CNN Changes Rules for Fiorina

[What Would Jesus Do?]

http://news.yahoo.com/cnn-amends-debate-criteria-fiorina-may-215858659--election.html

CNN has changed its criteria for who qualifies for the next Republican presidential debate, giving former technology executive Carly Fiorina a better chance at appearing in the Sept. 16 prime-time affair.

The news network announced the change on Tuesday following weeks of public pressure from Fiorina and her supporters.

Fiorina is the only woman in the Republican field. She likely would not have been among the top 10 candidates on the debate stage on Sept. 16 as determined by national polling between July 16 and Sept. 10. The new terms would add any candidate who ranks in the top 10 in polling between Aug. 6 and Sept. 10 — a period that better reflects Fiorina's rise in the polls.

The final participants will be announced on Sept. 10.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I wonder who will get the boot to make room for her. Will anyone else be helped, too?

 

[22*43*51]

It's CNN's version of Title IX for debates.

 

[N_fuego]

Sounds bad for Chris Christy. He was in the 10th spot before they refined the formula.

 

[swagsurfer02]

http://news.yahoo.com/cnn-amends-debate-criteria-fiorina-may-215858659--election.html

CNN has changed its criteria for who qualifies for the next Republican presidential debate, giving former technology executive Carly Fiorina a better chance at appearing in the Sept. 16 prime-time affair.

The news network announced the change on Tuesday following weeks of public pressure from Fiorina and her supporters.

Fiorina is the only woman in the Republican field. She likely would not have been among the top 10 candidates on the debate stage on Sept. 16 as determined by national polling between July 16 and Sept. 10. The new terms would add any candidate who ranks in the top 10 in polling between Aug. 6 and Sept. 10 — a period that better reflects Fiorina's rise in the polls.

The final participants will be announced on Sept. 10.

Figured you were ok with making exceptions.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Figured you were ok with making exceptions.

I already said I thought the original rules were bad (previous thread). These sound better. But now we get into the quicksand of changing rules in the middle of the game.

 

[LifelongHawk]

Shows that CNN is entertainment company not a news company, big shock. If they are going to do this, they may as well have gone the Fox rout and not even announced the criteria until they decided what they wanted. Announcing the rules early, then changing them due to public opinion and/or special interest attacks, shows a lack of both intelligence and integrity.

Link also shows Yahoo has terrible writers, reads like new criteria can add but doesn't subtract and might lead to more than 10 at big table. Wouldn't be that hard to write it so that is made clear either way.

 

[SIXERS24]

Why does CNN get to make the rules?

If so why dont they do it for the Dems and force them to have to some debates! DWS is protecting her girl Hillary because she knows the only person HRC can beat in a debate is :Lincoln Chefee!

 

[BubsFinn]

Why does CNN get to make the rules?

If so why dont they do it for the Dems and force them to have to some debates! DWS is protecting her girl Hillary because she knows the only person HRC can beat in a debate is :Lincoln Chefee!

This is an excellent question. It isn’t CNN’s debate, it’s the GOP’s debate. CNN shouldn’t have jackshit to say who is and who is not part of it. And if CNN thinks they get to choose who is in the debate, the GOP should cancel it and make them air reruns of Nancy Grace.

 

[unIowa]

Good move. I like what Carly has shown to this point, she has got some stuff to her that cuts through the typical political BS. Very well accomplished lady, hell the most female accomplished running for POTUS at this time IMO.

Kick Christy Cream out as he is just a political blow hard. I don't think she gets the GOP nod but i think she has VP written all over her for this 2016 run. Mitt and Carly 2016

 

[ANYCHawk]

Good move. I like what Carly has shown to this point, she has got some stuff to her that cuts through the typical political BS. Very well accomplished lady, hell the most female accomplished running for POTUS at this time IMO.

 

[unIowa]

Serious question, do you think Hillary is more accomplished? I think other woman broke the SOS and senator barrier prior to her but no one beat Carly to first female CEO of a top 50 company.

In reality Hills is a smart lady but she is a career politician who has been aided along by the popularity of her husband and his legacy. I can't respect that over the first fortune 50 lady CEO. Carly did something unprecedented.

Hills couldn't even satisfy her man.

 

[thewop]

http://news.yahoo.com/cnn-amends-debate-criteria-fiorina-may-215858659--election.html

CNN has changed its criteria for who qualifies for the next Republican presidential debate, giving former technology executive Carly Fiorina a better chance at appearing in the Sept. 16 prime-time affair.

The news network announced the change on Tuesday following weeks of public pressure from Fiorina and her supporters.

Fiorina is the only woman in the Republican field. She likely would not have been among the top 10 candidates on the debate stage on Sept. 16 as determined by national polling between July 16 and Sept. 10. The new terms would add any candidate who ranks in the top 10 in polling between Aug. 6 and Sept. 10 — a period that better reflects Fiorina's rise in the polls.

The final participants will be announced on Sept. 10.

It's the right thing to do. I applaud CNN. She's polled well enough since the initial debate, and it's ridiculous to include anything before that given the way the field expanded just prior. Plus, as Fox proved in the first debate given their line of questioning, these debates are for entertainment purposes, and she should be there. There are plenty of white male career politicians that can step down. I vote for the Angry Leprechaun (Rand Paul).

 

[thewop]

Serious question, do you think Hillary is more accomplished? I think other woman broke the SOS and senator barrier prior to her but no one beat Carly to first female CEO of a top 50 company.

In reality Hills is a smart lady but she is a career politician who has been aided along by the popularity of her husband and his legacy. I can't respect that over the first fortune 50 lady CEO. Carly did something unprecedented.

Hills couldn't even satisfy her man.

I totally agree. Hillary's incredibly intelligent, but she rode the coattails of her husband to power and played politics thereafter. Carly took a much more difficult (though probably more likely) road to the top.

 

[MitchL]

CNN isn't the GOP shill like Fox News is, so it is possible Priebus tries something. However... If anyone thinks Fox and CNN aren't both basically entertainment outlets, they haven't watched cable TV for quite a while.

 

[unIowa]

It's the right thing to do. I applaud CNN. She's polled well enough since the initial debate, and it's ridiculous to include anything before that given the way the field expanded just prior. Plus, as Fox proved in the first debate given their line of questioning, these debates are for entertainment purposes, and she should be there. There are plenty of white male career politicians that can step down. I vote for the Angry Leprechaun (Rand Paul).

I like Rand. At least he doesn't stand for the stripping of our individual liberties in the name of public "safety" like the other guys that will be on stage. He also is for reform of our criminal justice system (needed), a change in drug laws (needed), and a reduction of influence by our MIC (needed).

 

[ANYCHawk]

Serious question, do you think Hillary is more accomplished? I think other woman broke the SOS and senator barrier prior to her but no one beat Carly to first female CEO of a top 50 company.

In reality Hills is a smart lady but she is a career politician who has been aided along by the popularity of her husband and his legacy. I can't respect that over the first fortune 50 lady CEO. Carly did something unprecedented.

Hills couldn't even satisfy her man.

I can't believe you can argue that. I really don't care that she was the first woman CEO of a fortunate 500 company. She frankly sucked at it. I mean good for her to working to that position, but if you suck how much does it count? I mean Manon Rheaume was the first woman to appear in an NHL game it doesn't mean I think she should be NHL commissioner (though anyone other than Bettman would be better).

I don't get why people give so much credence to the fact she was first. Obama is the first black president. Do you give him a pass on his 8 years just because he was the first to do something unprecedented and not be a white guy?

Look you can argue against Hilary I get it. I don't plan on voting for her in the primaries. But, to sit here and argue that somehow Carly is more accomplished seems odd to me. She was a quickly failed CEO...for the sake of argument let's call that a wash with a bad SOS stint for Hilary (not saying she was bad, just for the sake of argument). Hilary still won two elections, served 8 years as a U.S. Senator and another 8 as first lady.

And when did career politician become automatically synonymous with bad thing? So was Kennedy, Lincoln and FDR.

 

[unIowa]

And when did career politician become automatically synonymous with bad thing? So was Kennedy, Lincoln and FDR.

I look at it like academia (not science academia). Those who can't teach or in this case become career politicians (sorry teachers). Career politicians (that haven't shown success in another field) produce nothing, they have taken no risk...I can't respect that.

America was made great bc of do'ers, not bc of career politicians.

 

[ANYCHawk]

I look at it like academia (no science academia). Those who can't teach or in this case become career politicians (sorry teachers). Career politicians (that haven't shown success in another field) produce nothing, they have taken no risk...I can't respect that.

America was made great bc of do'ers, not bc of career politicians.

So Lincoln, FDR and Kennedy didn't help make america great?

 

[unIowa]

So Lincoln, FDR and Kennedy didn't help make america great?

They may have helped but it was Americans, collectively, that helped push them up to greatness.

Wait, are you really trying to compare Hills with Lincoln, JFK & FDR?

You keep putting your faith in politicians, i will put mine with the people i stand with shoulder to shoulder every day...those people make America go.

 

[ANYCHawk]

Wait, are you really trying to compare Hills with Lincoln, JFK & FDR?

I never did that. I asked when did "career politician" become automically synonymous with bad. Then I provided three examples of career politicians that were pretty good.

You didn't say, my bad, I agree not all career politicians are bad. Instead you doubled down, which shocked me.

And like you stand shoulder to shoulder with trump or Carly. Or they stand shoulder to shoulder with the american public. Ha!

 

[thewop]

So Lincoln, FDR and Kennedy didn't help make america great?

They have a role, but an army of doers is capable of doing great things without the help of politicians. An army of politicians make America great without the help of doers? Nope.

 

[ANYCHawk]

They have a role, but an army of doers is capable of doing great things without the help of politicians. An army of politicians make America great without the help of doers? Nope.

OK....

So people need help. OK. What does that have to do with this idea that career politician is somehow automatically bad?

 

[unIowa]

OK....

So people need help. OK. What does that have to do with this idea that career politician is somehow automatically bad?

It seems their main goal today is to just get reelected, maybe in a different time the career politician was good but 9 times out of 10 today it seem like their own personal interest are put above the peoples.

Like i said before, I can't respect that, i don't respect that. Maybe you are ok w that or see it differently but that is how i, and most Americans, see it.

 

[unIowa]

I never did that. I asked when did "career politician" become automically synonymous with bad. Then I provided three examples of career politicians that were pretty good.

You didn't say, my bad, I agree not all career politicians are bad. Instead you doubled down, which shocked me.

And like you stand shoulder to shoulder with trump or Carly. Or they stand shoulder to shoulder with the american public. Ha!

Maybe i didn't articulate my point well. What i meant is i respect those people who work hard, take risk, and keep America going (your everyday employees, entrepreneurs, and business owners) more so then the career politicians of today. These people have a better understanding of what makes America great than what someone like Hillary Clinton does.

Maybe that makes me jaded but the folks i see in DC today are most interested in themselves above anything else.

 

[lucas80]

I thought Republicans were against affirmative action?

 

[hawkchaps]

I can't believe you can argue that. I really don't care that she was the first woman CEO of a fortunate 500 company. She frankly sucked at it. I mean good for her to working to that position, but if you suck how much does it count? I mean Manon Rheaume was the first woman to appear in an NHL game it doesn't mean I think she should be NHL commissioner (though anyone other than Bettman would be better).

I don't get why people give so much credence to the fact she was first. Obama is the first black president. Do you give him a pass on his 8 years just because he was the first to do something unprecedented and not be a white guy?

Look you can argue against Hilary I get it. I don't plan on voting for her in the primaries. But, to sit here and argue that somehow Carly is more accomplished seems odd to me. She was a quickly failed CEO...for the sake of argument let's call that a wash with a bad SOS stint for Hilary (not saying she was bad, just for the sake of argument). Hilary still won two elections, served 8 years as a U.S. Senator and another 8 as first lady.

And when did career politician become automatically synonymous with bad thing? So was Kennedy, Lincoln and FDR.

Please; how the H is serving as 1st lady a qualification? nice reach; she sux and has gotten places by riding coattails of a disgraced womanizer

 

[TexMichFan]

I never did that. I asked when did "career politician" become automically synonymous with bad. Then I provided three examples of career politicians that were pretty good.

You didn't say, my bad, I agree not all career politicians are bad. Instead you doubled down, which shocked me.

And like you stand shoulder to shoulder with trump or Carly. Or they stand shoulder to shoulder with the american public. Ha!

For me being a "career politician" seems to be the biggest accomplishment for Hillary. She has no major accomplishment as a senator or SOS.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Maybe i didn't articulate my point well. What i meant is i respect those people who work hard, take risk, and keep America going (your everyday employees, entrepreneurs, and business owners) more so then the career politicians of today. These people have a better understanding of what makes America great than what someone like Hillary Clinton does.

Maybe that makes me jaded but the folks i see in DC today are most interested in themselves above anything else.

But does Carly qualify as one of "those people"? What are her skills and how do they apply? Dubious mergers? Laying people off? Negotiating a golden parachute for herself? Which of those skills do we need in the White House? What about her successes and failures makes you think she has a better understanding of what makes America great?

Tangentially, I'm reminded of that great opening scene in The Newsroom where the character Will McAvoy goes on a tirade about how idiotic it is to think America is great. Most of our cons here went ballistically hostile in reaction and creamed themselves when they found 1 factual error in that rant.

Yet at the moment we have several GOP candidates saying they want to make America great again. Which was what the McAvoy character also said.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

````````````````````````````````

For me being a "career politician" seems to be the biggest accomplishment for Hillary. She has no major accomplishment as a senator or SOS.

I'm not sure this is either correct or a fair assessment. How many Senators or SECSTATEs have "big accomplishments" that you can point to? The good ones work on getting the bills passed or the jobs done; they don't usually stand out as having their own personal "major accomplishments." Occasionally they have personal major failures - and the GOP is trying to hang some of those on HC. Benghazi. Emails. But they don't seem to have much power, despite the huge efforts to hone them into sharp weapons.

 

[Jan Itor]

OK....

So people need help. OK. What does that have to do with this idea that career politician is somehow automatically bad?

Would you agree that politics, in Washington, has taken a turn for the worse since the days of Lincoln, FDR, & Kennedy? IMO, those days are gone, and the career politicians of today are mostly looking out for themselves. So I don't think the examples you provided, from another time, holds water.

 

[unIowa]

But does Carly qualify as one of "those people"? What are her skills and how do they apply? Dubious mergers? Laying people off? Negotiating a golden parachute for herself? Which of those skills do we need in the White House? What about her successes and failures makes you think she has a better understanding of what makes America great?

Tangentially, I'm reminded of that great opening scene in The Newsroom where the character Will McAvoy goes on a tirade about how idiotic it is to think America is great. Most of our cons here went ballistically hostile in reaction and creamed themselves when they found 1 factual error in that rant.

Yet at the moment we have several GOP candidates saying they want to make America great again. Which was what the McAvoy character also said.

View embedded media

I am not sure, that is why i am glad she got put in the debate. Currently she brings something different to the table, Americans should get the chance to see what she is made up of.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I am not sure, that is why i am glad she got put in the debate. Currently she brings something different to the table, Americans should get the chance to see what she is made up of.

I hope this time she goes beyond the message of the first debate. She needs to talk about issues and her own policy plans.

 

[TexMichFan]

````````````````````````````````

I'm not sure this is either correct or a fair assessment. How many Senators or SECSTATEs have "big accomplishments" that you can point to? The good ones work on getting the bills passed or the jobs done; they don't usually stand out as having their own personal "major accomplishments." Occasionally they have personal major failures - and the GOP is trying to hang some of those on HC. Benghazi. Emails. But they don't seem to have much power, despite the huge efforts to hone them into sharp weapons.

"Most of them" are not running for President. When you run for President shouldn't your record be reviewed?

Fiorina gets hammered by libs including you on her record but when we ask about Hillary's record and accomplishments you give us "Well senators and SOS don't usually have any". This might be a race to the bottom between Fiorina and Clinton but they should be looked at equally.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

"Most of them" are not running for President. When you run for President shouldn't your record be reviewed?

Fiorina gets hammered by libs including you on her record but when we ask about Hillary's record and accomplishments you give us "Well senators and SOS don't usually have any". This might be a race to the bottom between Fiorina and Clinton but they should be looked at equally.

By all means review everybody's record. But offering a critique that she doesn't have something that most in her position don't have seems sort of off base.

As SECSTATE the main thing I associate with her (as opposed to with the overall activities of her department) is her puch for women's rights around the world.

Is that the sort of thing you are looking for?

 

[ottumwan in tx]

the entire country and the entire world altered rules for Obama, so what the heck?

 

[cigaretteman]

Katherine Graham was the first woman CEO of a Fortune 500 company, not Carly.

 

[cigaretteman]

Why does CNN get to make the rules?

If so why dont they do it for the Dems and force them to have to some debates! DWS is protecting her girl Hillary because she knows the only person HRC can beat in a debate is :Lincoln Chefee!

The RNC agreed to the rules when they made the arrangements for CNN to cover the "debate."

 

[dandh]

I'm sure that Fiorina will be asked to defend the claims that she did a poor job at HP at this debate. I'm mixed on it - I've read analysts who have taken both sides of that coin. Some say she was terrible, some say she was actually good at both managing and with the merger, as Compaq eventually (after her tenure) was a more valuable company due to her decisions.That side argues that HP's board just pulled the plug too soon.

Me, I'm just gonna wait and watch. I am glad that they changed the criteria- what they originally set up was just dumb.