IMHO, the harder and more off the wall questions are, the more we can see how these candidates respond under stress.
No one that I heard asked a question that shouldn't have been asked, and most were questions that many Americans wanted answered.
BS basil. How about the ‘rats start answering some questions other than pearls vs diamonds?
I don’t mind the questions as long as the people asking the questions are properly identifying themselves so the answer is in the correct context as well as the QUESTIONER!
CNN made the allusion these were undecided or GOP voters asking questions. They were NOT.
Nonsense. For example, how many Americans are concerned about the Confederate flag issue and why is it relevant for the Presidential campaign? We went through this in SC in 2000.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying get some people in there who don't have agendas to ask questions. How is it that 90% of the questions came from people with a liberal background? Just by chance? LOL!
Actually, yes, I do. This isn't the general election, but the primaries. The important thing at this point is for Republicans to select their candidate. The questions should be those that are useful to Republicans, and not these fringe peripheral sorts of non-issues.
"gays in the military" for example is not a Republican issue. It's a liberal issue, which means that the "discussion" is just a pointless flapping of gums and a waste of time.
That said, you're right in your later post about these "debates" not meaning much in the big picture. Since the whole event is pretty much a waste of time, it doesn't really matter much.
for a primary or caucus debate (not a general election) it DOES matter.
Like a company interviewing a potential candidate to work for them. Would you let a competitor interview your job applicant? ....no.
Maybe CNN shouldn't have declare these as "Undecided Republican Voters".