CNN DEBATE CHANGE PUTS CNN BETWEEN A ROCK & A HARD PLACE

…Not a Fiorina fan, but she deserves to be heard in the next debate.

 

CNN’s upcoming debate could be a real fiasco.

As much of an anti-FOX News believer that I am, it’s hard to believe that FOX had a more flexible approach to staging the first GOP debate than that of a usually more reasonable cable network like CNN.

CNN has finally changed their claim that it could not legally change its debate criteria in a way that would allow Carly Fiorina into the debate. This was a totally wrong assumption as FOX had changed their criteria only a week before the first debate.

According to the Carly camp, legal analysis by the former head of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Brad Smith, had said: “CNN is under no obligation to change the debate criteria.” However, he was emphatic that, “There is no rule that says they can’t change the criteria a few weeks out.” He said it was up to CNN, but if he were advising CNN he’d tell them to go ahead and make a rule change.

But CNN was previously working on a weird calculation for determining the top-tier debate invitees.  Their debate criteria went all the way back to before the first debate to July 16.  That would be some two months before the second debate with CNN was even scheduled. Using that outdated methodology, Fiorina would not have made the cutoff, even though she has been in the top 10 of every national poll since the first debate.

But now, CNN has finally decided to change their criteria.  However, instead of making things more fair for everyone, they have gone and really screwed up.

Most people know that I am not a fan of the ex-CEO of Hewlett-Packard.  Being an up close and personal witness of Carly Fiorina’s poor performance at H-P, along with her major loss of running for California senator, that has more than convinced me that she was not qualified to be the Commander in Chief of the United States.  But based on the latest polls, she should be allowed in the top group for the next GOP debate.

Unfortunately, instead of CNN having two separate debates and randomly picking which candidates were to be in Debate 1 and Debate 2, they are instead just going to add Carly as the 11^th debater on the main debate stage of 10 candidates.  The others that didn’t make the main stage will again be relegated to the “Forum” occurring before the real debate.

Fiorina’s deputy campaign manager, Sarah Flores, herself a lawyer with experience in campaign law had argued that, “CNN’s interpretation of the debate rules seem to be a convenient excuse without a lot of legal merit that they’ve decided to hide behind.”  But now this change only makes their approach to solving the problem that much worse.

The former head of the FEC, Mr. Smith, has had no further comment on CNN’s motives, but he did say it was up to CNN to evaluate any potential risks. 

Other election lawyers agree with Mr. Smith, as do some well-known pollsters, that the debate rules could be changed.  But I don’t think the latest CNN change is what was expected.

J. Ann Selzer, an esteemed Iowa pollster, recently told the New York Times, “I think they did not have a pollster at the table when they decided this. I think it [the latest change] is hard to defend, purely from a mathematical perspective.”

The reality of why CNN is doing this is apparently because of the potential negative effects on some of the other potential nominees.  But this latest changes will achieve exactly what CNN was apparently trying to avoid!  Now they will have all those not on the main debate stage rightfully raising holy hell!  CNN has just gone from bad to worse.

So far, CNN does not appear to be willing to do the right thing for everyone.  The reality is that their decision is not in the interests of the Republican primary voters.

Hopefully, if CNN continues to stick with their latest decision, the Republican National Committee (RNC) should make it clear that they will not sanction future debates with CNN, unless CNN rethinks its position.

But is the RNC and its chairman, Reince Priebus, strong enough or smart enough to make a statement like this stick?

Based on some of their past failed statements,, it does make one wonder….

Copyright G.Ater  2015