On March 11, the Washington Post published the editorial titled The GOP’s uncivil debate was full of ignorant stereotyping, written by the Editorial Board. This editorial focuses on the Republicans' last debate before the Florida and Ohio primaries and states that the debate should not be seen as being civil, as some headlines put it.
The Editorial Board believes that simply because the Republican candidates did not exchange "petty insults or discuss body parts," the debate was a civil one. All this lack of nonsense was made up for with, what the Board believes to be, ignorant stereotyping, which they provide evidence for with candidate Donald Trump's statement that there is "tremendous hate" among the world's Muslims and that "we better solve the problem before it’s too late."
Along with seeing the Republican debate as being uncivil, the Editorial Board also believes that the stereotyping going on in those debates should not be seen as normal simply because the debating candidates are not making childish remarks. The Board believes that no aspect of ignorant stereotyping should be seen as normal, but because this last debate was tamer in comparison to previous ones, some view the content as being more rational.
In the end, this editorial seems to be aimed at Republicans, especially their leaders, and is meant to get them to understand that no matter how the discussions are presented, uncivilized behavior can still be present and action should be taken to deter not enforce that behavior. Overall I think that the Editorial Board made a decent argument pointing out our misinterpretation of the debate and opened the eyes of the public for future debates.
No comments:
Post a Comment