I don’t watch these travesties, but from every thing I’ve read, these things aren’t anything like what I would call a “debate”. I don’t know what to call them, but there is no actual debating going on. It’s not such a bad thing to do what they’re doing, but calling it a “debate” is totally misleading, and characterizing the hosts as “moderators of a debate” is equally misleading. If they were actually moderating, they wouldn’t get any chance to choose what questions they ask. The fact that they are even given the leeway of deciding what the candidates are going to be asked about suggests that they are not in fact moderators at all, but interviewers looking for answers to specific questions. That’s what this is: a huge nationally televised job interview.
Like it or not, the moderators, and hopefully “Mainstream Media” act as proxies for the American public. Are you saying that moderators should NOT ask tough-to-answer or awkward or embarrassing (or even unfair) questions?
Maybe future Republican debates can be conducted by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, and their ilk? Should they ask easy-to-answer questions?
Do you think America will get a good idea of which candidate will be a good President then?
Golly, republicans have turned into monumental pussies. Quit whining and grow up, republicans.
That’s what almost everybody is saying, and I don’t get it. How is “McCain did it too!” a great answer for collecting a six figure salary while not showing up for work? I thought Pubbies were all about not taking money from the government.
But Bush sure blew it. He should have Lloyd Bentsoned Rubio’s ass — “Senator, you’re no John McCain.”
There you go again. Nobody has said tough questions aren’t allowed. You quote my post and go message board tough guy bitching about pussies who don’t like tough debate questions. Who the hell are you talking to? I made no such assertion.
Have you guys seen political debates before?
I agree that the moderation was an absolute travesty. The Mods would interrupt Trump (or somebody) after a few seconds, attacking what he was saying. There were relatively long periods of cacophony, candidate refusing to shut up when Mod was trying to drown him out. It’s normal to let a candidate finish a sentence or two when time has expired, but some candidates were allowed to add several pargaraphs, while others were cut off, insulted etc. Part of the problem may have been using “moderators” like Jim Cramer, probably not even a competent interviewer let alone moderator.
CNBC’s performance was an utter joke. I hope they’re duly embarrassed.
Still one has to blame the GOP candidates themselves for these travesties. Bullshit ideas and blatant lying now seem to be the norm.
It might be interesting to compare the debates in post-rational America with earlier debates. It’s easy to search for, e.g. “1976 Presdiential debate” in YouTube … but I’d quickly get bored watching! The post-rational debates compete with professional wrestling, Jerry Springer and The Three Stooges for audience, not with shows offering intelligent discourse. (I and millions of Americans often turned to the Comedy Channel for intelligent TV news :smack: )
“Jeb, you’re not even George W. Bush.”
Bill Maher tweeted after Cruz’s swipe at the moderators
I agree it was a mess, but I don’t lay all the blame on the moderators.
If they tried to be polite and let the candidate finish their last sentence or two, you had Carly Fiorina going on for another 30 seconds. If you try to cut them off, they shout that you aren’t being fair, and keep talking and otherwise preventing the moderator from guiding the conversation.
What are they supposed to do? Get a buzzer, say “time” and if the candidate says more than the end of the existing sentence, lay on the buzzer till they shut up?
The moderators are surrogates for the American people. They aren’t there to ask softballs so the candidates can spout their ad slogans. They are there to ask important and sometimes pointed questions to help America sort out who is best. Sometimes that means pointing out when the candidates are saying something in conflict with a previous position. Sometimes that means asking to elaborate on what they said about another candidate. Sometimes it means asking for more details on a proposed policy.
The question to Trump could perhaps have been phrased a bit more politely and still conveyed the same essence: many Americans feel those positions are nonsense, pipe dreams. What do you say to those Americans to convince them your ideas are achievable?
Cut off the mike.
If they keep talking for another 5 seconds, you trigger the taser built into the lectern. 
We can stop the “moderators shouldn’t lob softballs” discussion because nobody is arguing that.
Let’s hear from CNBC’s staff:
And those comments were on the redeye flight after the debate. CNBC’s own people immediately recognized that they sucked.
How about allocating a fixed, equal maximum portion of time to each candidate? Tell everyone at the beginning exactly how many minutes they get for the whole show. Keep clocks. Candidates can take as long as they want to answer (or not answer) anything, but if their mouth is open, their clock is ticking down. Closing statements are whatever time they have left.
CNBC is a business news television channel. Business news. People tuned in to the GOP Candidate’s Debate to hear what the business policy positions of the Republican candidates were.
NO ONE tuned in to hear what Moe, Larry, and Harwood had to say. Ask policy questions. Ask business related questions. And then stay out of the way. I’ve witnessed high school debates that were run in a more professional and business-like manner.
The CNBC “alleged” moderators injected themselves INTO the debate. These assholes lied, asked childish questions, and they argued with the candidates. The audience spoke out loud and clear when they BOOOOOO’d the moderators. Maybe the audience has higher standards and expectations than you do?
For God’s sake! The scare quotes go around “moderator” not around “alleged”!! And you don’t need the word “alleged” since that’s what those damn quote marks imply! Aarg!
(post shortened)
Yes, it was a mess. The “alleged” moderators were supposed to be impartial and be able to control the overall debate. The “alleged” moderators failed to do their job. And these people are supposed to be financial experts and advisors. I pity anyone who takes their advice.
Other debates have used lights to alert the candidates when they were approaching the end of their time and when they had reached the end of their time. Simple, easy, and way too difficult for CNBC to master.
Several GOP candidates took these incompetent moderators too task for their obviously politically-biased interjections during the GOP Candidate’s Debate. And the audience, who were there to hear the GOP candidates speak, justifiably BOOOOOO’d the “alleged” moderators politically-biased, un-professional behavior.
Thanks for the info.
These CNBC alleged “moderators”, repeatedly, and wrongly, acted as active participants in the GOP Candidate’s Debate. BOOOOOO CNBC!
How would I know? The question was “why does Mrs. grate,” not “what should she be called.” (Edit: I did say what she should be called, but that was a “my opinion of what 2015 standards are” thing.)
I agree. There were enough lying, childish, argumentative assholes on stage already. No need for the moderators to stoop to that level.
Where did they lie? What’s a question you actually found childish? And when the candidates spout actual, verifiable nonsense, the moderators should call them on it (“argue with the candidates.”) Anything less is a dereliction of their duty.
I don’t think anyone thought the moderators did a great job. They were in a tough position, trying to herd ten clueless, bloviating cats, but both the CNN and Fox moderators did a better job in this respect. But the problem isn’t in the questions they asked, and it isn’t because they made an attempt to interject a little reality from time to time.
Republicans Call Off Upcoming NBC Debate because of (in the Republican view) the CNBC fiasco:
And Telemundo? Smooth, guys, real smooth. Not to worry, you got Marco Rubio, who is like totally Hispanic! Americans of Mexican and Central American descent just absitively, posolutely love them some Cubans!