GOP campaigns debate negotiation megathread - Demands issued + Trump goes rogue

[SteveRogers]

The complaints about the media "moderators" appear legitimate. And say what you will, during the CNBC debate, the candidates handled themselves much better than the bozos asking the questions. I mean, shouldn't the role of a debate moderator be that of an impartial facilitator, someone who states the (preferably on-topic) question and keeps participants focused and aware of the agreed-upon time constraints? Does anyone think that the questions put forth during Wednesday night's debate were (a) on-topic and (b) indicative of anything other than the typical "gotcha" politics that's so popular today? It's high time for the process to be looked at, as the candidates and electorate deserve better than this. I mean, some folks actually wanted to see a substantive debate, not the media-induced circus this ended up being.

A few examples of what I'm talking about (remembering that this "debate" was supposed to focus on economic and financial issues):

Marco Rubio, asked about the Sun-Sentinel editorial about his missing votes in the Senate during his presidential campaign: "Back in 2004, one of my predecessors to the Senate by the name of Bob Graham, a Democrat, ran for president missing over 30 percent of his votes. I don't recall them calling for his resignation. Later that year, in 2004, John Kerry ran for president missing close to 60 to 70 percent of his votes. I don't recall the Sun -- in fact, the Sun-Sentinel endorsed him. In 2008, Barack Obama missed 60 or 70 percent of his votes, and the same newspaper endorsed him again. So this is another example of the double standard that exists in this country between the mainstream media and the conservative movement."

Donald Trump, asked by moderator Harwood, "Is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign?", replies: "No, not a comic book, and it's not a very nicely asked question the way you say that."

Chris Christie, after Bush was asked a question about whether fantasy football businesses should be regulated:  “We’re talking about fantasy football? How about we get the government to do what they’re supposed to be doing? Enough with fantasy football. Let people play. Who cares?”

Ted Cruz, summarizing the evening's questioning: “The questions asked in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media. This is not a cage match. 'Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain?' 'Ben Carson, can you do math?' 'John Kasich, will you insult two people over here?' 'Marco Rubio, why don’t you resign?' 'Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen?' How about talking about the substantive issues?”

I'll grant you the Trump question maybe, but can you explain to me what exactly was inappropriate about the specific questions that elicited those responses from Rubio, Christie, and Cruz?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Don't forget the dumbass questions from the kiddie table debate...."what apps do you use on your phone." WTF?

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Ted Cruz, summarizing the evening's questioning: “The questions asked in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media. This is not a cage match. 'Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain?' 'Ben Carson, can you do math?' 'John Kasich, will you insult two people over here?' 'Marco Rubio, why don’t you resign?' 'Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen?' How about talking about the substantive issues?”

The question that trigger Cruz's (obviously prepared) "rant"Quote

[mencken]

Ted Cruz, summarizing the evening's questioning: “The questions asked in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media. This is not a cage match. 'Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain?' 'Ben Carson, can you do math?' 'John Kasich, will you insult two people over here?' 'Marco Rubio, why don’t you resign?' 'Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen?' How about talking about the substantive issues?”

The question that trigger Cruz's (obviously prepared) "rant"Quote

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes indeed, how dare the media ask Cruz about his actual positions and actions, and call him on his bullsh**t. It's like Cobert said: reality has a liberal bias.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

After that disaster of a debate I would hope something changes soon.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Ted Cruz, summarizing the evening's questioning: “The questions asked in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media. This is not a cage match. 'Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain?' 'Ben Carson, can you do math?' 'John Kasich, will you insult two people over here?' 'Marco Rubio, why don’t you resign?' 'Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen?' How about talking about the substantive issues?”

The question that trigger Cruz's (obviously prepared) "rant"Quote

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes indeed, how dare the media ask Cruz about his actual positions and actions, and call him on his bullsh**t. It's like Cobert said: reality has a liberal bias.

So if Cruz doesn't like the deal that Obama crafted then he obviously favors complete mayhem? If I don't buy a timeshare within the next 30 minutes, do I not want to take my family on vacation ever again?

[Likely Voter]

According to reports today, representatives from all campaigns will be at the Sunday meeting, including Bush (who was last holdout).

Also NYT has the memo with the rules for the FNB debate. They are allowing 90 seconds for answers and 60 seconds for rebuttals (as opposed to 60 and 30 like previous debates). Also like previous debates, no opening statements.
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/30/rules-of-next-republican-debate-are-unveiled/?_r=0

This issue of allowing more time should placate Carson, but we will see.  I am dubious that all 15 campaigns will be able to agree on much as they al have different agendas. And I am dubious as to how much they can really change things. Are they really going to risk running their own debates against on CSPAN and against the RNC?

[SillyAmerican]

I'll grant you the Trump question maybe, but can you explain to me what exactly was inappropriate about the specific questions that elicited those responses from Rubio, Christie, and Cruz?

Sure thing.

I believe the objection to Trump's question needs no further clarification.

On the question to Rubio, what specific economic and/or financial issue was being asked about exactly? I mean, if you're going to bother specifying a topic for discussion, wouldn't you think the least the moderator could do was stick to questions on that topic?

On the response from Christie, given the $19 trillion debt figure and the limited time being devoted to this broadcast, is fantasy football high on the list of discussion points? Are you saying you believe that that question represents a good use of the time? If so, I respectfully disagree.

On the response from Cruz, I agree that he didn't answer the question being asked of him, and he should have, but do you disagree with his pointing out the fact that the debate "moderators" were being completely silly with some of their questioning? I mean, I for one expected more from them, in terms of both tone and substance.

Hopefully that clarifies my objections...

[SillyAmerican]

Don't forget the dumbass questions from the kiddie table debate...."what apps do you use on your phone." WTF?

I didn't bother to watch the kiddie table debate. If the moderators there were asking about phone apps, it's simply another example of the media letting us down.

Honestly, are these supposed to be substantive debates, or simply fun political reality television for the kids?

[Lyin' Steve]

Cruz didn't answer the question because he had been wanting to deliver that monologue for a while and it was his first chance to talk.  Pretty standard debate technique.

[The Mikado]

Given Cruz's starf**ker sense regarding Carson and Trump, and Rubio's obvious frustration, if Trump and Carson can sign on their two leading rivals onto whatever their counterproposal turns out to be, they're golden. There can't be a debate without those four.

Actually, their position is good enough that if Carson and Trump do something that Cruz is fine with, Rubio will have to go along. Rubio doesn't want to be the only one of the top four who isn't at the Donald Trump luxurious and classy alternative debate and is at the loser follows the rules RNC debate. Going to the RNC debate will be for loser squares like Jeb Bush.

[SillyAmerican]

Cruz didn't answer the question because he had been wanting to deliver that monologue for a while and it was his first chance to talk.  Pretty standard debate technique.

Agreed. Still, while I'm no big Ted Cruz fan, what he said was not without merit...

[Likely Voter]

Another update. Carson is floating some crazy ideas...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He is also pushing for fewer debates and for them to be moved to Internet broadcast instead of TV.

The one thing that is clear is that Ben Carson does not want to be on national TV in front of a big audience answering questions.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/carson-calls-for-major-changes-in-gop-debate-format-distribution-1446326197

[The Mikado]

Carson's idea of holding a debate streamed live on Youtube and Facebook is not a terrible idea, especially because you could probably arrange it so that it wasn't exclusive and any Cable network that wanted could just air it.

Obviously the other part of the proposal is a joke, but I like the idea of livestreaming the debate.

[FLgirl]

*sigh*

I was cheering when the candidates railed against the biased media at the debate. It was merited, and they were unified, and it was a bright moment. But they're overplaying their hand, and it now has the potential to turn into a huge clusterf---. I understand the reasoning behind canceling the NBC debate, but it does make them look really bad when it's the Telemundo one that's being canceled and just reinforces the "party of racists and bigots" perception.

All these crazy ideas being floated around:
     - all 14 candidates on stage on once?!
     - 2 debates and drawing straws to select who is at which?!
     - veto power in selecting moderators?!

Come on.

On one end, you have Trump and Carson, both wholly unqualified to even be running and both who suck at debates and know nothing about actual policy, doing all they can to try to not talk about policy; on the other end, you've got the bottom tier candidates who are trying to force themselves into undeserved airtime; in the middle you have Ted Cruz using the opportunity as another one of his pandering soapboxes. I agree with Chris Christie.

Fox Business changed the usual rules of 60 sec responses and 30 sec rebuttals to 90 sec responses and 60 sec rebuttals. That's a good, effective change, and that's the kind of thing that it's fine for the candidates to try to negotiate to. It's fine to double down on the networks to focus on substantive, issue related questions and leave out personal "scandals" or negative attacks.

But this other crap they've been floating around? I hope nothing comes of that.  

[Gass3268]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is actually a more fair idea.

[FLgirl]

Can't have 14 people on stage. It's already too much with 10 people.

Maybe if they had started the debate season by drawing straws and continued like that, it would be fair. But they did not, and it's too late to start that now. The candidates in the lower tier don't stand a chance of winning. Even some candidates in the main debate tier don't stand a chance. Most people aren't gonna watch two debates. To throw a monkey wrench into it now is disruptive and not fair to the voters.

Two equal sized debates is fine but not by drawing straws. Using national polls and using cutoffs is perfectly fair, and there's no reason to stop doing that.

[Likely Voter]

WaPo's Robert Costa has been reporting on the meeting over the last day, including livetweeting leaks from the meeting (taking place now).
https://twitter.com/costareports


Some interesting tidbits:

- Graham has brought in lawyer Ben Ginsberg to help
- Campaigns unsure if RNC should have any role/kicking Spicer out not enough
- Considering having RNC only involved with tickets/logistics, leaving rules negotiating with networks up to campaigns
- Trump wants fewer debaters (higher threshold), Carson wants more debaters
- All 'undercard' campaigns want to be on the main stage (issue causing 'tension')
- Santorum and Jindal pushing for splitting into 2 random choice debates of 7
- All agree to treat Fox differently than other networks "People are afraid to make Roger mad."  (LOL)
- Campaigns agree they should have approval of graphics on screen during debate (assume this means bio stuff next to candidates)
- Bush wants Telemundo reinstated (they were kicked out along with NBC), Trump camp says no, threatens to boycott

[The Mikado]

Jeb was apparently upset about this.

[Likely Voter]

Costas has an article up on the meeting. It covers the same points summarized before, and specifically that they are not lobbying to make any changes with respects to the upcoming debate on Fox Business..
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-contenders-demand-greater-control-over-crucial-debates/2015/11/01/c1226c0c-80a0-11e5-8ba6-cec48b74b2a7_story.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Right now there are only 3 debates planned before Iowa, one of which is on FBN and one of which is on Fox. So this meeting seems to really be focusing on the CNN debate on December 15. But reading between the lines, it doesn't seem like they can agree on much except debates shouldnt be longer than 2 hours and they should be given 30 seconds for opening and closing statements (which is what they agreed on before with CNBC negotiations).

By the time of the ABC debate in NH on Feb. 6, many of the issues arising from dealing with 14 candidates will be resolved through dropouts.

[Lyin' Steve]

Letter of demands coming within 48 hours.

[Lyin' Steve]

This letter is on behalf of the 14 Republican Presidential campaigns.  We are aware that you are sponsoring a debate on ___ at ___.  Below and attached are questions about your debate that the campaigns would appreciate answers to at your earliest convenience, and in any event no later than a month from today.

The answers you provide to these questions will be used by each campaign to determine whether its candidate will participate in your debate.  All the campaigns recognize that robust debates are an important part of the electoral process.  It is also important that all debates be appropriate platforms for discussing substantive issues and the candidates' visions for the future.

Please answer the following:

• Where and when will the debate be held?
• What is the estimated audience for the debate?  Will it be disseminated on-line?  By radio?  Will it be disseminated by other means and do you have any additional partners?
• What are the criteria for inclusion?
• What format do you envision -- podiums, table, other?
• Who is the moderator ? Will there be any additional questions?  Are they seated?
• Will there be questions from the audience or social media?  How many?  How will they be presented to the candidates?  Will you acknowledge that you, as the sponsor, take responsibility for all questions asked, even if not asked by your personnel?
• What is your proposed length of the debate?
• Will there be opening and closing statements.  How long will they be?
• Will you commit to provide equal time/an equal number of questions to each candidate?
• How long are the answers and rebuttals?  If a candidate is mentioned, will he/she automatically be called on so they can rebut?
• Will there be a gong/buzzer/bell when time is up?  How will the moderator enforce the time limits?
• Will you commit that you will not:
  • Ask the candidates to raise their hands to answer a question
  • Ask yes/no questions without time to provide a substantive answer
  • Allow candidate-to-candidate questioning
  • Allow props or pledges by the candidates
  • Have reaction shots of members of the audience or moderators during debates
  • Show an empty podium after a break (describe how far away the bathrooms are)
  • Use behind shots of the candidates showing their notes
  • Leave microphones on during breaks
  • Allow members of the audience to wear political messages (shirts, buttons, signs, etc.).  Who enforces?
• What is the size of the audience?  Who is receiving tickets in addition to the candidates?  Who's in charge of distributing those tickets and filling the seats?
• What instructions will you provide to the audience about cheering during the debate?
• What are the plans for the lead-in to the debate (Pre-shot video?  Announcer to moderator?  Director to Moderator?) and how long is it?
• What type of microphones (lavs or podium)?
• Can you pledge that the temperature in the hall will be kept below 67 degrees?

If there is any additional information you would like to provide the candidates and there (sic) campaigns, please do so.
Thank you for your cooperation.

[/]

Seems pretty sensible to me.

[The Mikado]

• Can you pledge that the temperature in the hall will be kept below 67 degrees?

Rubio's input, no doubt.

No candidate to candidate questioning is disappointing.

Also, no reaction shots?

[YPestis25]

Everything but the demand not to allow candidate to candidate questioning seems fairly reasonable. Do they want a debate, or a Q & A session?