So overall, what do you all think of the effectiveness of this 10 at a time debate format?

[Amaryllis]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by JudyM (a host of the General Discussion forum).

Seems to me like it isn't going to give the voting public much to go on as far as narrowing the field; not enough time to get into anything really substantive, but then that is often the case with debates.

I still like the candidates I liked and still don't like the ones I didn't. The ones who interrupt are obnoxious, and may well filter themselves out, but there are lot of candidates who are saying really good things and who are likable. It will be really interesting to see how this field gets narrowed down, but I really question if these debates help that process, other than weeding out the interrupters. That is if others also find that obnoxious.

Mostly my concern is if this will help the voters at all in making decisions. Seems there has to be a better way.

Curious to hear what your perspectives are.

[AlexSFCA]

1. terrible, malpractice almost

but with the bar for presidency lowered below ground, it is no surprise I guess. No one polling significantly less than 5% belongs anywhere near that stage.

[snowybirdie]

2. Too many on the stage

We're not getting much substance, just talking points. Look forward to later debates between less candidates

[Arkansas Granny]

3. Too many people trying to talk at the same time. The whoops and hollers

from the audience is irritating.

[Amaryllis]

5. Agree. I wish they'd just have a no audience reaction policy.

[MANative]

4. Ludicrous. The floor for entry should have been higher. Nt

[demmiblue]

6. Wrong forum. n/t

[JudyM]

7. Locking.

Please check the admins’ message before posting anything relating to the Dem primaries: