Tuesday 3 November 2015   / Hour 1, Block C:  Bill Whalen, Hoover, in re: Using the four most recent national polls, Chris Christie, Lindsey Graham, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal and George Pataki would not qualify for the 9 PM event but would all qualify for the 6 PM forum. Recommendations:  Start with C-SPAN, with the most personality-free interviewers.   (The RNC is sort of at war with all the candidates, but holds all the cards short of controlling the room temp.)   Candidates want more control over the moderators, which won't come to pass.  At least, a pledge of no gotch'a questions. (Ten candidates is unwieldy. Could raise the bar to, say, 5%, or arbitrarily have three debates instead of two.  If you can't get to 5% in a year of electioneering, then you're not going anywhere.)  Is the word "debate" misleading" Everyone makes statement all evening long – no contest of wills, since we know in advance what they'll say.  True; "candidates's forum" is the better term. . . . Is the GOP getting growth message out? Boulder debate was suppose to . . . Meet on Tuesday the tenth in Milwaukee.  All presidents elected in their forties won on aspirational campaigns. Will Rubio have the same core qualities? Main question: who's best-qualified to sit across form Vl Putin?   http://www.forbes.com/sites/billwhalen/2015/10/31/here-are-four-ways-tha...