there has to be consequence when the debate process is abused in the way that cnbc did it. among the proposals ton table, a two-hour time limit, equal speaking time for each candidate, all 14 of them, and a 30 second limit on opening and closing statements. let s bring in mark for more. we saw the 14 candidates campaigns meet last night in old town alexandria outside of washington, d.c. to try to get some common cause for the changing of the debate process. as you re right, they are angry at the media, but they re also angry at the republican national committee, which they claim has not been able to meet their demands and watch their backs. however, instead of fighting the rnc, now trying to lock arms with the candidates themselves. we heard republican national committee chairman say so much this morning on abc.
of them was seen on the debate stage. last night representatives from nearly all of the campaigns pushed the national committee aside to discuss their demands for the upcoming contests. the meeting was nominated by the debate process. accord to go a draft letter distributed inside the meeting it ranged from maximum temperature inside the room, these things are important. officials from the rnc who sanctioned and negotiated the primary debates with the networks were left out of the meeting and while specifics have yet to emerge, the consensus is that the campaigns will take the lead going forward. yesterday the rnc replaced their points person on the debate negotiation process and friday after last week s highly criticized debate, they
it s not on life support. we have the most money, the greatest organization. we re doing fine. jeb bush insisting his campaign is not on the down and out. we re back with the panel. george, is he on the glide path to the death spiral? there is a self-fulfill be mechanism that starts here. people start staying you re in trouble, you re in trouble because people said you re in trouble because donors panic and that feeds back into this loop and marco rubio gets peter singer or paul singer. i can t remember which. paul. it cascades. i think jeb bush is probably feeling not unreasonably that he s the victim of a debate process that no one really thinks tests in a broad way the essential attributes of the president.
revolt candidates against the press demanding changes be made to future debates. the backlash comes after angry candidates complained about so called gotcha questions at the cnbc debate. that debate was a really weird debate because you didn t get a chance to continue on. i literally got cut off by three all three of them saying, you know, next question, next question. we have too many people on one stage and too few on the other. i don t mind being asked hard questions and challenging questions. i think some of the questions have been downright silly. and this thing has gone on too long. harry truman couldn t get elected explaining united states of america s health care plan in 30 seconds. we should have moderators who are interested in disseminating the information about the candidates as opposed to, you know, got ya. there has to be consequence when the debate process is
dispatched their negotiators to this private meeting. the idea was to pressure news organizations who sponsor any future debates. working with a top republican lawyer, those negotiators drafted a set of questions and requests which range from the conventional like having opening statements from candidates, sure, you guys. to the unusual like requesting that the politicians not reporters have final sign-off on what goes on the screen during debates. dr. ben carson whose team spearheaded last night s meeting talked about the negotiations a short time ago. well, the important thing is that we have an influence on the debate process and be able to do something that actually makes sense that disseminates appropriate information to voters. jamal, i want to start with real talk here. you don t put politicians in charge of their own debates because it s the one time once a