CNBC debate requirements announced

[devil21]

Just on CNBC:

8pm
"Candidates with at least 2.5% average in polls. Jobs Tech Taxes Economy topics"

JV debate
Minimum of 1% average in polls.

[KEEF]

Is Rand's average good?

[Jan2017]

Candidate criteria for the October 28, 2015 CNBC Republican Debate is as follows:
National polls will be used to determine a candidate's eligibility and placement on the stage. To be eligible to appear in either segment,
a candidate must have at least 1% in any one of the methodologically sound and recognized national polls conducted by:
NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, CNN and Bloomberg, released between September 17, 2015 and October 21, 2015.

To appear in the 8pm debate a candidate must have an average of 3% among these polls.
The polls will be averaged and will be rounded up to 3% for any candidate with a standing of 2.5% or higher.
Candidates who average below that will be invited to the 6pm debate.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/30/cnbc-...-criteria.html

[fcreature]

Not sure on how they'll pick the average but RCP has the following:

Graham: .2
Pataki: .3
Santorum: .5
Jindal: .5
Paul: 2.3
Christie: 3.0
Huckabee: 3.0
Kasich: 3.3

Wonder how they picked 2.5

[staerker]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-3823.html

Paul at 2.3%

Looks like he'll be in the JV debate all by himself?

[fcreature]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-3823.html

Paul at 2.3%

Looks like he'll be in the JV debate all by himself?

As long as the others have gotten 1% in at least 1 poll they're allowed in.

[Jan2017]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-3823.html

Paul at 2.3%

Looks like he'll be in the JV debate all by himself?

Certain poll results over next four weeks of polling (until Oct 21) could be included in the computation . . .

[staerker]

As long as the others have gotten 1% in at least 1 poll they're allowed in.

The NBC/WSJ has a sample size of 230 GOP voters. +/-6.5%.

This circus is even more of a sham than it normally is.

[AngryCanadian]

Graham And Santorum ?

[William Tell]

Certain poll results over next four weeks of polling (until Oct 21) could be included in the computation . . .

Could be or will be?

[fcreature]

Certain poll results over next four weeks of polling (until Oct 21) could be included in the computation . . .

Yes. Hopefully we see some better polling this month.

Really absurd requirements considering all the polls right now have between 3% and 6% margins of error. The process is so corrupt. Everyone with a serious campaign should be allowed on the stage. That can easily be defined by having an infrastructure, staffing, etc.

[fcreature]

The NBC/WSJ has a sample size of 230 GOP voters. +/-6.5%.

This circus is even more of a sham than it normally is.

Yea for me it's painfully clear what they're doing here. They see Paul is hovering around 2.5% right now so in an attempt to exclude him while not making it blatantly obvious they make 3% the mark, rounding up. In order to not have a debate with one person, they throw in the added qualification of only having to get 1% in a single poll to qualify even if you are only at .1%. So essentially they want to put Paul in the debate with a group of people whom he has over 4-10 times the support of, even according to their stacked/flawed methodologies.

Yet they make an exemption for Fiorina who didn't meet any of the qualification in the first place.

"Sham" is a nice way of putting it.

[Jan2017]

Could be or will be?

Polls done after the last debate and until October 21 will be in consideration of being used . . .
sorry but that is the best I can describe how I read this.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/30/cnbc-...-criteria.html

national polls conducted by: NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, CNN and Bloomberg, released between September 17, 2015
and October 21, 2015.

no Quinni U. poll used . . .

[William Tell]

Polls done after the last debate and until October 21 will be in consideration of being used . . .
sorry but that is the best I can describe how I read this.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/30/cnbc-...-criteria.html

Looks like only polls by
NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, CNN and Bloomberg

[staerker]

Yea for me it's painfully clear what they're doing here. They see Paul is hovering around 2.5% right now so in an attempt to exclude him while not making it blatantly obvious they make 3% the mark, rounding up. In order to not have a debate with one person, they throw in the added qualification of only having to get 1% in a single poll to qualify even if you are only at .1%. So essentially they want to put Paul in the debate with a group of people whom he has over 4-10 times the support of, even according to their stacked/flawed methodologies.

Yet they make an exemption for Fiorina who didn't meet any of the qualification in the first place.

"Sham" is a nice way of putting it.

Exactly. I expect his numbers to fall sharply, after the CNN/ORC 4% drops out.

Would be funny to hold the potential Sanders debate on the same day.

[William Tell]

Looks like only polls by
NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, CNN and Bloomberg

I think Rand is at 2.75% if you only count those. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-3823.html

[Jan2017]

Rand at 4% in eighth place in the latest and only CNN poll to be used so far (presumably) of September 20 -
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/20/politi...can-2016-poll/

I expect he will go up with all the Senate actions.

[SilentBull]

I think Rand is at 2.75% if you only count those. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-3823.html

Yeah, he is. If the next two polls have him at 2%, he's still at 2.5, so he may be OK here. I'm sure he'll be higher than 2 in at least some of the polls that will come out between now and the 21st. The last ABC one had him at 5 while others had him at 3 around that time, so let's hope the next ABC one is the same or better.

[TheNewYorker]

Looks like Graham will finally get to rip into Rand the way he's been wanting to in a debate. Expect Graham to be called the winner of the junior debate.

[The Rebel Poet]

Is Rand's average good?

Candidate criteria for the October 28, 2015 CNBC Republican Debate is as follows:National polls will be used to determine a candidate's eligibility and placement on the stage. To be eligible to appear in either segment,
a candidate must have at least 1% in any one of the methodologically sound and recognized national polls conducted by:
NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox, CNN and Bloomberg, released between September 17, 2015 and October 21, 2015.


To appear in the 8pm debate a candidate must have an average of 3% among these polls.
The polls will be averaged and will be rounded up to 3% for any candidate with a standing of 2.5% or higher.
Candidates who average below that will be invited to the 6pm debate.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/30/cnbc-...-criteria.html

Using this criteria, Rand is currently at 2.75.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...823.html#polls

[Aquinas]

I think Rand is at 2.75% if you only count those. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-3823.html

Agree. ABC and CBS don't have polls in the quoted timeframe yet, either. An optimistic interpretation would be that they are trying to place Rand at the cutoff (note they cite 3% as the cutoff, but will "round up"). It wouldn't make sense to exile anyone from the top-tier debate given that Walker has already dropped out. Plus, there is a clear delineation between Rand's current position and Jindal, et al. It would take some consistently sliding polling numbers for a Rand or Huckabee to deteriorate out of the prime debate, and the recent Reuters results are encouraging on that front.

Numbers with CNBC criteria:

Trump 23%
Carson 17%
Fiorina 11.5%
Rubio 9.75%
Bush 9%
Cruz 6%
Kasich 4%
Huck 3.5%
Christie 3.75%
Paul 2.75%
Santorum 0.75%
Jindal 0.5%
Pataki 0.25%
Graham 0% (NOTE: He currently does NOT qualify for the JV debate)

[fcreature]

Agree. ABC and CBS don't have polls in the quoted timeframe yet, either. An optimistic interpretation would be that they are trying to place Rand at the cutoff (note they cite 3% as the cutoff, but will "round up").

I did consider that as well. I hope you're right and I'm wrong!

[SilentBull]

If I didn't know any better, I would say they created the rounding up rule to make sure Rand is INCLUDED. If they wanted to set the minimum at 3%, Rand would be the only one in danger of being left out. I wonder why they didn't do that. Maybe they're afraid of pissing people off. They also could have included Quinnipiac if they really wanted to screw him, but they didn't.

[cajuncocoa]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...tion-3823.html

Paul at 2.3%

Looks like he'll be in the JV debate all by himself?

With Santorum, Jindal, and Graham? LOL

He's going to make those guys look like the 3 stooges they are.

[SilentBull]

With Santorum, Jindal, and Graham? LOL

He's going to make those guys look like the 3 stooges they are.

No, he's at 2.75. He's good.

[devil21]

No, he's at 2.75. He's good.

Don't be complacent. These are the same people that manufacture "surges" through those very polls. They'll make $#@! up if they feel the need.

[jllundqu]

So the campaign rests on Rand's polling over the next couple weeks. If he doesn't make the main debate, he's done. the "JV" debate is basically being handed your hat and being shown the door.

[Liberty74]

No need to worry just yet. About 3 weeks of polling to be included. But I will say this - some of these polls are bogus with around 300 voters. Didn't one even include Democrats?

A legit poll would be 75% Rep and 25% Indy with about 1000 voters saying they are going to actually participate.

[69360]

So the campaign rests on Rand's polling over the next couple weeks. If he doesn't make the main debate, he's done. the "JV" debate is basically being handed your hat and being shown the door.

Not necessarily. Fiorina was in the JV debate, "won" it and got a big polling bump up to the big girl debate.

[CPUd]

Looks like Graham will finally get to rip into Rand the way he's been wanting to in a debate. Expect Graham to be called the winner of the junior debate.

Rand will be in the main debate. Lindsey *might* be in the early debate.