BallotBall
  • Home
  • American Elections
    • The First Whammy in Miami (night 1) >
      • The First Whammy in Miami (night 1 results))
    • The First Whammy in Miami (night 2) >
      • The First Whammy in Miami (night 2 results)
    • Getting Gritty in the Motor City (night 1 results))
    • Getting Gritty in the Motor City(night 2 results)
    • Houston, We Have a Forum
    • The Clash In Columbus
    • Getting Adversarial in Atlanta
    • The Last Debate of the Decade
    • 608,000 - 9
    • 1 Strike and You're Out!
    • Presidential Power Rankings >
      • Power Rankings: February 2016
      • Power Rankings: January 2016
      • Power Rankings: December 2015
      • Power Rankings: October 2015
      • Power Rankings: September 2015
      • Power Rankings: August 2015
  • International Elections
    • Power Rankings: 2017's Most Anticipated (And Entertaining) Elections
    • Russian Electoral Doping
    • Brexit
    • Relegation for Team Dilma
    • The Great Slight Hope
    • Reign Delay
    • Third Time's A Charm
    • The Maple Crown
    • El Clásico
    • The Nazis Change Their Uniforms
    • The Only Game in Town
    • North Korea Fixes the Hack-a-Shaq, Ruins Everything Else
  • Ballotball Classic!
    • Playing in the Mud
    • Head to Head: The Woman Card
    • Head to Head: Supreme Court Edition
    • (Naturally) Born in the USA!
    • Head to Head: 2016 CFP Champion Edition
    • The New England Patriots
    • Wrote Like a Butterfly, Stings Like a Bee
    • The Nazi Game Plan
    • Breaking the Color Barrier...Again
    • Ballotball Begins!
  • Podcasts
  • About
  • 2020 Democratic Primary Tracker
  • Home
  • American Elections
    • The First Whammy in Miami (night 1) >
      • The First Whammy in Miami (night 1 results))
    • The First Whammy in Miami (night 2) >
      • The First Whammy in Miami (night 2 results)
    • Getting Gritty in the Motor City (night 1 results))
    • Getting Gritty in the Motor City(night 2 results)
    • Houston, We Have a Forum
    • The Clash In Columbus
    • Getting Adversarial in Atlanta
    • The Last Debate of the Decade
    • 608,000 - 9
    • 1 Strike and You're Out!
    • Presidential Power Rankings >
      • Power Rankings: February 2016
      • Power Rankings: January 2016
      • Power Rankings: December 2015
      • Power Rankings: October 2015
      • Power Rankings: September 2015
      • Power Rankings: August 2015
  • International Elections
    • Power Rankings: 2017's Most Anticipated (And Entertaining) Elections
    • Russian Electoral Doping
    • Brexit
    • Relegation for Team Dilma
    • The Great Slight Hope
    • Reign Delay
    • Third Time's A Charm
    • The Maple Crown
    • El Clásico
    • The Nazis Change Their Uniforms
    • The Only Game in Town
    • North Korea Fixes the Hack-a-Shaq, Ruins Everything Else
  • Ballotball Classic!
    • Playing in the Mud
    • Head to Head: The Woman Card
    • Head to Head: Supreme Court Edition
    • (Naturally) Born in the USA!
    • Head to Head: 2016 CFP Champion Edition
    • The New England Patriots
    • Wrote Like a Butterfly, Stings Like a Bee
    • The Nazi Game Plan
    • Breaking the Color Barrier...Again
    • Ballotball Begins!
  • Podcasts
  • About
  • 2020 Democratic Primary Tracker
BallotBall

The Nuisance in houston
referee's report card for 10th republican debate

Picture
Picture

February 26, 2016 – In our preview, we compared the remaining GOP candidates with the 2010-14 Miami Heat (the parallels between Dr. Ben Carson and Chris “Birdman” Anderson were too obvious to ignore). However, last night’s contentious debate in Houston made it clear that at least 3 of these candidates--Trump, Cruz, and Rubio--aren’t playing on the same team.

As always, Ballotball.com was playing referee. We didn't pick a winner—you, the voter, should decide that for yourself. But we did try to keep the bout civil by throwing flags and calling penalties in real time. There were essentially only 3 rules: answer the question, don't stray off topic, and don't compare any of your opponents to the Nazis.
​
Below are the results (all quotes come from the debate transcript available here).

The candidates

Picture
Donald Trump - Delegate Total: 81 (1,237 needed to win nomination)
7%
3 penalties

Failure to answer: Donald Trump was given time to defend himself after Ted Cruz claimed he had supported Democrats in the past. Instead of answering this, Trump launched into an attack on how unpopular Cruz is in the Senate and how this would mean he could never get any of his plans accomplished if he became president.
 
Failure to answer: Trump was asked about his past statement that he would make Mexico pay for a border wall between the US and Mexico. Since the past two Mexican presidents have publicly said they would never pay for such a wall, where would Trump get the $10-$12 billion he needed? Trump rejected the premise of the question by suggesting that Mexican intransigence to paying for the wall would result in the wall getting “10 feet taller” and then promising to start a trade war with Mexico if they refused to pay.
 
Failure to answer: When Marco Rubio attacked Trump for using illegal Polish workers to build Trump Tower, Trump responded by saying that his $1-million fine for the incident paled in comparison to the credit card scandal that Rubio is involved in regarding personal expenses on a GOP credit card.
Picture
Ted Cruz - ​Delegate Total: 17
1%
2 penalties
​​
Failure to answer: Ted Cruz was asked whether he would deport US-born children born to illegal immigrants. Instead of responding to the question, Cruz took the opportunity to attack Donald Trump for being weak on immigration and supporting Democrats.
 
Failure to stay on topic: Cruz was asked when he would release copies of his tax returns. He briefly answered before pivoting to attack Trump for not releasing his tax returns and said his failure to disclose them would make him a weak candidate against Hillary Clinton.
Picture
Marco Rubio - Delegate Total: 17
1%
2 penalties

​Failure to stay on topic: A wide ranging argument broke out about foreign labor and various countries devaluing their currency. Out of the blue, Marco Rubio brought up the fact that Trump had operated a “fake” university and that he was currently being sued by former students for fraud.
 
Failure to stay on topic: Just like Cruz, Rubio took the question about disclosing his taxes as an opportunity to talk about something else. After briefly answering the question, he used the rest of his time to talk about the national debt and how the next president will need to do something about it.
Picture
John Kasich - Current Delegates: 6
0%
2 penalties
​
Failure to answer: John Kasich was asked about his position that deporting 11 million illegal immigrants from the country was “ludicrous and everybody knows it.” If this is the case, wouldn’t it introduce a moral hazard to say that people can be “allowed to break the law just because it’s not feasible to stop them?” Kasich explained his position at length, including a path to legalization, but didn't comment on the bigger question of the moral hazard.

Failure to answer: Kasich was asked if Trump’s tax plan (which includes large tax cuts that will be paid for by eliminating the Department of Education and the EPA) will work for the country. Fearing attacking Trump directly and giving him a chance to respond, Kasich spoke about his own tax plan without mentioning Trump.
Picture
Dr. Ben Carson - ​Current Delegates: 4
0%
0 penalties!

The Penalties

With the NBA season heating up, we've instituted some new basketball rules for the debate.

Candidates can receive a foul for the following infractions:

  • Failing to answer a question
This one is pretty self explanatory. Candidates might have a good reason to avoid the question, but this is a debate and if you're not here to answer the questions, then it's just a televised press conference. 

  • Failing to stay on topic
For instance, in an earlier debate, Lindsey Graham was asked about his opinion on the right of bakers to refuse to cater a gay wedding. He responded: "Whether you're the wedding cake baker or the gay couple or the Baptist preacher, radical Islam would kill you all if they could."

  • Candidates can receive a technical foul by comparing their opponents to the Nazis.
​​This rule might be controversial due to the innumerable times Donald Trump's opponents have compared his xenophobic policies to Nazism. However, going back to the first debate, we, at Ballotball, have held a zero-tolerance policy towards Nazi comparisons. We flagged Lindsey Graham for comparing ISIL to the Nazis, and we were watching Governor Mike Huckabee closely after he compared President Obama to the Nazis after he agreed to the Iran nuclear deal (this didn't happen during a debate, so no penalty was issued). The reason for this rule is threefold:
  1. Nazi comparisons are lazy. If you'd like to compare Donald Trump's ban on Muslims entering the country to a historical precedent, why not try McCarthyism, or the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, or the Jim Crow south? Instead, people always grab the low-hanging fruit of the Nazis to make their point.
  2. Nazi comparisons ignore the fact that there are still Nazi parties alive and well in many countries. They have not receded to the dustbin of history and currently have at least one member sitting on the European Parliament. 
  3. This is a debate. And nothing shuts down a debate faster than a Nazi comparison. It is our strong opinion that such comparisons send all parties to the barricades and prevent anyone from actually communicating. Disagree strongly, and make your case the best you can, but leave the Nazi metaphors at home, please.
© COPYRIGHT 2015. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.