Fox news "debate" is a farce.

[rightwinger]

As if any of them is meaningful. look at having being questioned by someone like Candy Crawley. she threw that debate for the Democrat by piping up with information that she shouldn't have while they were stuttering to answer a question. they have all become nothing more than an dog and pony show.

Romney's failure to address that in real time probably cost him the election.

Romney lost because of some snake who released a tape on him saying how he wouldn't have to pander to 47% of people (meaning those on some form of taxpayer assistance. welfare, food stamps, etc) and the leftwing medias with the Democrats ran a smear champagne over that. Did anyone know that was Jimmy Carters grandson who released it.

smear champagne......too funny

 

[Camp]

They could start out with a spelling bee to cull the numbers a little bit.

They should divide them into two teams "Shirts" and "Skins" and let them play off

I have never seen that show Dancing with the Stars for more than maybe a minute. I would watch a show that had a dancing competition for presidential wanna be's.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I must be missing something. Seems to me the obvious answer is to do a drawing of names and divide the group into two separate, back to back debates. The only reason I can think of to not do this is that they think people's attention spans wouldn't be able to handle it.

.

People's attention spans can't cope with the whole thing, the whole 16 months of non stop nonsense all designed to tell people how democratic the whole thing is, when it isn't.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Even with two or three candidates you'll still only get well rehearsed meaningless pre-packaged soundbites.

 

[Stephanie]

I doubt many people make up their minds on who they will vote for over the debates anyway. if that was the case, Obama would have never been elected. I know I already have in mind who I would like or wouldn't like.

 

[LoneLaugher]

As if any of them is meaningful. look at having being questioned by someone like Candy Crawley. she threw that debate for the Democrat by piping up with information that she shouldn't have while they were stuttering to answer a question. they have all become nothing more than an dog and pony show.

Romney's failure to address that in real time probably cost him the election.

Romney lost because of some snake who released a tape on him saying how he wouldn't have to pander to 47% of people (meaning those on some form of taxpayer assistance. welfare, food stamps, etc) and the leftwing medias with the Democrats ran a smear champagne over that. Did anyone know that was Jimmy Carters grandson who released it.

Oooh! A smear champagne. That sounds delicate!

 

[Camp]

As if any of them is meaningful. look at having being questioned by someone like Candy Crawley. she threw that debate for the Democrat by piping up with information that she shouldn't have while they were stuttering to answer a question. they have all become nothing more than an dog and pony show.

Romney's failure to address that in real time probably cost him the election.

Romney lost because of some snake who released a tape on him saying how he wouldn't have to pander to 47% of people (meaning those on some form of taxpayer assistance. welfare, food stamps, etc) and the leftwing medias with the Democrats ran a smear champagne over that. Did anyone know that was Jimmy Carters grandson who released it.

smear champagne......too funny

Sounds like a cracker spread.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Even with two or three candidates you'll still only get well rehearsed meaningless pre-packaged soundbites.

That's a fact. These candidates aren't up there expressing their vision or their agenda in most cases. They are up there exhibiting their ability to be politicians. The public wants to make sure that they aren't hiring a freak like Bachmann or a person who can't handle a little pressure like Perry.

The moderators ought to ensure that questions are answered and not just responded to. Their is a difference. But.....that would result in candidates whining for days and refusing to go on the corresponding Sunday Morning show. Can't have that.

Bernie will buck the trend, I believe....but he's also a very skilled politician.

 

[candycorn]

In all seriousness, I think the GOP is doing a great dis-service to it's rank and file. The primaries are not set up for the casual voters, the "I'll have a look" republicans, or the media or anyone else. It is about the registered Republican Party voters. Those that live and die with the GOP.

For this reason, it is pretty much unimaginable that the GOP chair sat up this nutty system by which he/she who is polling poorly somehow gets onto the big stage and those who do not, will not. You may as well give cyanide to those who do not because getting one's messge out is everything at this point. More disturbing is that many who are on the stage have zero chance of winning a General Election; much less the GOP nomination. If you are running a political party, it would seem to me that you would have access to one, two, or six hundred political operatives who could tell the Chair this all-too-clear-fact. Be it because their views are out of the mainstream of general public opinion (West, Trump, Paul, Cruz, Huckabee), they have an electoral college problem (Christie, Walker) or just off the chart negatives (Perry), having people who are not playing the long game makes no sense. Not only do they waste your time, they suck oxygen out of the room for the actual candidates who are good for all time zones like Kasich for example. There is also a strange idea of limiting it to ten participants. Why not 8? Why not 12? Someone decided on 10. There doesn't see to be any reasoning at all.

The debate is about the party faithful picking their candidate. Nothing else. Presumably, they want to pick a candidate who can win. The best idea is not to limit the voices, put them all there and let them slug it out. Will it last a long time? Yes. Will the party faithful care? No. Will Fox care? I doubt it but if they do, simply switch the coverage to CSAPN which will cover all. If the viewers get Fox, they get CSPAN.

And may the best man or woman win. Not what some pollster tells you based usually on name recognition.

 

[amrchaos]

As if any of them is meaningful. look at having being questioned by someone like Candy Crawley. she threw that debate for the Democrat by piping up with information that she shouldn't have while they were stuttering to answer a question. they have all become nothing more than an dog and pony show.

Romney's failure to address that in real time probably cost him the election.

Romney lost because of some snake who released a tape on him saying how he wouldn't have to pander to 47% of people (meaning those on some form of taxpayer assistance. welfare, food stamps, etc) and the leftwing medias with the Democrats ran a smear champagne over that. Did anyone know that was Jimmy Carters grandson who released it.

smear champagne......too funny

I wonder, is it served chilled or at room temperature?

 

[amrchaos]

I don't know why there is so damn many running as it is.

Politicians have such massive, seemingly uncontrolled egos that I bet each one of them have completely convinced themselves that (a) they are truly special and needed, and (b) all they have to do is get a little exposure and the entire world will see how truly special and needed they are.

Political affiliation irrelevant.

.

Ben Carson must fall under b)

 

[Seawytch]

Come on guys...Fox is brilliant! Make sure only top nationally polling candidates get on the debates. So, how do you get to the top in national polling? Advertise on {Wait for it}...

FOX!

Fox is not only picking your candidates for you, the candidates are paying them to do it. ******* brilliant.

 

[rightwinger]

Even with two or three candidates you'll still only get well rehearsed meaningless pre-packaged soundbites.

That's a fact. These candidates aren't up there expressing their vision or their agenda in most cases. They are up there exhibiting their ability to be politicians. The public wants to make sure that they aren't hiring a freak like Bachmann or a person who can't handle a little pressure like Perry.

The moderators ought to ensure that questions are answered and not just responded to. Their is a difference. But.....that would result in candidates whining for days and refusing to go on the corresponding Sunday Morning show. Can't have that.

Bernie will buck the trend, I believe....but he's also a very skilled politician.

The debates can be make or break

JFK and Clinton won because of the debates
Rick Perry imploded

Can anyone forget what the debates did to Dan Quayles career?

 

[Auld Phart]

I don't watch Fox, and I won't bother tuning in to any of the debates, til after the conventions.

 

[rightwinger]

In all seriousness, I think the GOP is doing a great dis-service to it's rank and file. The primaries are not set up for the casual voters, the "I'll have a look" republicans, or the media or anyone else. It is about the registered Republican Party voters. Those that live and die with the GOP.

For this reason, it is pretty much unimaginable that the GOP chair sat up this nutty system by which he/she who is polling poorly somehow gets onto the big stage and those who do not, will not. You may as well give cyanide to those who do not because getting one's messge out is everything at this point. More disturbing is that many who are on the stage have zero chance of winning a General Election; much less the GOP nomination. If you are running a political party, it would seem to me that you would have access to one, two, or six hundred political operatives who could tell the Chair this all-too-clear-fact. Be it because their views are out of the mainstream of general public opinion (West, Trump, Paul, Cruz, Huckabee), they have an electoral college problem (Christie, Walker) or just off the chart negatives (Perry), having people who are not playing the long game makes no sense. Not only do they waste your time, they suck oxygen out of the room for the actual candidates who are good for all time zones like Kasich for example. There is also a strange idea of limiting it to ten participants. Why not 8? Why not 12? Someone decided on 10. There doesn't see to be any reasoning at all.

The debate is about the party faithful picking their candidate. Nothing else. Presumably, they want to pick a candidate who can win. The best idea is not to limit the voices, put them all there and let them slug it out. Will it last a long time? Yes. Will the party faithful care? No. Will Fox care? I doubt it but if they do, simply switch the coverage to CSAPN which will cover all. If the viewers get Fox, they get CSPAN.

And may the best man or woman win. Not what some pollster tells you based usually on name recognition.

The idea that some pre, pre political debate five months before the Iowa caucus is somehow important is ridiculous

Let the candidates "champagne" on their own until the primaries begin. Then pare down the field through the primaries and have debates when the number gets lower

 

[Toro]

There should be only one candidate on stage - Trump!

 

[Auld Phart]

There should be only one candidate on stage - Trump!

There should be only one candidate on stage - Trump!

Only if it's the one going from Laredo to Dallas

 

[longknife]

Why do I not see one single link to what FoxNews has established for guidelines on the debates?

Well, check this out Fox News Facebook to host first GOP primary debate of 2016 race Fox News

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Even with "only" 10 candidates there will be only enough time to hear well rehearsed meaningless pre-packaged soundbites.

They should include all the candidates and expand the debate to 7pm-1130pm.

They might be well rehearsed as it begins but once Trump goes nuclear on one of them the scripts get tossed.

 

[rightwinger]

Even with "only" 10 candidates there will be only enough time to hear well rehearsed meaningless pre-packaged soundbites.

They should include all the candidates and expand the debate to 7pm-1130pm.

They might be well rehearsed as it begins but once Trump goes nuclear on one of them the scripts get tossed.

I think Trump will be on his best behavior as he attempts to look "presidential"

He may even get a haircut