ABC Feb 6 GOP Debate Criteria - UPDATE: Lineup announced

[Lyin' Steve]

Fiorina isn't an important voice as the only woman.  She's gotten close to an hour at these debates to speak, and in that hour, what unique perspective has she brought as a woman?

ABC put out the debate criteria before Iowa happened.  Three candidates dropped out afterwards.  It's not like they made the choice specifically to exclude Fiorina, they were excluding Paul, Huckabee, and Santorum as well.  It just so happens that all those guys dropped out and Fiorina's the only one of the four who can't take a hint.

It's not sexist at all to pick criteria and stick to it.  Rand Paul was a whiny bitch about the criteria before the CNN debate, and CNN relented and let him in, and everyone criticized them for it.  But now that it's Fiorina whining, people say it's sexism.  Was CNN being sexist when they wanted to exclude Rand?  Because it's literally the exact same decision, with the exact same motivations.

If Carly really wants to make it onto the stage she should do better.  Chris Christie got that sixth place spot with 3% in the national polls, it ain't that hard to beat.  The truth Carly is unable to face is that the networks already moved heaven and earth to give her her chance in the sun, and while she made the most of it that night, she's been a flop ever since.

[This account no longer in use.]

Who's excluded from the debate? Is it just Fiorina and Gilmore now?

Yes. Gilmore I could care less about, but excluding Fiorina is clear sexism that ABC should be ashamed of.

No it isn't. She's not doing well enough either nationally or in New Hampshire.

Yeah, they put out criteria. But it's not like there was a real mystery as to what that criteria would produce at the time of its release. ABC news knew it would likely exclude Fiorina.

Look, with only 8/9 candidates running, there's really no reason to have anything more than minimal criteria. You can fit 8 or 9 candidates on the stage just fine. Fiorina is an important voice as the only woman, and had Romney, Gingrich, Ayotte, Cruz, and Carson saying she should be included. For ABC to design the criteria it did and stick to it is Sexism - the only reason the criteria existed was to create an excuse to avoid a lawsuit.

I genuinely hope you're trolling at this point.

[Admiral Kizaru]

Hope ABC stick to their guns and don't cave as pathetically as CNN did earlier in the debate cycle.

Who's excluded from the debate? Is it just Fiorina and Gilmore now?

Yes. Gilmore I could care less about, but excluding Fiorina is clear sexism that ABC should be ashamed of.

No it isn't. She's not doing well enough either nationally or in New Hampshire.

Yeah, they put out criteria. But it's not like there was a real mystery as to what that criteria would produce at the time of its release. ABC news knew it would likely exclude Fiorina.

Look, with only 8/9 candidates running, there's really no reason to have anything more than minimal criteria. You can fit 8 or 9 candidates on the stage just fine. Fiorina is an important voice as the only woman, and had Romney, Gingrich, Ayotte, Cruz, and Carson saying she should be included. For ABC to design the criteria it did and stick to it is Sexism - the only reason the criteria existed was to create an excuse to avoid a lawsuit.

I genuinely hope you're trolling at this point.

[Why]

Who's excluded from the debate? Is it just Fiorina and Gilmore now?

Yes. Gilmore I could care less about, but excluding Fiorina is clear sexism that ABC should be ashamed of.

This is just total and utter nonsense. They put forth criteria which Fiorina did not meet. The only reason she is the only serious candidate excluded is that others who would have been excluded have dropped out.
Or were the ABC going to be sexist against Santorum and Huckabee if they stayed in the race?

[Zanas]

Look, I'm probably one of the most feminist SJW around, I very often call sexism on things that deserve it even when absolutely no one else sees it, but here ABC is not being sexist. Fiorina's just not faring well enough. If anyone's sexist, the Republican electorate is. The fact that only one woman was able to build a candidacy is telling by itself. Also, the fact that even though she's not worse than most of her male counterparts, and probably smarter than some of them, and is still polling this low, tells a lot about the GOP consituency. Still, she's not really any good of a politician, but neither are her male adversaries.

Sanders' surge completes this in telling an interesting story of male dominance in American society.

[Badger]

i could see putting strong limits and undercard debates when the number of candiidates was is the teens, and Gilmore's inability to make the ballot in many states removes him from serious contention, but there's little reason not to expand the debate from 7 to 8 candidates to include Fiorina who's at least previously shown signs of life.

Not that it'll stop her from finishing at or near last this Tuesday and dropping out soon afterwards, but still...

[PresidentTRUMP]

Figured they would have theses 7 at the debate: Cruz, Rubio, Trump, Christie, Kasich, Bush and Carson

After this debate I expect the debates moving forward to have around 4 candidates, maybe just the top three depending on who drops out after NH.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Fiorina isn't an important voice as the only woman.  She's gotten close to an hour at these debates to speak, and in that hour, what unique perspective has she brought as a woman?

ABC put out the debate criteria before Iowa happened.  Three candidates dropped out afterwards.  It's not like they made the choice specifically to exclude Fiorina, they were excluding Paul, Huckabee, and Santorum as well.  It just so happens that all those guys dropped out and Fiorina's the only one of the four who can't take a hint.

It's not sexist at all to pick criteria and stick to it.  Rand Paul was a whiny bitch about the criteria before the CNN debate, and CNN relented and let him in, and everyone criticized them for it.  But now that it's Fiorina whining, people say it's sexism.  Was CNN being sexist when they wanted to exclude Rand?  Because it's literally the exact same decision, with the exact same motivations.

If Carly really wants to make it onto the stage she should do better.  Chris Christie got that sixth place spot with 3% in the national polls, it ain't that hard to beat.  The truth Carly is unable to face is that the networks already moved heaven and earth to give her her chance in the sun, and while she made the most of it that night, she's been a flop ever since.

Rand didn't have Romney and Gingrich pushing for his inclusion, and at that point having a cut was justified because the number of candidates was still high enough where they couldn't all debate at once. Now that we only have 8 real candidates, there's no such issue. You can have all 8 debate without any problem. So there's probably some degree of sexism that goes into the exclusion, especially since in Iowa, Fiorina beat two of the people that will be included, giving further reason to not cut her.

[Lyin' Steve]

Man, sexism just means nothing anymore, does it?  Actual sexism is a form of bigotry, it's a very serious charge.  Now it's something that just gets flung around whenever something hurts a woman. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I remember when THIS was sexism.  That smug bastard is probably pretty thrilled that the charge against him that used to be so damaging is now utterly meaningless.