ADVERTISEMENT

Yes, that’s correct, the next 2016 Republican Primary debate is happening next week on Tuesday, November 10. This debate is being hosted by the Fox Business Network, the sister channel of Fox News which focuses exclusively on business news and is a direct rival to CNBC. As a result of the criticism CNBC received for the way they handled the last debate, Fox Business Network is now running TV commercials touting how they will offer a “real debate” on economic topics.

ADVERTISEMENT

Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Fox Business Network Republican Debate

9pm ET (8pm CT, 6pm PT) – Main Debate
6pm ET (5pm CT, 3pm PT) – Undercard Debate

Moderators: Neil Cavuto, Maria Bartiromo, and Gerard Baker

Candidates: Candidates who score 2.5 percent or higher in an average of the four most recent national polls conducted through Nov. 4 will be invited to the main debate stage, the rest on the undercard stage

Report from CNN:

Fox Business is calling out rival CNBC’s debate shortcomings while promoting its own chance to question the Republican field of candidates.

“CNBC never asked the real questions, never covered the real issues,” a Fox narrator says in a commercial. “That’s why on November 10 the real debate about our economy and our future is only on Fox Business Network.”

The commercial started running on Thursday night, one day after CNBC’s debate. It’s a shot at Fox Business’ rival with Fox taking advantage of the widespread criticism of its competitor’s performance.

Fox’s jabs at CNBC started in the opening minutes of Wednesday’s debate, and afterward one of the Fox moderators, Neil Cavuto, asked fans on Twitter to retweet him if they thought Fox would have a stronger debate.

The implicit message was “we’ll do it better,” and now that has become explicit.

Some of the anchors on Fox News and Fox Business have adopted a similar message in their verbal reminders about November 10: Fox, they say, will provide a “real debate” about economic matters.

Fox has already indicated that its debate would be different, giving the candidates more time to explain themselves and reply to criticism from other candidates. During the CNBC debate, frustrated candidates and moderators were sometimes talking over each other as candidates tried to speak and the moderators tried to move on to the next question.

The irony in this is that the Fox News Channel took a lot of criticism for the first Republican debate where moderators once again took up a disproportionate amount of time and became argumentative with candidates. I think the correct way to approach this is to make sure that at the end of the debate, nobody remembers the moderators, they only remember hearing from the candidates. That should be the goal of a debate, to let the candidates do most of the speaking.

By Thursday we should have the official candidate list for the primetime debate and the undercard debate coming up next Tuesday.

23 COMMENTS

  1. Let’s hope FOX Business gets it right. Or they’ll also be exposed, as FOX News (better known as Tel Aviv TV) has been as Israel’s shills. On FOX News everyone could be exposed doing wrong — except for Netanyahu and his terrorist State of Israel.

    If the questions contain: What would you do to make sure Israel is safe? — then, time to stop watching!

  2. “CNBC never asked the real questions, never covered the real issues.”

    Apparently questions like, “Dr. Carson, let’s talk about taxes. You have a flat tax plan of 10 percent flat taxes, and — I’ve looked at it — and this is something that is very appealing to a lot of voters, but I’ve had a really tough time trying to make the math work on this.

    “If you were took a 10 percent tax, with the numbers right now in total personal income, you’re gonna come in with – bring in – $1.5 trillion. That is less than half of what we bring in right now. And by the way, it’s gonna leave us in a $2 trillion hole.

    “So what analysis got you to the point where you think this will work?” aren’t sufficiently ‘real’ for the righties.

    Give us all a break. America deserves it.

    • He never said it would be 10 percent. He’s always said it will be more like 15 percent. That’s exactly the problem with these debates so far. He meant tithe in a sense that it will be fair and it will be the same for everyone with no loopholes.

      • “never said it would be 10 percent”–

        FOX NEWS SUNDAY:

        WALLACE: One of the pillars of your economic program is a flat tax. How would that work?

        CARSON: Well, I like the idea of a proportional tax. That way you pay according to your ability. And I got that idea, quite frankly, from the Bible, tithing. You make $10 billion a year, you pay $1 billion. You make $10 a year, you pay $1. You get the same rights. That’s pretty darn
        fair, if you ask me.

        http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2015/05/10/can-dr-ben-carson-emerge-from-crowded-gop-field-plus-rep-michael-mccaul-on/

        • I think he was just using that as an example and not the official number that he would go with. That was my take away from it anyway. It was a bad example, but I didn’t take that as him committing to the 10% number.

          • That’s exactly what it was. I remember because I watched him say it. I am so glad that he’s running I watch all of his speeches. He’s a brilliant man.

          • You’re absolutely right. I’m sure the Fox comment was meant to be just a colorful example, and he did say in that same interview that it was “about” that, but he shouldn’t have quibbled with the question. “Tithe” means 1/10 from Old English, and churches use it to mean “one tenth,” so it was fair to ask–giving him the chance to clarify. But he should not have said he “never said” that. That was his error.

            • Hillary: The only posts that have been deleted are ones that are personal attacks on other posters–which do not add anything to the discussion.

              Your post here actually fits that criterion, but since your liberal attack was primarily against me, I’ll allow it–because it really just makes you look bad, Hillary.

      • You’re quibbling and not addressing the issue.

        The issue is that CNBC did a mediocre job a moderating (but I don’t think they completely sucked at it like extremists do) and that all the candidates’ whining, calling even vaguely substantive questions ‘gotcha’ questions is at best disingenuous and at worst craven.

        Think about it. These folks claim they want to be President with weak questions like what I posted pissing them off causing huge and pathetic examples of petulance best left in the nursery where it belongs; yet the want their base to believe that they are capable of successfully dealing with Putin, the Chinese, ISIL and whatever else comes up?

        Sorry, but I’m not buying into their schtick and no one who gives a damn about this nation should either.

        • Carson’s doing a good job dialoging with progressives and the Left who have been trying to trap him. He’s the most intelligent and informed candidate so far (that’s including democrat candidates). I wouldn’t want anyone less informed negotiating with China or Russia.

          • Wow. An impressive load of b.s.there.

            What’s your definition of ‘dialoging with progressives’?

            Who’s trying to ‘trap’ him”

            The most intelligent, perhaps. Most informed, not even for a Republican.

            I wouldn’t want anyone less informed than Carson dealing with China or Russia either. But then I would prefer someone even vaguely politically informed; say, a typical piece of gravel.

    • And, CNBC never let Americans see the debate–unless they put money in the pockets of the cable companies. The real story this election year is that some media outlets (CNBC for one) are denying access to the presidential debates to non-cable subscribers. All political debates should be free for the public to view–the way they used to be. We hope you will join our non-partisan movement at the Facebook page FreeTheDebates, where you will find the link to our petition to the White house. Don’t let Big Media hold our democracy for ransom! Equal access for all!

        • Swastika Boy — “while not a crime, is certainly unpatriotic” — describing your actions by displaying Nazi Symbolism each time you post…?

  3. It doesn’t matter how many good points you made in the debate if some Americans were excluded from hearing you. The real story this election year is that some media outlets (CNBC for one) are denying access to the presidential debates to non-cable subscribers. All political debates should be free for the public to view–the way they used to be. We hope you will join our non-partisan movement at the Facebook page FreeTheDebates, where you will find the link to our petition to the White house. Don’t let Big Media hold our democracy for ransom! Equal access for all!

Comments are closed.