing else,” predicted Dan Abrams, chief legal correspondent for MSNBC. “Just wait, it’s a sleeper now, but it’ll be big soon.”

Democrats can only hope Abrams is right. If the debate viewership is reflective of a poor national following, the future looks grim for the Donkey Party.

Howard Dean sees no reason for fear: “If someone just tells me before they do these things and we get the organized right, everything will be fine. Gracious!”

1 comment:

Mommy G said...

Ok, boys, if you are going to play on the political playground, be sure to wear your beanies. It can be very chilly out there! Burrrrrrr!