So...what's the criteria for the Jan 28 debate?

[ds21089]

The Donald will be debating his toupee. No other candidate or hairpieces are invited.

The toupee would win because it's not spouting nonsensical garbage.

 

[CPUd]

I think they'll all be on the same stage from here on out.

 

[Jackie Moon]

I'm going back and forth on if he should boycott again if he qualifies.
I thought I saw a tweet, and I don't even have Twitter, saying something along the lines of "should I let them know now that I'm not going to be at the next stupid debate either?"

If it were another undercard debate then I think he would skip it again.

But if he's able to be on the main stage he will definitely take it.

The debate is in Iowa, days before the caucus. It's the one that the Iowa voters will be watching and making up their mind about who they will vote for... or if they want to go caucus at all.

And without even knowing the criteria I'm already sure that he will make it. He technically already qualified for this one... and when you combine the growth he already had, plus the extra boost of attention from this, plus Carson sliding - he will be there.

I think they'll all be on the same stage from here on out.

Yeah, I can see them doing that too. One last debate in Iowa with everyone on stage together to make it look fair.

And the day after the caucus enough of them will drop out to make the debate on February 6th naturally fit on one stage. By the February 13th debate there might only be 5 or 6 left.

 

[CPUd]

He mentioned in the Union Leader sitdown that he thought the RNC was trying to artificially cull the herd by adding that debate because not enough were dropping out. When the debates started, he said his and some of the other campaigns have been lobbying back channel to get rid of the undercard. Rand agreed 10+ is hard to do, he suggested random splits on different days.

The RNC is not getting good feedback about last night.

 

[Dianne]

He mentioned in the Union Leader sitdown that he thought the RNC was trying to artificially cull the herd by adding that debate because not enough were dropping out. When the debates started, he said his and some of the other campaigns have been lobbying back channel to get rid of the undercard. Rand agreed 10+ is hard to do, he suggested random splits on different days.

The RNC is not getting good feedback about last night.

That's actually a great idea. Have all the candidates draw to set up two groups of five. Don't let FOX assign the match ups by any means.

 

[derek4ever]

That's actually a great idea. Have all the candidates draw to set up two groups of five. Don't let FOX assign the match ups by any means.

Or 3 groups of 4! That way, there's a possibility of a hypothetical debate between a "1st tier", "2nd tier", "3rd tier" and "4th tier" candidate. In other words, in a Trump-Paul-Kasich-Santorum, the odds of Trump getting stopped by any of the other 3 is huge and there's a big risk!

 

[rich34]

If they truly wanna stop Trump from winning the whole damn election they must include Paul and allow his true support to be shown . He is imo the only shot they have at fighting another day. If Trump wins Iowa this thing could get ugly very fast. Sure they can take a gamble on Cruz and even more remotely Rubio but they must know that only Paul has the boots on the ground to beat Trump in Iowa. They can more easily discredit a Paul win than they can a Trump win. If the GOP wants to beat Trump it has to start with Paul winning Iowa giving them them the ammo to say Trump is just a paper tiger. That or let Trump win Iowa and thus the nomination. I suppose we'll see for real in the next two weeks just how bad the gop elite really despises Trump.. Imo Rand is their only hope at preventing a sweep and then the fight starts from there on out starting in New Hampshire. I sall an ad in WV today of Bush going a Rubio. Hell our primary is not until May. If Trump wins Iowa Bush just wasted a lot of money. I know he don't care but at the same time he's an insider and must know something. I just can't see them letting Trump win Iowa or else it coold likely be over. Rand imo is the only guy with enough boots on the ground to definitely beat Trump. Buckle up folks we're bout to go mud runnin..

 

[derek4ever]

If they truly wanna stop Trump from winning the whole damn election they must include Paul and allow his true support to be shown . He is imo the only shot they have at fighting another day. If Trump wins Iowa this thing could get ugly very fast. Sure they can take a gamble on Cruz and even more remotely Rubio but they must know that only Paul has the boots on the ground to beat Trump in Iowa. They can more easily discredit a Paul win than they can a Trump win. If the GOP wants to beat Trump it has to start with Paul winning Iowa giving them them the ammo to say Trump is just a paper tiger. That or let Trump win Iowa and thus the nomination. I suppose we'll see for real in the next two weeks just how bad the gop elite really despises Trump.. Imo Rand is their only hope at preventing a sweep and then the fight starts from there on out starting in New Hampshire. I sall an ad in WV today of Bush going a Rubio. Hell our primary is not until May. If Trump wins Iowa Bush just wasted a lot of money. I know he don't care but at the same time he's an insider and must know something. I just can't see them letting Trump win Iowa or else it coold likely be over. Rand imo is the only guy with enough boots on the ground to definitely beat Trump. Buckle up folks we're bout to go mud runnin..

The thing is the beltway is screwed either way! First, the famous rule change. Second, they'd have to pick between Trump and Rand. They can try to rig the delegate allocation to try and favor a beltway candidate but that's just mere speculation. The beltway is finally seeing the chickens coming home to roost. They had their chance to coalesce around Rand after the first debate and NOBODY, I repeat, NOBODY in the beltway world backed Rand and said that he had a point. They had their chance, now let them face the music!!

 

[puppetmaster]

Trump is old right? They may "TAKE CARE OF IT" the old fashioned way.

 

[nikcers]

Trump is old right? They may "TAKE CARE OF IT" the old fashioned way.

That's why the best non establishment candidate has a dead man switch for vp as a deterrent. I would think anyone with ambitions post JFK has at least entertained the thought right? We need someone for VP so scary that no one would ever "take care of" Rand.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Rand needs to be in the next debate, especially if he has surged in the polls into the double digits by 1/28, to publicly embarrass FOX for its exclusion of him the last time. His presence will speak volumes to FOX's phony debate exclusion criteria.

 

[Anti-Neocon]

That's why the best non establishment candidate has a dead man switch for vp as a deterrent. I would think anyone with ambitions post JFK has at least entertained the thought right? We need someone for VP so scary that no one would ever "take care of" Rand.

Walter Jones is my favorite option. Great story and great voting record. All the Senators and Govs are crap, and he has good experience.

 

[moraha]

Good points. Unfortunately, this makes sense. They may be thinking of doubling down because it's too risky for them to include him. I hope that's not the case. I'm just not sure how they can keep him out. I imagine his poll numbers will rise starting next week.

I personally wouldn't be surprised if they have some ridiculous criteria like "polling only in double digits." Just like Rand said, the RNC wants to narrow the field.

 

[KEEF]

I personally wouldn't be surprised if they have some ridiculous criteria like "polling only in double digits." Just like Rand said, the RNC wants to narrow the field.

The that would sit their boy Bush out.

 

[Foreigner]

I think no undercard, top 5 nationally, + top 8 in Iowa. Since it is the debate in Iowa, right before the caucus.

 

[mit26chell]

The that would sit their boy Bush out.

Nah, they'd find a way to get him in.

 

[Isaac Bickerstaff]

Which Republican president besides W has Iowa ever picked? If I were 'Stablishment Duschbag, I would give Rand the old Santorum Surge to demoralize Trump and his minions and then pump up . . . Whoever in NH and SC. They are both pretty establishment moron strongholds and would give the unwashed masses plenty of time to forget about Rand, with their fish-like memories and all.

That is assuming that Trump is not establishment himself. They know how stupid the electorate is and know that a flock of morons needs a king. All the bluster and vitriol is undoubtedly an act. The statist-run media has had ample opportunity to ignore him, but no, they have given Trump $100 million plus in free media.

Edit: to avoid a mixed metaphor, that should probably be "school of morons".

 

[LibertyExplorer]

Which Republican president besides W has Iowa ever picked? If I were 'Stablishment Duschbag, I would give Rand the old Santorum Surge to demoralize Trump and his minions and then pump up . . . Whoever in NH and SC. They are both pretty establishment moron strongholds and would give the unwashed masses plenty of time to forget about Rand, with their fish-like memories and all.

That is assuming that Trump is not establishment himself. They know how stupid the electorate is and know that a flock of morons needs a king. All the bluster and vitriol is undoubtedly an act. The statist-run media has had ample opportunity to ignore him, but no, they have given Trump $100 million plus in free media.

Edit: to avoid a mixed metaphor, that should probably be "school of morons".

W was also the last Republican to win the White House. If Rand takes Iowa, he may be able to use that to his advantage and create a narrative of "history has shown that you can't win the WH unless you nominate the Iowa winner"

 

[nobody's_hero]

They'll have one giant under-card debate.

 

[jbauer]

Fox doesn't want him. So he'll get 1-2 questions and the trumpster will bash him for being on the stage.