Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-06-2015, 05:56 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,858,215 times
Reputation: 4585

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
FBN LOWERED the threshold to 2.5% to make the main debate. Why? Who exactly are they so desperate to get in the main debate? It can't be Rand Paul. He's on one end. Is it Kasich again? They did jumping jacks to get him in the Fox News debate,

Christie and Huckabee will be in the smaller earlier debate with Santorum and Jindal and Graham is in no debate.

And once again they are insisting Trump is in the center when they have an even number (8) of participants in the main debate.
With the top two candidates, one being a super Egomaniac the other being Batsh..t Crazy..... what could possibly go wrong with the GOP process??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-06-2015, 06:44 AM
 
Location: Kansas
25,961 posts, read 22,126,936 times
Reputation: 26699
Quote:
Originally Posted by trlhiker View Post
They dropped it down to 2.5% to make sure jeb gets in.
And, that can't possibly surprise anyone can it? I knew the minute I heard that that Bush would be included.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rizzo0904 View Post
I wish Christie was in the main debate. Glad Kasich made it...he's my favorite right now.
Agree on Christie. He did a good job the last time and certainly better than Bush. Kasich? I cannot stand him as there is something about him that just doesn't sit right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
I think they dropped it to make sure Kasich gets in just like they finagled it in the first Fox debate.
I don't understand why. He seems to have nothing special to offer. Probably bought his way in like Bush.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WeHa View Post
I think they want to keep Christie out. He's not afraid to be honest and call bs on the moderators and the questions.
He did a great job in the last debate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
With the top two candidates, one being a super Egomaniac the other being Batsh..t Crazy..... what could possibly go wrong with the GOP process??
Oh, no, super Egomaniac (Hillary) and the other Batsh......... Bernie are Democrats not GOP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2015, 07:36 AM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
33,942 posts, read 22,532,112 times
Reputation: 25816
Quote:
Originally Posted by UB50 View Post
Graham was the funniest of all the debaters. I'll miss him.
Me too. He makes me laugh. I was never going to vote for him.

Someone on Morning Joe pointed out that he's the only one that actually served in the military and he's getting the boot right before Veterans Day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2015, 09:42 AM
 
1,676 posts, read 945,849 times
Reputation: 800
Pataki also doesn't qualify for the debates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2015, 10:00 AM
 
2,003 posts, read 1,168,634 times
Reputation: 1949
They need to have two debates, draw numbers randomly, and split them up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2015, 10:45 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,803 posts, read 41,019,978 times
Reputation: 62204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1 View Post
Me too. He makes me laugh. I was never going to vote for him.

Someone on Morning Joe pointed out that he's the only one that actually served in the military and he's getting the boot right before Veterans Day.
He didn't just serve, he retired as an officer - Colonel.

"In 2015, Graham retired from the Air Force with over 33 total years of service, after reaching the statutory retirement age of 60 for his rank." Wikipedia

He was a lawyer/JAG
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2015, 10:50 AM
 
4,081 posts, read 3,606,367 times
Reputation: 1235
Quote:
Originally Posted by treasurefinder View Post
They need to have two debates, draw numbers randomly, and split them up.
I could get on board with that. It would be the fairest way to conduct business.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2015, 06:17 PM
 
4,287 posts, read 10,769,895 times
Reputation: 3811
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
I think they dropped it to make sure Kasich gets in just like they finagled it in the first Fox debate.
They wanted to have 8. It would be too bold of a move to go from 10 to 6, especially when there is only 2 weeks between debates. Kasich is actually outpolling Rand Paul.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2015, 06:26 PM
 
Location: Montgomery County, PA
16,569 posts, read 15,278,266 times
Reputation: 14591
I am not sure I have a solution but this is the first time the media are deciding who is “worthy” of being heard. Does it also mean they won’t be polled again?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2015, 09:10 PM
 
7,578 posts, read 5,327,909 times
Reputation: 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
We're up to our 4th debate. Is it unreasonable to not include people with less than 1%?
Well considering that this is the second election cycle where the early Republican front runners have been, well let's just say outside the norm, who after riding to the top of the heap went on to pretty quickly implode under public scrutiny (See Herman Caine) and that fact that the Republicans are still months away from the major primaries and almost more than six months from their convention... the elimination of candidates who actually have demonstrated experience in governance being eliminated from, if nothing else, the conversation I would think is more than bit problematic.

That leaves me with the following opinion, democracy is a wonderful thing, but the political parties aren't governments, they are political entities and as a result have a responsibility to control the political debate within their respective parties. To do that, they have an important role in deciding who represents their organization which means in my mind, vetting its candidates, in effect deciding who gets to run and who doesn't. That being said there is no rational reason for a party to have 17 candidates vying for a place in a national discussion based solely on their popularity months before any meaningful primary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top