Pat Paulsen
Posted on 05/22/2015 2:36:19 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
In a new press release, Fox News announced that the first Republican presidential debate will feature only candidates who average in the top 10 in the most recent polls, in a field where well over a dozen candidates are expected to run. (RELATED: Who Gets In The Primary Debates? A Serious Question For Republicans)
Fox News will host the first Republican presidential debate in Cleveland, Ohio on August 6, in conjunction with the Ohio Republican Party and Facebook. One of the requirements for debate participants is that they “must place in the top 10 of an average of the five most recent national polls, as recognized by FOX News leading up to August 4th.”
Six Republicans have already announced their candidacy for president (Carly Fiorina, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Mike Huckabee). Four other candidates (Lindsey Graham, Rick Perry, Scott Walker, and George Pataki) plan to make announcements one way or the other in the near future, and six more have taken formal steps toward running for president (Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, John Kasich, Donald Trump, and Scott Walker).
The end result is that as many as six candidates could be excluded from the first debate, assuming none drop out, there are no ties, and no dark horses emerge.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Don’t their careers speak louder than a few words intended to make people vote for them?
Huck over Cruz? Yikes!
RE: Why call ten people standing at podiums with 5-6 minutes of actual speaking time a debate?
At any rate, we had this so called “debate” before in 2012.
Off the top of my head, I can remember the following in the early debates:
Romney
Perry
Gingrich
Cain
Santorum
Bachmann
Ron Paul
Huntsman
Pawlenty
Gary Johnson
Thaddeus McCotter
Have two debates and draw numbers for placement.
Someone suggested the two debates happen one after the other so that the same questions can be asked. Or they could ask different questions.
If a candidate were just a party-crasher candidate I could see excluding him. But that is not the case. The early debates should allow room for everyone. Then later polling done multiple times and averaged may have some validity.
As far as I'm concerned 10 is extremely generous and still includes several vanity candidates who know perfectly well they stand no chance of winning a single state primary or caucus, never mind being nominated.
A "debate" with 10 candidates winds up giving each a few minutes of air time, just enough for a few sound bites without substance and a lot of time wasted on "I agree with what so and so said..." type of discussion.
Foxnews reports the debate! Who decides?
In my opinion the real race is between Bush, Walker, Rubio, Paul, and Cruz.
With Huckabee and Perry on the outside waiting for an opening
And everyone else with no chance in heck.
All that matters to me is that Cruz is on the stage.
enough of these useless political games
America needs to be led by enlightened warrior leadership
not by lawyers and blowhards .
We love our country and want it to survive ? We have to fight , really fight for it . Letting the fraudulent vote process to continue as it has degenerated into will ensure our demise .
Yes, I remember that and it was something but it wasn’t a real debate.
I agree. They should hold simultaneous debates on two stages with no more than five to a stage, same questions, and broadcast them consecutively.
I agree 10 is generous but I'm only talking about the first debate. After that it should be reduced by one or two each debate going forward. If there should be a candidate who cracks the polls from outside matching the criteria they should be included.
Pat Paulsen
Sixteen candidates? That’s at least double the size the field ought to be.
And who decides who is in the top 10?
ALL of them should have their moment to show what they are about to the public. For many uninformed voters, this might be the only chance they’ll see this candidate and IMo, a debate stage is a good way to see how that person handles stress, pressure and answering questions a President would have to answer. It’s also a good way to see what the candidates platform is.
This limited debates, limited candidates, limited rule...is why our country is so screwed. SO SICK OF THE ESTABLISHMENT CABAL!!!!
Good but 10 still too many.
Nowhere in there is any indication that they will hold an actual debate. They can call it whatever they want, but they can’t change the fact that these things aren’t debates, and really serve little useful purpose to those trying to make a reasoned choice for the nomination.
“Sounds fine to me.
The also rans are annoying.”
You mean like McCain in 2008?
Make no mistake, if he announced another run, he would make the top 10.
And that is what I find annoying.
“
Carly Fiorina
Marco Rubio
Ben Carson
Mike Huckabee
Lindsey Graham
Scott Walker
Jeb Bush
Chris Christie
John Kasich
Donald Trump”
No Ted Cruz = big trouble
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.