Forum Thread

Fox News Set to Host First GOP Debate of the 2016 Season

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 4 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Fox News is set to host the first of many debates in the 2016 Presidential primary season tonight and it is guaranteed to be interesting. The top ten polling candidates will be participating in the main debate while anyone polling lower will be participating in a "happy hour debate" that will be held before the main event.

    Donald Trump, who is currently leading the polls, will be front and center. He will be flanked by Jeb Bush and Scott Walker. Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, and John Kasich make up the remainder of the ten candidates who made the cut.

    Carly Fiorina, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal, Lindsey Graham, George Pataki and Jim Gilmore will all be participating in the earlier debate.

    What do you think about the decision Fox News made to limit the main debate to the top ten candidates? Does it make sense that they limited the number of participants in order to give more time for the participants to speak or should they have allowed every declared candidate to participate in the main event?

    I personally agree with their decision to limit the number of participants because I feel it would be impossible to have a legitimate debate with seventeen individuals vying for airtime. Do you agree or should every declared candidate have been given the opportunity to participate in the main debate?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Deraj Wrote: What do you think about the decision Fox News made to limit the main debate to the top ten candidates? Does it make sense that they limited the number of participants in order to give more time for the participants to speak or should they have allowed every declared candidate to participate in the main event?
    I think they should have just extended the time frame and allowed everyone to participate at the same time instead of having two separate debates. That way everyone would have been given an equal opportunity.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I'm fine with them limiting the number of candidates who can participate. Seventeen people is an awfully lot of people sharing one stage and it would be a logistical nightmare trying to ensure that they all receive equal amounts of time to speak.

    And let's face it--if they aren't in the top ten by now then what are their chances of ever winning the nomination?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Richard1022 Wrote:

    I'm fine with them limiting the number of candidates who can participate. Seventeen people is an awfully lot of people sharing one stage and it would be a logistical nightmare trying to ensure that they all receive equal amounts of time to speak.

    And let's face it--if they aren't in the top ten by now then what are their chances of ever winning the nomination?

    Yes. Good points. I'm glad they went for as many as 10 to be honest. They could have totally gone another direction and only given 5 or 6 front runners a main podium. 10 is plenty.