Perspective: GOP 2000 debates

[poskonig]

I found the nature of some of the attacks back then very interesting.

Here is a salon article, for instance. http://www.salonmag.com/news/feature/1999/12/14/debate/print.html

In it, Hatch and Keyes pile on Bush for being an "inexperienced governor," various candidates make the endorsers of other candidates sound like the antichrist, the obnoxious 2nd tier candidates bash the 1st tier candidates for not being pure enough, et cetera.

Here, http://www.sptimes.com/News/120499/Worldandnation/Debate_does_little_to.shtml , we see all sorts of goodies, like McCain being attacked for being "angry," the frontrunner declared a "winner" by not losing, one minute responses from candidates in a crowded field, et cetera.

This bizarre spectacle sounds eerily familiar. Does it not?

What lessons can we learn from this?