On December 15th, in Las Vegas Nevada The republican presidential candidates gathered for their fifth debate. The debate was centralized around the topic of national security, and was full of very radical statements regarding military involvement. Below are a few of the most radical statements.
"On the campaign trail, Cruz has used tough and withering rhetoric on terrorism. He said recently in Iowa that he would “carpet-bomb” the Islamic State “into oblivion” and wanted to “see if sand can glow in the dark.”"
"I would be very, very firm with families,” Trump said. “Frankly, that will make people think — because they may not care much about their lives, but they do care, believe it or not, about their families’ lives.”"[Trump on killing the families of terrorists].
The main criticism of the debate is that the candidates were appearing to extreme. Yes, being as "right wing" as possible is one tactic to win the votes of devout republicans, but what about the swing votes? The statements coming from the mouths of these candidates will not attract voters who are not committed to a political party. The candidates are alienating themselves and only appealing to those as radical as themselves.
Also, saying all of these extreme statements to win the primary will leave the winning candidate in a risky position during the general election. Making these promises and being so far to the right, on the political spectrum, will cause less popularity in the general election because they have ignored a large audience of voters who are more in the middle of the political spectrum.
Questions: Are the candidates just trying to match up to the extremism of the frontrunner Donal Trump? Why are the candidates not concerned with winning the votes of swing voters?
Your Three. Video curated for you.
No comments:
Post a Comment