It's Crazy to Have 10 Candidates in the Main Debate and 3 in the Sideshow One

News Machete ^ | 10/4/2015 | News Machete

[conservativejoy]

CNBC has released its criteria for the next GOP debate, and effectively it means there will be ten candidates in the real debate, and three in the minor leagues division:

Donald Trump would be at the center, flanked by Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina. If polling averages remain constant, the rest of the 8 p.m. stage would feature Sen. Marco Rubio, former Gov. Jeb Bush, Sen. Ted Cruz, Gov. John Kasich, Gov. Chris Christie, former Gov. Mike Huckabee and Paul.

Any candidate who has reached 1 percent in at least one of the polls recognized by CNBC is invited to participate in a 6 p.m. EDT undercard debate. According to current polls, that stage would feature Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Gov. George Pataki and former Sen. Rick Santorum. Sen. Lindsey Graham and former Gov. Jim Gilmore would need to notch at least 1 percent in any upcoming polls recognized by CNBC over the next three weeks in order to make the stage.

This is insane. The less important debate will have only three candidates, with each getting a good amount of time to explain their positions, and the important debate will have ten. Now, this is tentative; if Rand Paul, Huckabee, and Christie don't maintain a 3% polling average, they may be dropped.

Yes, they should be dropped. This is no longer so "early" in the campaign; there are only four months left until Iowa starts voting. The top six candidates--Trump, Carson, Carly, Rubio, Jeb, and Cruz should have one debate, and the rest, roughly seven other candidates, should be in the lesser debates.

If they are unhappy being in the lesser debate, they should either work hard to improve their poll standings, as Carly did, or put pressure on the network to add an 11th candidate to a ten person debate because the 11th candidate is a woman, as Carly also did. Perhaps this second strategy would not work so well for Pataki or Jindal, but it might work for Lindsey Graham!

I understand that the debate organizers don't want to leave viable candidates out of the major debate. But we are learning very little by having the debates sliced into ten pieces. Last time Ted Cruz and Scott Walker got penalized by it, and look at what happened poor, poor Scott Walker. That's why I say, no more than the top six for the major debate.

[Jim W N]

The whole thing is a sideshow and none if it is a true debate.

Why and how the Right continues to let the Left run the Right’s show is absolutely astonishing.

[cripplecreek]

Ditch the undercard debate and cut two off the main ticket.

[rrrod]

Naw...leave it like it is...this is fun!

[lacrew]

All this discussion of the GOP debates...whe the Rats decide not to have any at all, with their coronation.

[miserare]

I’m skipping this one.

I can’t stand the NBC spin and manipulation.

[conservativejoy]

Did the Dems call off the debate scheduled for this month?

[onyx]

Yes, it’s stupid.

Cut in half. 7 and six and be done with it.

[Blue Devil Reaganite]

What if they followed the NCAA March Madness? Have a “play in” game amongst four for the final spot? Whomever NBC ranks the lowest wins?

[InterceptPoint]

Here is the most recent RCP average. To qualify for the Big Boys and Big Girl Debate you need a score of 2.5 on the CNBC version of this poll average. To make it to the Little Boy's Debate you need to score a 1.0.

So, right now we would have Christie just skating in and Paul just missing. So the Little Boy's Debate would just be Rand Paul all by himself. But, given the current trends, Huckabee and Christie are likely to fall into the debate with Paul. Kasich, who has not been polling well lately could easily join them. So the best case for the Main Debate is Trump-Carson-Fiorina-Rubio-Bush-Cruz. That's 6. That would be OK with me. And Jindal, Santorum, Graham and Pataki get to stay home and watch their campaigns go yet further down the drain on Live Teeee Veeee.

[Jonty30]

I think the smaller debate should be shut down. It’s not really a debate at this point.

[Svartalfiar]

Why make the cutoff 10 people? That only made sense when there were 19 or 20 people in the running.

If they were of even normal intelligence, having two debates, you split the field in half. 10-3 is stupid. You split them up 7-6 instead.

[norton]

Simple!
So far everyone has something to say and be heard.
Just shuffle and cut the deck, then hold two consecutive "debates" with 6 & 7 participants (no regard to polls) and then do it again before cutting out the lower scoring candidates:
As it is now, the deck may not be stacked, but it definitely favors the most bombastic and best known wanna-be.

(I'd love to see Trump actually have to defend his "It'll be better, it'll be beautiful, I'm a nice guy" platform against someone with little to lose.)

[lacrew]

Not yet. But honestly, I couldn’t name their candidates...Biden hasn’t even announced.

On the GOP side they will have had 3 debates and a couple of people have already dropped out, before the first dem debate. In 2008 they had 26 debates...now its down to either 4 or 6. Just seems odd to me.

[citizenK]

The whole thing is a sideshow and none if it is a true debate.

Why and how the Right continues to let the Left run the Right’s show is absolutely astonishing.

Wasn't the last true debate in US electoral politics Lincoln-Douglas?

They just don't run the show, the left effectively selects the candidates for the Republicans. Allowing independents and party affiliation gamesmanship into the primary process closes the deal. Makes one wonder.

[napscoordinator]

I think it should be top 6 in the main event and then the rest in the kids table. 6 is a good number needed to really get a good hearing from everyone.

[Mr. Jeeves]

That chart shows a very clear, natural cut-off point at 5% to divide the two debate fields. I would bet that if Cruz were at 4.9% that is exactly what we would see. But he’s a little too high to drop, so they need to dilute his message by including as many candidates as possible. :)

[<1/1,000,000th%]

The Presidential election is more than a year away.

[i_robot73]

And whom gets to decide the 6? Polls?

Last few election cycles I don’t recall much of ANY debate, but I DO remember a whole lot of ‘ME TOO!’

Does anyone seriously believe w/out Trump this go-round there would be word ONE re: immigration, trade deficits, etc.??

He might not be my choice, but thank God he’s in the race to cause heartburn and angst across the spectrum. People are AWAKE, and that scares the ca-ca out of D.C. and their masters.

[napscoordinator]

Yes polls. that is how they have since then. They should now. I hope they decide to go with top 6. The rest are worthless and waste of time.