Search Results: moderators

Most people can agree that the last CNBC Republican debate was at the very least flawed with moderators unsure of their own questions/facts, some nonsensical questions, not enough time given to each candidates, and the moderators losing control at points of the debate itself. As a result, the candidates have taken to the public, the RNC, and the press to demand that future debates be structured in a specific way that allows more time to each candidate, opening and closing remarks for each candidate, and more substantive questions that would promote less "gotcha" questions and avoid candidates purposefully having to fight one another in their answers, but speak more to their own agenda and platforms. While the campaigns agreed to the changes in principle Sunday night, the media companies that host the debates are under no obligation to adopt them. Candidates such as Trump have even threatened to not show up to future debates if they don't get their way especially for him in regards to NBC's relationship with Telemundo whom he's had issues with or created issues with depending on how you see it, in the past. Is this going too far or just right in terms of how the debates/press should function in the future?