Althouse: "Fox says only the 'top' 10 candidates, as judged solely by national polling, will be allowed on its stage"

July 15, 2015

"Fox says only the 'top' 10 candidates, as judged solely by national polling, will be allowed on its stage"

"That may be understandable later, but the first votes are half a year away and there are a lot more than 10 viable candidates. The early primary process gives all candidates a chance to be heard,... If networks and national polls are to decide this now, the early state process is in jeopardy and only big money and big names will compete."

Said C-SPAN, announcing that it's inviting all 17 candidates to appear in a forum 3 days before the Fox News debate.

24 comments:

Bob Boyd said...: Fox has denied rumors it will sell the organs of candidates whose campaigns are aborted by the policy.; 7/15/15, 10:18 AM
Known Unknown said...: "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

Wow. A phrase that does work for everything.; 7/15/15, 10:21 AM
Bobber Fleck said...: So this will be a lot like the Lincoln-Douglas debates, but geared toward the low information/attention deficit voters:

The format for each debate was: one candidate spoke for 60 minutes, then the other candidate spoke for 90 minutes, and then the first candidate was allowed a 30-minute "rejoinder." The candidates alternated speaking first. As the incumbent, Douglas spoke first in four of the debates.; 7/15/15, 10:32 AM
Dan Hossley said...: Good for CSPAN. If Brian Lamb moderates the forum, it should be informative.; 7/15/15, 10:33 AM
Brando said...: Going by polls, when there are this many candidates in the race, this many different polling organizations (with varying methodologies), and the candidates are this close to one another in poll positions, is an incredibly arbitrary way to decide which 10 are your most "viable" candidates.; 7/15/15, 10:41 AM
CJinPA said...: Wow. CSPAN never wades into active political issues like this. This is big.; 7/15/15, 10:50 AM
kcom said...: I assume they are wading in to do it right and without favoritism. If so, more power to them.

If they do it well, maybe we can get away from the gotcha format that journalists (especially of the "Democrats with by-lines" variety) love. I've never understood why Republican debates would/should be moderated by Democratic journalists asking questions Democrats care about, rather than questions Republican primary voters care about.; 7/15/15, 11:19 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/15/15, 11:20 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Good for CSPAN. What a stupid unforced error on FOX's part, making me wonder (again) if they've been captured by the establishment wing (Rove etc.).

[spelling cleaned up.]; 7/15/15, 11:21 AM
Brando said...: "If they do it well, maybe we can get away from the gotcha format that journalists (especially of the "Democrats with by-lines" variety) love. I've never understood why Republican debates would/should be moderated by Democratic journalists asking questions Democrats care about, rather than questions Republican primary voters care about."

I would like to see hard questioning, regardless of the politics of the moderator--these debates too easily wander into the "good question, now I will segue this into an answer prepared that recites my talking points" sort of way which defeats the point of a debate.

Hell, let the candidates question each other directly--it should be all like that, so they have to actually answer hard questions, and the moderator should be limited to making sure one at a time speaks, and time limits. Otherwise it looks like a long joint press conference.; 7/15/15, 11:25 AM
Deirdre Mundy said...: What happens if poll numbers change dramatically between the CSPAN debate and the big 10?; 7/15/15, 12:37 PM
Thorley Winston said...: If I were running FOX, I would announce that they will be limiting their debate to the top six or eight candidates who have actually filed with the FEC, qualified to be on the ballot in the early primary states and have an up and running campaign organization in those states. This would weed out some of the least serious candidates and make their debate more meaningful because the candidates who attend would actually get a chance to speak for more than ten minutes and say something meaningful and memorable. More than likely it would cause the top six or eight candidates to want to skip the CSPAN debate (which is unlikely to get a lot of viewers anyway) as these candidates will want a better forum for their first debate rather than trying to talk over fifteen other people.; 7/15/15, 1:22 PM
Michael said...: CSPAN's plan is better but still wrong. There should be 3 debates (every other day?) of 6 candidates each, assigned by lot. CSPAN has the time to burn and isn't as concerned about plugging their everyday talent as Fox or CNN might be. Then re-draw for the next round. People who cared would pay attention, and the "highlights" would be available on YouTube. If this doesn't serve the Networks' private purposes, tough bananas.; 7/15/15, 1:51 PM
hombre said...: Two debates would be good for everybody, including Fox.

I am probably not going to support Carly or Dr. Ben, but if they aren't included, I won't be watching an array of Trump and pro politicians.; 7/15/15, 1:52 PM
MadisonMan said...: It would be awesome if someone declined to participate. As someone pointed out yesterday or the day before, it's not like the President debates foreign leaders. So what does an alleged win in a debate prove? Nothing. How did we arrive at this format? Television. That's the 1980 way of running a campaign.

Give each candidate 5 minutes to sell themselves. Then the next candidate. And the next....; 7/15/15, 4:39 PM
mccullough said...: Even 10 people is an unwieldy debate. Why is their any debate 6 months before any primary/caucus?; 7/15/15, 5:51 PM
Static Ping said...: I sympathize with Fox News. There is no way to do a proper debate with 17 candidates. Either each candidate is given an appropriate amount of time for a debate, which causes the debate to go on far too long for the attention span of anyone who is not a political junkie, or the time allotted is too short to say anything other than soundbites. Debates work best with fewer candidates, ideally two.

Really, the best you can hope for with a 17 candidate debate is someone says something really stupid and is forced to drop out. I doubt anyone can say anything brilliant enough to separate from the pack in this format though.; 7/15/15, 6:08 PM
Wilbur said...: Just have two different candidates debate - or better, discuss the issues - each other every day for a 20 minutes, or whatever length is appropriate. You could have two or three of these a day. Every legitimate candidate would get their chances, if they so desired.

The GOP should start their own GOP Channel - even if it's online, to start - and show it on there.; 7/15/15, 6:18 PM
grackle said...: Hell, let the candidates question each other directly--it should be all like that, so they have to actually answer hard questions, and the moderator should be limited to making sure one at a time speaks, and time limits. Otherwise it looks like a long joint press conference.

Bingo!; 7/15/15, 6:30 PM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: Whether it's 10 on Fox or 17 on C-SPAN, this first debate is going to resemble a Miss Universe pageant. That can only benefit Donald Trump.

Or perhaps it will resemble a Cambridge municipal election. After each debate, the lowest polling candidate is declared defeated. The rest go to the next round, and pick up whatever support transfers over from the defeated. That will resemble The Apprentice, which can also only benefit Trump.; 7/15/15, 6:35 PM
mccullough said...: I remember the three-way debates between HW, Clinton, and Perot in 1992. Not great TV.; 7/15/15, 6:47 PM
rehajm said...: Who am I? Why am I here?; 7/15/15, 8:05 PM
mishu said...: Maybe they should have it set up like the NCAA tournament. One on one debates with instant polling afterwards. The winner moves on to the next round.; 7/15/15, 9:30 PM
richard mcenroe said...: Fox will do what it has to to protect the wobbling Annointed One Jeb.; 7/15/15, 11:06 PM