RNC threatens to ban candidates from appearing in debates

[butters]

The RNC said that the CPD must address its “failures” if the organization wishes to have creditability within the Republican party including adopting term limits for its board of directors, committing to hold at least one debate before the start of early voting and establishing a transparent criteria for selecting debate moderators.

Frank Fahrenkopf, chairman of the CPD, told ABC News that he met with the RNC and tried to convey that the commission doesn't work with the party but works with the candidates instead.

"They just want to take over everything and we told them that we don't deal with the political parties, we never have," Fahrenkopf said. "We have nothing to do with the Republican, Democratic party or any other political party. We work only with those candidates for president and vice president who meet the requirements that we put out a year or so ahead of time."

The official statement put out by the CPD echoed Fahrenkopf's statement with regard to political parties. The CPD said its plans for the 2024 debates "will be based on fairness, neutrality and a firm commitment to help the American public learn about the candidates and the issues."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...g-in-debates/ar-AASKCq5?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531

 

[Rightguide]

Tell the rest of the story! Only those debates sponsored by left leaning and corrupt, Commission on Presidential Debates.

 

[pecksniff]

This "Commission on Presidential Debates" is a bipartisan entity, doing a function better performed by a nonpartisan entity. It would be better to give the presidential debate arrangements back to the League of Women Voters. They would at least sometimes let third-party candidates onto the stage.

 

[pecksniff]

Tell the rest of the story! Only those debates sponsored by left leaning and corrupt, Commission on Presidential Debates.

The CPD is run by officials from both parties, you know. It is no more left-leaning or corrupt than the average of the two.

 

[ll74]

The response from the commission was basically a middle finger

 

[pecksniff]

If the GOP pulls out of the presidential debates, that leaves the Dem candidate with the stage and the cameras and all of time to himself. The debate becomes an hour-long televised campaign speech, made just a bit more interesting by questions from the audience, but only one party's candidate gets to answer them, and the other party's candidate looks like a coward. This is not well thought out.

 

[pecksniff]

The RNC said the CPD must address its "failures" if the organization wishes to have creditability within the Republican Party, including adopting term limits for its board of directors, committing to holding at least one debate before the start of early voting and establishing transparent criteria for selecting debate moderators.

Those sound like very curious grievances. Isn't there always a debate before the start of early voting? And what's wrong with the moderators who have served in the past?

 

[ll74]

As the commission responded, they work with candidates not with parties.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

If the GOP pulls out of the presidential debates, that leaves the Dem candidate with the stage and the cameras and all of time to himself. The debate becomes an hour-long televised campaign speech, made just a bit more interesting by questions from the audience, but only one party's candidate gets to answer them, and the other party's candidate looks like a coward. This is not well thought out.

I can hardly wait to see a one-hour drone from Joey Hairplugs. What's the over/under on him falling asleep?

 

[Rightguide]

This "Commission on Presidential Debates" is a bipartisan entity, doing a function better performed by a nonpartisan entity. It would be better to give the presidential debate arrangements back to the League of Women Voters. They would at least sometimes let third-party candidates onto the stage.

The above has proven to be bullshit. Anyone can see it in their way of conducting debates. The questioners are always leftist, Democrat, or liberal members of the media. No conservative has ever been allowed to question presidential candidates.

 

[Rightguide]

If the GOP pulls out of the presidential debates, that leaves the Dem candidate with the stage and the cameras and all of time to himself. The debate becomes an hour-long televised campaign speech, made just a bit more interesting by questions from the audience, but only one party's candidate gets to answer them, and the other party's candidate looks like a coward. This is not well thought out.

There won't be a debate unless you think Joe Biden talking to his friends is a debate.

 

[Wrong Element]

The above has proven to be bullshit. Anyone can see it in their way of conducting debates. The questioners are always leftist, Democrat, or liberal members of the media. No conservative has ever been allowed to question presidential candidates.

Wasn't Brit Hume the panelist who asked Dan Quayle the question that prompted the "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy" retort from Lloyd Bentsen? Hume is obviously a conservative and he wouldn't deny it.

 

[pecksniff]

I can hardly wait to see a one-hour drone from Joey Hairplugs. What's the over/under on him falling asleep?

I doubt he'll actually be running in 2024.

 

[pecksniff]

There won't be a debate unless you think Joe Biden talking to his friends is a debate.

It will be the closest thing to a debate the public gets to see -- and that will be entirely the fault and choice of the RNC.

 

[pecksniff]

The above has proven to be bullshit. Anyone can see it in their way of conducting debates. The questioners are always leftist, Democrat, or liberal members of the media. No conservative has ever been allowed to question presidential candidates.

See post #4.

 

[pecksniff]

What's wrong, anyway, with giving this whole thing back to the League of Women Voters? Nobody ever accuses that organization of partisan bias.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

See post #4.

Not a refutation. He's right.

I'd love to see Joe Rogan run a debate.

 

[Rightguide]

What's wrong, anyway, with giving this whole thing back to the League of Women Voters? Nobody ever accuses that organization of partisan bias.

Are you daft? They are a liberal organization, always has been.

 

[Rightguide]

Not a refutation. He's right.

I'd love to see Joe Rogan run a debate.

Let's have mark Levin ask a few questions.

 

[pecksniff]

Not a refutation. He's right.

I'd love to see Joe Rogan run a debate.

If the Republicans have members on the CPD board, why do they allow the debates to be run in a Dem-friendly way?

 

[Wrong Element]

What's wrong, anyway, with giving this whole thing back to the League of Women Voters? Nobody ever accuses that organization of partisan bias.

It wasn't taken away from The League of Women Voters; they stopped doing it on their own.

The current system works pretty well, although allowing a presidential candidate who is known for dishonesty and who happened to have Covid to get around testing before the first 2020 debate because of "the honor system" was probably a mistake.

 

[pecksniff]

It wasn't taken away from The League of Women Voters; they stopped doing it on their own.

The current system works pretty well, although allowing a presidential candidate who is known for dishonesty and who happened to have Covid to get around testing before the first 2020 debate because of "the honor system" was probably a mistake.

Well, we've seen a lot of things happen since 2015, that in earlier years nobody ever imagined could be a problem.