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.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 17 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,552 posts, read 16,528,077 times
Reputation: 6031
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
Karl Rove, on Fox News Sunday, said Fox News is going to apply some criteria to limit the number of GOP candidates who will be allowed to participate in the first debate this August that Fox News hosts.
I think as long as they are officially declared candidates they should all be allows to participate. Fox News has no business winnowing the field and applying who knows what criteria to favor candidates they approve of by allowing them to debate. Plus, they'll probably use their own poll to decide which candidates are on top.
Right now, the lowest candidate in the polls is not really all that far apart from the highest one.
I think they could make the debate longer and let all candidates be seated.
Do you agree that if they have officially declared they all should be allowed to participate?
FOX News is a company, and they are holding/paying for the debate. if the GOP themselves did this, then there would be a problem.
FOX News is a company, and they are holding/paying for the debate. if the GOP themselves did this, then there would be a problem.
Actually, the Republicans will do it, and so will the Democrats. There have always been criteria for who gets to participate in these debates, and who won't. The key is to make sure that the criteria are reasonable and not motivated by partisan bias on behalf of the crafters of the criteria.
Karl Rove, on Fox News Sunday, said Fox News is going to apply some criteria to limit the number of GOP candidates who will be allowed to participate in the first debate this August that Fox News hosts.
I think as long as they are officially declared candidates they should all be allows to participate. Fox News has no business winnowing the field and applying who knows what criteria to favor candidates they approve of by allowing them to debate. Plus, they'll probably use their own poll to decide which candidates are on top.
Right now, the lowest candidate in the polls is not really all that far apart from the highest one.
I think they could make the debate longer and let all candidates be seated.
Do you agree that if they have officially declared they all should be allowed to participate?
It depends on how many are actually in the race come August and what % of the support they really have.If it is only a small support, they should not be in the debates, we had too many last time. If there are candidates only separated by a few % points, they should be able to debate. Even by August we will be getting a pretty good picture of what lies ahead.
The best and most obvious solution to this is for Fox to schedule more debates. This could limit the number of candidates per single debate, but would allow them all sufficient face time. Severaldebates would probably be more of a ratings booster than only one was well.
I'm guessing the candidates and the party don't want to tick off the other networks during the primaries because they have to come back to them for the general election debates and just for general publicity but how many debates does the DNC schedule on Fox News?
FOX News is a company, and they are holding/paying for the debate. if the GOP themselves did this, then there would be a problem.
And I contend that unless they announce that criteria right now and don't use their own Fox News poll to determine the ranking, they will use any late criteria to favor the candidates they want to see make the cut off (or "disfavor" the ones they want to starve out of the race).
Karl Rove, on Fox News Sunday, said Fox News is going to apply some criteria to limit the number of GOP candidates who will be allowed to participate in the first debate this August that Fox News hosts.
I think as long as they are officially declared candidates they should all be allows to participate. Fox News has no business winnowing the field and applying who knows what criteria to favor candidates they approve of by allowing them to debate. Plus, they'll probably use their own poll to decide which candidates are on top.
Right now, the lowest candidate in the polls is not really all that far apart from the highest one.
I think they could make the debate longer and let all candidates be seated.
Do you agree that if they have officially declared they all should be allowed to participate?
Well, right now, we have only 4 officially declared, so I wouldn't worry about it. However, the field could get very large. How many participants can there be and still have a robust debate? Clearly, there is a point where it becomes impossible to manage and less meaningful. Important issues can't be adequately covered if you have fifteen people all wanting to add their two cents.
I think it should be left to the host to decide, but personally, I think these debates are useless anyway. Somebody is always the "favorite" no matter who hosts the debate, and last time, we know what Candy Crowley did to Mitt Romney. It was disgusting! She threw the debate to Obama, by offering him a defense, and then not letting Romney respond with the truth. We don't need "debates" like that.
No question about it. At their debate, when they asked them which ones didn't believe in evolution, and all of them looked at each other first before raising their hands was absolute gold.
Oh, sure, we really need a debate about "evolution," and throw in "climate change" too. We have a bunch of savages threatening the entire Middle East, as well as the rest of the world, slaughtering people they don't agree with (as they have done for 1400 years), and we should debate "evolution and so-called "climate change?" Let's hope not.
We also have serious economic problems that need to be solved, as the Democrats have created a huge problem by rubber stamping Obama's destructive policies.
As for entertainment, how are the Democrats different? Hillary "What-difference-does-it-make" Clinton is certainly laughable. I'd look forward to that freak show if someone like Elizabeth "You-didn't-build-that" Warren and a couple of the other Democrat clowns (Bernie Sanders, the self proclaimed socialist?) get into the scuffle. Could be very entertaining indeed? What will they debate? Certainly faux "Climate Change" will be high on their list. Free college for everyone? Probably. And, of course, so-called "income inequality." All the favorite socialist redistribution schemes as well. "Make the rich PAY!"
Well, right now, we have only 4 officially declared, so I wouldn't worry about it. However, the field could get very large. How many participants can there be and still have a robust debate? Clearly, there is a point where it becomes impossible to manage and less meaningful. Important issues can't be adequately covered if you have fifteen people all wanting to add their two cents.
I think it should be left to the host to decide, but personally, I think these debates are useless anyway. Somebody is always the "favorite" no matter who hosts the debate, and last time, we know what Candy Crowley did to Mitt Romney. It was disgusting! She threw the debate to Obama, by offering him a defense, and then not letting Romney respond with the truth. We don't need "debates" like that.
That wasn't a primary debate so there weren't multiple candidates.
I'd be okay with it if Fox News says right now, we're going to limit the debate to 8 candidates and the poll we will use is Gallup's last one. Any criteria presented closer to the debate (like cutoff percentage of who is ahead and number of candidates allowed to participate) and/or if they use their own polling, I'll suspect it is rigged.
No question about it. At their debate, when they asked them which ones didn't believe in evolution, and all of them looked at each other first before raising their hands was absolute gold.
I doubt any of the candidates don't believe evolution is true they just know most of their prospective voters are, shall we say, fact challenged?
Look how FOX is putting Cruz in last place, so they can boot him from debating their projected guy, if they limit participation.
I hope these are the only 3 that get in. With only 3 or 4, Cruz will surly be included.... But stranger things have happened.
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.
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.
