FOX decides name-recognition should be criteria for debate. maybe Bieber should run.

It looks like the OP is based on this story: The GOP s debate problem - Eli Stokols - POLITICO

A number of campaigns, speaking on background, are unhappy that the Republican National Committee, which decided to insert itself into the debate process early on by limiting the number of debates and spacing them out, appears to have kicked to the networks the more difficult and consequential issue of who participates.
 
I don't believe media outlets select the participants. Are they sponsoring a debate?
they do and they are

Link please

I found it . You are correct. I was wrong.

But at what number should it be cut off? Even allowing 10 means each candidate will have very little time to express himself /herself. And if you don't use polling numbers as the criteria, what do you use?

Not a fan of Fox News by ANY MEANS, but I think they are ok on this call.

well it points to a problem with the whole system. I think tho that in the early debates you leave all in who have political or prominent private experience...fiorina, carson and trump all should be in.

Prominent Is a subjectIve Term0
 
so because Bush has had a couple of fuck-up relatives in the presidency...he deserves a place on the debate stage....good idea FOX

Uhm, can you say Hillary? What the fuck has she ever done besides being married to Bill the serial sex offender?
 
I don't believe media outlets select the participants. Are they sponsoring a debate?
they do and they are

Link please

I found it . You are correct. I was wrong.

But at what number should it be cut off? Even allowing 10 means each candidate will have very little time to express himself /herself. And if you don't use polling numbers as the criteria, what do you use?

Not a fan of Fox News by ANY MEANS, but I think they are ok on this call.

well it points to a problem with the whole system. I think tho that in the early debates you leave all in who have political or prominent private experience...fiorina, carson and trump all should be in.

Prominent Is a subjectIve Term0
yea, I know....like I said problem with the whole system.....but fiorina and trump have run major companies.....Carson has been a prominent doctor....written books i think. I hate to leave it to just those with national level political experience as that also means your a likely crook.
 
they do and they are

Link please

I found it . You are correct. I was wrong.

But at what number should it be cut off? Even allowing 10 means each candidate will have very little time to express himself /herself. And if you don't use polling numbers as the criteria, what do you use?

Not a fan of Fox News by ANY MEANS, but I think they are ok on this call.

well it points to a problem with the whole system. I think tho that in the early debates you leave all in who have political or prominent private experience...fiorina, carson and trump all should be in.

Prominent Is a subjectIve Term0
yea, I know....like I said problem with the whole system.....but fiorina and trump have run major companies.....Carson has been a prominent doctor....written books i think. I hate to leave it to just those with national level political experience as that also means your a likely crook.

So are you saying you want more than 10 or something other than polling to determine the 10?
 
Link please

I found it . You are correct. I was wrong.

But at what number should it be cut off? Even allowing 10 means each candidate will have very little time to express himself /herself. And if you don't use polling numbers as the criteria, what do you use?

Not a fan of Fox News by ANY MEANS, but I think they are ok on this call.

well it points to a problem with the whole system. I think tho that in the early debates you leave all in who have political or prominent private experience...fiorina, carson and trump all should be in.

Prominent Is a subjectIve Term0
yea, I know....like I said problem with the whole system.....but fiorina and trump have run major companies.....Carson has been a prominent doctor....written books i think. I hate to leave it to just those with national level political experience as that also means your a likely crook.

So are you saying you want more than 10 or something other than polling to determine the 10?

I want more than 10, in the early debates at least.
 
With a two-hour debate and 10 candidates, you get a maximum of 12 minutes for each candidate. I wouldn't want to cut that down anymore.
 
With a two-hour debate and 10 candidates, you get a maximum of 12 minutes for each candidate. I wouldn't want to cut that down anymore.
seems to me we've had more than that before.....but maybe your right...it would be helpful if they grouped the candidates by broad policy views and whittled them down in categories....say hawks and religious conservatives ...not going to happen..but it would be helpful...you know Santorum versus Hucklebee and maybe Cruz.....Then put all the establish hacks together...Kasich, Christy, Bush, Walker...so voters wouldnt split their vote if one category is over represented.
 

Forum List

Back
Top