The Republican National Committee is preparing to change its stance, requiring candidates seeking the party nomination to sign a pledge to not participate in any debates sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates.
Republican committee officials informed the debate commission about their plan in a Thursday letter, per the New York Times. If the change moves forward, it will be the first change in how presidential and vice-presidential debates have been conducted in over 30 years.
The commission describes itself as non-partisan, but Republicans have argued for nearly a decade that its rules and regulations favor Democrats.
The RNC will vote on the change at its winter meeting in Salt Lake City this February.
If the change proceeds, it would likely change the debate approach to be similar to what happened prior to the commission’s existence, when the two parties had to negotiate directly and agree on terms.
“So long as the C.P.D. appears intent on stonewalling the meaningful reforms necessary to restore its credibility with the Republican Party as a fair and nonpartisan actor, the R.N.C. will take every step to ensure that future Republican presidential nominees are given that opportunity elsewhere,” Republican Party Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel wrote.
She added that the Committee would start the process of amending its rules at the winter meeting “to prohibit future Republican nominees from participating in C.P.D.-sponsored debates.”
The post Backbone! RNC to Prohibit Candidates Seeking Party Nomination from Participating in Presidential Debates appeared first on Human Events.
© Copyright 2022 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.
—-
This content is published through a licensing agreement with Acquire Media using its NewsEdge technology.
Now we will see who has a backbone and who doesn’t.
We’ve often seen them bloviate about things like this, but when push comes to shove, they cave in like a house of cards.
Backbone and RNC in the same sentence. Hard to believe.
Anyone who wants to be the leader of the free world should be able to hold his own, no matter where he debates.
Disagree. When the chosen moderator tag teams with the Dem candidate as they always do and also has the moderator’s power to over-rule the Repub candidate’s objections, Churchill himself couldn’t break through that pincer attack.
Star, was you on about “WE need mods who DON’T favor one party over the other”? OR was you more on about “anyone too scared to go up against a gang pile of the mods AND the dems, shouldn’t run”>>??
The debates have been terribly biased in favor of liberal candidates for decades. It’s time for a change and a focus on bringing unbiased moderation to our debate process.
That’s why i’d LOVE TO SEE THEM DO AWAY with that whole supposedly “UNBIASED” Commission on presidental debates.. THEY HAVE FOR YEARS proven that NO THEY ARE NOT, and never could ever be unbiased.. OF the three moderators we get 2 rabid liberals, and ONE NOT SO rabid liberal.. WHERE IS THE UNBIAS there?!
This would be a start to finding a backbone again. Eliminating RINOs through running strong primary folks against them (or digging up resignation dirt) would be a great step. Maybe putting more funds into the 7 states that seem to really matter. I’m afraid that GOP should also bite the bullet and play dirtier (but legal) at least trying to match the socialists/marxists/globalists. Being pure and holy doesn’t seem to work very well any more and the only thing I agree with liberals on is… All that really matters is winning the election. Sorry to say that but it is reality – short of the real answer – Turning Back To God – but that seems to be trending badly as well for the vast majority.
Dems repeat their lies a thousand times without fear of contradiction by complicit media. Repubs seem to think saying the truth once suffices. NO IT DOESN’T!
I’ve always noticed that these debates always had a communist dummycrat as a moderator. Should’ve taken this action back in 1980.