Posted on 10/15/2015 10:12:12 AM PDT by conservativejoy
A nearly 90-minute conference call between CNBC and representatives of Republican presidential candidates on Wednesday turned heated over a CNBC decision regarding the next GOP primary debate.
Many of the Republicans complained about a CNBC plan to drop opening and closing statements to allow more time for questions from moderators at the event, scheduled for Oct. 28 at the University of Colorado, Boulder.
The plan was included in a memo the network distributed prior to a conference call that claimed the campaigns had already agreed to the format change, Politico reported.
Eliminating opening and closing statements would allow a more “free flowing discussion, lively candidate interaction, fair treatment of all candidates,” the memo stated, according to Politico.
But during the call, it was clear the campaigns weren’t going along.
The first to object was Ed Brookover, a campaign strategist on the Ben Carson campaign. Two sources on the call told Politico that Brookover threatened to take his concerns public.
Other campaign staffers chimed in, including representatives from Rand Paul, Jeb Bush, John Kasich, and Chris Christie.
A top Mike Huckabee aide, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, argued that doing away with the traditional statements would further marginalize lower-tier candidates.
Michael Glassner, a top aide to front-runner Donald Trump, expressed his agreement with those complaining.
Republican National Committee officials who were on the call to said they would take up the matter with CNBC, Politico reported.
In an email to Politico, Sean Spicer, an RNC spokesman, wrote: “The entire purpose of the calls is to provide a two way street of information and feedback. As was stated we are taking their feedback and will follow up.”
Thanks!
Why are they going on CNBC at all?
Yes, then instead of the enemy gaystream press, it would be the enemy GOPe conducting the debates. Not sure there is enough difference to warrant the change.
Man. I’d pay to see that debate. Rush, Levin, and Steyn as moderators. Hannity can be the MC I guess.
OAN could step up and do this. They could stream it live. They’d be blowing up entire data centers.
No way the RNC allows this. Trump could make it happen. Talk about picking the right battlefield. OAN would be on the map tomorrow morning.
If you think that's what they would use national air time for, you must be a bigger idiot than most. Other than Trump, few of the candidates have gotten much air time at all outside of answering "gotchya" questions from Liberal attack dogs...
and the fact that the Liberal attack dogs agreed to give them that time, and now are trying to take it away, should tell you all that you need to know.
Agree. They end up being free campaign ads.
Agreed. If CNBC wants to do something positive to elevate the debate, there should not be more than 6 to a stage. The second tier debate is a total waste of time.
Since Trump’s manager is one of his best friend’s, he can make Trump do anything he wants.
Only an idiot party would hold the debate at that so called network.
"Mr. Fox, could you please come speak at our chicken clucker at the barnyard coop and talk to us about how to protect the hens from predators, such as foxes? What security features would you recommend we put in place to protect the eggs we lay from those who want to destroy them?"
Talk about shooting themselves in the foot. What is wrong with the RNC when they set these things up? Or do we just give the keys to the Republican Party to the liberals and asked that they drive carefully and don't scratch the paint? What kind of madness is this?
Ivanka says her dad is a great listners but makes all the decisions himself. That’s what a leader does so the staff never feels quilt or remorse if it doesn’t work out !
Good question. I think the RNC and the candidates should select the moderators and hold the debates on CSPAN.
As I mentioned in an earlier post. I don’t think that the candidates are opposed to forging opening statements and thus there must be some other debate condition that is not palatable.
In most debates, I find the Opeinng Statements to be boring and repetitive. Closing statements are more important. But, do we really need to hear about Columbia Bush and how much Jeb loves the Hispanic people?
If you insist on playing with the enemy, then don’t come whining to me when they pull the football out from under you. Why are you having a Republican debate on CNBC in the first place?
Actually, the questions control candidates by giving airtime to some and denying others. Statements equalize and give everyone a chance to be heard. MY fav, Cruz, for instance, has been ignored more or less in debates. I think they are afraid of him sounding too good. That’s my opinion.
Long-winded questions that we could get if we just tuned in to CNBC.
This is as irritating as a 30 second commercial on Youtube for a 24 second video.
I agree that there should be equal time for each candidate.
But...but...our guys only know air-guitar!
IOW, they don't want the candidates having a chance to clear up the twists and spins.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.