Every Male Candidate Should Watch This Media Interview
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), a possible 2016 presidential candidate, gave an interview to CNBC yesterday that may eliminate his chances of winning the Republican nomination before his campaign even gets under way.
Much of the media coverage about the interview focused on Paul’s dangerous insistence that vaccines should remain voluntary because of “freedom.” But another part of the interview is the focus of this post. And every male presidential candidate—particularly the Republican nominee who will almost certainly be male and will almost certainly face Hillary Clinton—should watch it to avoid making the same mistake.
During his interview with CNBC’s Kelly Evans, Paul “shushed” Ms. Evans, told her to be “quiet” and “calm down a bit,” and interrupted her before she could “get going” again.
The questions Ms. Evans asked weren’t unusual—it was Paul who reacted peevishly and created a controversy where none existed. He had the right to refute premises he thought were incorrect, of course, but acted surprised by questions that could have been swatted away with ease.
The interview below is an edited “highlights” clip:
But there’s another key issue here: Gender. That Mr. Paul is man and Ms. Evans is a woman changes the political calculus for interviews such as this one. Male politicians who are viewed as condescending to women often pay a political price for their dismissiveness, as the four examples below show.
1. Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama (2008)
After winning the Iowa caucus, Senator Barack Obama was widely expected to win the pivotal New Hampshire primary and cruise to an easy nomination. But after taking a gratuitous swipe at Senator Clinton’s likeability in a debate held just days before the vote, female voters handed Ms. Clinton an unexpected victory, helping to extend her campaign for months.
2. Hillary Clinton vs. Rick Lazio (2000)
During a New York Senate debate, Republican candidate Rick Lazio approached Ms. Clinton’s lectern aggressively. He handed her a paper pledge to refuse any soft money to the campaign – but the move was widely seen as inappropriate and boorish. Mr. Lazio lost the once-close race by double digits.
3. Geraldine Ferraro vs. George H.W. Bush (1984)
During the Vice Presidential debate, Vice President Bush took a patronizing tone with Rep. Ferraro when discussing foreign policy. Ms. Ferraro used her razor sharp tongue to let him know she didn’t appreciate it, earning her the applause of the audience and him the enmity of many opinion writers. In the end, it didn’t matter – Mr. Bush was part of a winning ticket that won 49 states.
4. Scott Brown vs. Elizabeth Warren (2011)
Then-Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) fell into a predictable gender trap when he slammed Elizabeth Warren’s figure. As background, in 1982, Mr. Brown posed nude for Cosmopolitan Magazine. During a Democratic primary debate, Warren was asked how she paid for college, given that Mr. Brown stripped to pay his tuition.
“I kept my clothes on,” Ms. Warren quipped, to the delight of the audience.
During a radio interview shortly thereafter, Sen. Brown responded:
Hosts: “Have you officially responded to Elizabeth Warren’s comment about how she didn’t take her clothes off?”
Scott Brown, laughing: “Thank God.”
With that broadside, Mr. Brown stepped into a gender minefield that threatened to alienate many women voters. To be sure, Ms. Warren’s swipe was unnecessary and gratuitous—and the question itself was sophomoric. But regardless of whether or not Ms. Warren opened the door to Mr. Brown’s response (she did), the political price was paid almost solely by Mr. Brown.
Like the blog? Read the book! The Media Training Bible: 101 Things You Absolutely, Positively Need to Know Before Your Next Interview is available in paperback, for Kindle, and iPad. Or click here to instantly join or mailing list and receive the best of the blog.
I have to say just the general rudeness of shushing someone is off-putting. Just seeing the still shot of Paul with his finger on his lips makes me cringe. I don’t have to watch the video to know that he is being dismissive and arrogant. Ugh.
Good point, Deborah. The still shot does a lot of damage, even without the accompanying video – and I suspect we’ll see it used against him in some fashion.
Brad
The one journalistic error this anchor made was to have APOLOGIZED.
I can’t believe I’m going to praise someone from Fox News, but Megyn Kelly would have disembowelled Rand Paul with good reason.
Bob —
I agree completely. She was endlessly polite, and I credit her for keeping her cool — but the “I’m sorry to have asked you a tough question” thing was unnecessary.
Thanks for reading,
Brad
[…] Brad Phillips flags a recent interview with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and says that “every male presidential candidate — particularly the Republican nominee who will almost certainly be male and will almost certainly face Hillary Clinton — should watch it to avoid making the same mistake.” […]
I’d also call attention to his observation that “The state doesn’t own your children, parents own the children…” While in some corners of America certain folks might still envision their familial relationships that way, in the broad center of the country, that was an off-putting comment, to put it mildly.
You may have authority over your children linked to the responsibility to act in their best interest, but does Mr. Paul really think you “own” them (in any way in which the word “ownership” has any meaning at all)? If so, I bet that would be even more disqualifying for a lot of folks.
Patronizing, rude … this guy is a jerk. Kelly Evans had nothing to apologize for. She asked reasonable questions in a pleasant tone (way more pleasant than Rand Paul deserved!). That he had the nerve to interrupt and talk over her and then tell her to shush … well, I can’t believe anybody, male or female, supports Paul.
Paul’s biggest mistake was agreeing to this “gotcha” interview. (It’s CNBC, he should have known better.) The female interviewer was hardly polite. Her first question started with, “Did you REALLY just say …..?” Gee, I wonder if this will be an objective interview?
The talking head then interrupted Paul several times, tried to negate his answers and not give him a chance to answer, asked “have you stopped beating your wife” – type questions, etc.
Yes, Paul could have handled it better, especially at the end. And yes the still shots aren’t good. But I’m amazed at the comment that the still shot is enough, I don’t want to know the context. Yeah, I’m really glad this person is an eligible voter. Don’t tell me facts, just show me pictures!
And Brad, while I think very highly of you and enjoy your blog, I think your dislike of Ron Paul is coloring your coverage of Rand Paul.
Thank you for considering my comments.
“We’re looking around the United States to see if the message resonates”
Let me save you some time here Senator Paul—it doesn’t!
Well it’s resononating with you, Wayne, albeit in a very bad way because you hate the message of freedom. Keep on hatin’ and maybe your dream of a Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton race will come true!
Rand Paul is far too often condensing. Truth is he can afford to be more polite since he will never win the presidency, and neither will Ted Cruz for that matter.