Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Houston CNN/Telemundo Republican Debate (February 25, 2016)
Ballotpedia's scope changes periodically, and this article type is no longer actively created or maintained. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
This article focuses exclusively on the Tenth Republican debate hosted by CNN and Telemundo on February 25, 2016. Click here to access Ballotpedia's full 2015-2016 presidential debate coverage. A schedule for Republican primary debates can be found below.
Ballotpedia's coverage of the tenth Republican debate—which took place on February 25, 2016—includes an overview of the event's basic information, the results of our Insiders Poll, statistics and post-debate commentary written by guest writers and members of our senior writing staff. The tenth Republican presidential primary debate consisted of only one main event contest.[1] Performance in the Republican primaries in New Hampshire and South Carolina and Republican caucuses in Iowa and Nevada were used to determine which candidates participated in the debate. More information on participants and rules for inclusion can be found in the "Basic Information" tab below.
According to CNN, the tenth Republican debate was the highest rated presidential debate to-date in 2016 based on Nielsen ratings. Between 13 and 16 million viewers are estimated to have watched the event.[2]
Basic Information
Date: February 25, 2016
Time: 8:30 pm EDT
Location: Houston, Texas
Venue: University of Houston
Sponsors: CNN, Telemundo, and Salem Media Group
Moderators: Wolf Blitzer, María Celeste Arrarás, Hugh Hewitt and Dana Bash
Rules for inclusion: Candidates were required to meet the following criteria in order to participate in the debate:[1]
| “ |
1. File a statement of candidacy with the Federal Election Commission. 2. Be actively campaigning for the Republican nomination and meet at least one of the following criteria: a. Have received support from at least 5% of those who attended the Republican caucuses in Iowa on February 1, 2016, according to the final vote tallies released by the Iowa Republican Party. b. Have received at least 5% of the overall vote in the Republican Presidential primary in New Hampshire on February 9, 2016. c. Receive at least 5% of the overall vote in the Republican Presidential primary to be held in South Carolina on Saturday, February 20, 2016. d. Receive the support of at least 5% of those who attended the Republican caucuses in Nevada to be held on Tuesday, February 23, 2016, according to final vote tallies released by the Nevada Republican Party. 3. Agree to accept the rules and format of the debate.[3] |
” |
Participants
|
|
Statistics
This article analyzes the central themes of the tenth Republican presidential debate held on February 25, 2016, in Houston, Texas. The transcript prepared by The Washington Post was used to measure candidate participation and audience engagement.[4] Footage from the debate was consulted where there were ambiguities in the text.
To compare the statistics of this debate to those of the previous Republican debate, see the analysis of the CBS Republican debate held on February 13, 2016.
Segments
Including opening and closing statements, this debate featured 16 unique discussion segments covering immigration reform, healthcare and foreign policy. These discussion segments were measured by any shift in the theme of a discussion prompted by one of the moderators: Wolf Blitzer, María Celeste Arrarás, Hugh Hewitt and Dana Bash.
- Opening statements
- Amnesty and mass deportation
- U.S.-Mexico border
- Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
- Republican Party's appeal to Hispanic voters
- The Supreme Court vacancy and protection of religious liberty
- Repealing and replacing Obamacare
- Tax reform and the federal budget
- Disclosure of tax returns
- Israeli-Palestinian conflict
- North Korea
- Middle East
- Apple, privacy and counterterrorism
- U.S.-Canada border
- Puerto Rican debt crisis
- Closing statements
Overall participation
Participation in a discussion segment was defined as a substantive comment related to the discussion segment's topic. Jokes and attempts to gain permission from a moderator to speak were not considered participatory speech acts. In some instances, candidates who participated in a discussion segment diverted from the prompted topic.
The median number of discussion segments per candidate was 11. Donald Trump participated in the most discussion segments at 14. After receiving a question about the potential disclosure of his tax returns, Trump challenged the moderators to address the other candidates. He said, "Are you going to ask anybody else that question? Every single question comes to me? I know I'm here for the ratings, but it's a little bit ridiculous."[4]
Ben Carson only participated in eight discussion segments. He noted near the end of the debate to moderator Hugh Hewitt, "[P]eople say that I whine a lot because I don't get time. I'm going to whine because I didn't get asked about taxes, I didn't get asked about Israel. Hugh, you said you're going to be fair to everybody, you didn't ask me about taxes. I had something to say about that."[4]
Candidate participation by behavior
Participation in the debate was also measured by the candidate's behavior at the start of each discussion segment. This study considered whether a candidate was initially prompted by a moderator to speak during a discussion segment or whether he or she independently engaged in the discussion segment by interrupting another candidate or calling on the moderator for permission to speak. A candidate's conduct after they joined a discussion segment was not considered.
Although the candidates frequently talked over each other within each discussion segment, they generally waited until a moderator prompted them to speak before joining the discussion at first. Carson was the only candidate who attempted to join a discussion segment and failed.
Candidate participation by speaking order
This study also calculated the number of times a candidate spoke first, second or third during a discussion segment, whether prompted by a moderator with a question or invitation to rebut or by interjection.
The moderators called on Trump first or second in nearly all of the discussion segments. When moderator Wolf Blitzer said he would begin a discussion segment on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with Trump, the candidate quipped, "Shocking."[4]
Candidate participation by speaking time
According to speaking time estimates from NPR, Trump spoke the longest, registering more than 30 minutes on the clock. He spoke for 20 minutes more than Carson.[5]
Candidate participation by speaking rate
Each candidate's speaking rate was calculated by dividing the total word count of the candidate's speech during the debate with his speaking time as measured by NPR. As in previous Republican debates, Rubio spoke significantly quicker than his peers at 249 words per minute.
Candidate participation by segment vs. speaking time
The amount of time a candidate spoke did not necessarily align with the number of issues he covered during the debate. However, in this debate, Trump dominated in both speaking time and the number of discussion segments he participated in.
Audience engagement
Audience engagement was measured by noting applause, cheering, or laughter in The Washington Post's transcript. Footage from the debate was consulted when the text was ambiguous about to whom the audience was responding.
With Jeb Bush's departure from the presidential race, Trump returned to the top of the field for the most positive audience engagement. He registered 46 instances, approximately double the number that Rubio and Cruz received.
The discussion segment on repealing and replacing Obamacare produced the most audience engagement overall.
Candidate analysis
|
|
|
|
|
Ballotpedia's Insiders Poll
Rubio's big night
February 26, 2016
By James A. Barnes
Republican politicians are hoping that someone will be able to thwart Donald Trump’s march to the GOP presidential nomination and party insiders believe that in the February 25 debate in Houston, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio stepped into the ring and landed punches.
Ballotpedia surveyed more than 100 Republican and Democratic strategists, pollsters, media consultants, activists, lobbyists and allied interest groups operatives on the debate and 80 GOP Insiders who responded overwhelmingly said Rubio was the “biggest winner” of the debate.
“He took the fight to Trump while still looking presidential,” said one GOP Insider. Echoed another, “He came out swinging and proved he is the best candidate to lead the GOP.”
Some Republicans felt Rubio dominated Trump to such a degree that he made Texas Sen. Ted Cruz seem like an afterthought in the debate. “Rubio turned Trump into an orange-coiffed punching bag while Cruz mostly looked on,” noted one GOP Insider. “Rubio was the man tonight, but it won't make any difference with Trump folks; they only see what they want to see,” said another. “Amazing that Cruz almost disappeared.” This survey was conducted anonymously to encourage candor from Insiders.
Several Republican Insiders cheered the Floridian’s aggressiveness. “Rubio verbally disemboweled Trump on stage tonight,” declared one GOP Insider. Another observed, “Rubio went after Trump like a Krav Maga instructor goes after a mugger.” They also wondered why they hadn’t seen this more combative candidate in previous debates. “Where the hell was that in New Hampshire?” asked one GOP Insider. “He was Super Marco, why did it take so long?” seconded another. “Made Trump look like a befuddled nursing home patient.”
Ohio Gov. John Kasich was a distant runner-up to Rubio, but he earned praise for his sober performance. “It took a while but when the adult got his chance he was his best yet,” said one GOP Insider who felt Kasich won the night. “The Apple [cellphone] answer was the highlight of the night.” Another said Kasich was “most ready to be president.”
Not surprisingly, nine-out-of-ten GOP Insiders judged that Rubio had helped himself. Likewise, almost six-out-of-ten Republicans said Trump hurt himself. More than one-third said that Kasich had helped himself and about four-in-ten Republican Insiders said that Cruz had hurt himself.
“Marco needed a big night, and he got one,” said one GOP Insider. “You could almost see the asterisk over Carson’s and Kasich’s heads.” Another Republican underscored the difficulty Carson and Kasich had in breaking into the conversation. “Short of setting themselves on fire Kasich and Carson can't be taken seriously,” observed another. “Rubio gave donors something to believe in.” One Republican influential maintained, “Trump [was] good on defense sometimes, but [had] some very bad moments with Rubio: not badly hurt but vulnerability established.” But another plaintively asked,” Trump is the emperor with no clothes but how many voters have eyes?”
Democratic Insiders, who can have a more detached view of the Republican presidential race, also thought Rubio had a good night. A plurality of the 40 Democrats who responded, 40 percent, said that Rubio was the biggest winner of the debate. But just over a quarter of the Democratic Insiders said that Trump prevailed and a quarter said Kasich won the debate.
“Rubio is better at debating than his opponents, though Trump was the only real story so it remains to be seen if anyone else really got helped,” said one Democratic Insider. “Finally, he took it to Donald Trump, and effectively,” said another.
Some Democratic Insiders reasoned that while Trump was a target for his rivals in the debate, he was also the focus of the two-hour slugfest and thus still benefited. “It was all about Trump so he truly won,” opined one Democratic Insider. “Cruz and Rubio looked like little boys trying to a track him. Kasich was above the fray and the only legit presidential candidate up there, but this electorate doesn’t care and Trump ultimately helped himself.” Another noted, “Until there is proof that these debates do anything to dent Trump, its a win for Trump.”
While Rubio won a lot of plaudits, some GOP Insiders also wondered what impact that will have on Super Tuesday’s voting. Rubio was, “calm, confident and in command of issues,” said one Insider. “We'll see if it translates at the ballot box.” Another simply said, “Rubio won, but not sure it matters.” And a third added, “We'll see if it is enough, but at least Rubio grew a pair against the Donald.”
This is not the first time that Republican Insiders have awarded a debate night to establishment candidates. After the February 13 debate in Greenville, South Carolina, almost half of the GOP Insiders surveyed by Ballotpedia said that Rubio was the “biggest winner” of the debate and another third said former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush carried that debate. Five days later, South Carolina’s voters went to the polls and gave Trump a 10 percentage-point victory in that state’s GOP presidential primary over Rubio. Bush finished a distant fourth in the balloting and withdrew from the race.
James A. Barnes is a senior writer for Ballotpedia and co-author of the 2016 edition of the Almanac of American Politics. He has conducted elite opinion surveys for National Journal, CNN and the on-line polling firm, YouGov. This Insiders survey was conducted February 25-26.
Debate Commentary
The columns below were authored by guest columnists and members of Ballotpedia's senior writing staff. The opinions and views belong to the authors.
The GOP Food Fight
February 26, 2016
By Karlyn Bowman
Karlyn Bowman, a widely respected analyst of public opinion, is a senior fellow and research coordinator at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.
Gallup polls from the 1940s showed that when people were asked if they would like to see a son of theirs enter politics, most people said no. Later, when the pollsters asked about sons and daughters, the responses were pretty much the same. Politics has never been a particularly attractive occupation, and hardly anything we saw on the stage last night would have made it more so.
The political profession almost always ranks near the bottom in terms of public confidence and trust in national polls. It is unlikely that the personal insults, the shouting, the repeated interruptions, and the relentless attacks improved impressions of politicians, with the exception of Ohio Gov. John Kasich who stayed above the fray all night, answering questions in a serious manner.
The cable news networks are complicit in these food fights because it shores up their ratings and bottom lines. Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson asked plaintively at one point whether someone would attack him so that he could get some airtime. It was a perfect illustration of what these debates have become.
As for substance, it was hard to evaluate much of it amidst all the shouting and the interruptions. As for tactics, as we had expected, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio attacked Donald Trump and his positions relentlessly. Their double-barreled attacks were supposed to change the race’s dynamic, to take down the Republican frontrunner once and for all. It isn’t clear to me they did. Trump parried effectively on many of the charges.
Rubio seemed less scripted, as he pulled from a grab bag of familiar and fresh attacks on the frontrunner. But it didn’t always work. When he accused the billionaire developer of hiring foreign labor and being fined for underpaying some workers, Trump responded that he was the only one on the stage who had actually hired people. Zing!
When the shouting ended shortly before 11:00 p.m., I doubt many minds had been changed.
The End of Debates As We Knew Them
February 26, 2016
By David Kusnet
David Kusnet is a former chief speechwriter for former President Bill Clinton. He is the senior writer and a principal at the Podesta Group, a government relations and public relations firm in Washington, D.C.
Will campaign debates ever be the same after this year’s Republican primary shout-fests?
Traditionally, presidential debates consist of exchanges about policy issues, bracketed by prepared opening and closing statements. The most memorable moments have been personal confrontations, such as Ronald Reagan telling Jimmy Carter, “There you go again,” Walter Mondale asking Gary Hart, “Where’s the beef?” or Lloyd Bentsen telling Dan Quayle, “You’re no Jack Kennedy.”
Sometimes these moments have been entirely visual, as when President George H. W. Bush looked at his watch while listening to a voter’s question during a town meeting with Bill Clinton and Ross Perot.
While candidates from John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton have benefited from their charisma, strength or empathy, Donald Trump is the first candidate to prevail by projecting his personality not his policy positions or political philosophy. During the primary debates, his performances have consisted of blanket assertions about national problems and his own proposals. He supports these assertions less with argument and evidence than with body language that conveys his personal strength and characterizations of his opponents that connote their supposed weaknesses.
In last night’s debate, his two leading opponents, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, tag-teamed Trump with attacks on his business record and his indeterminate ideology. But the question most commentators correctly focused on was whether he had been visibly set back on his heels. Meanwhile, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who could emerge as one of Trump’s leading challengers if Rubio loses the Florida primary, appeared to be debating by pre-2016 rules, stressing his record and proposals, rather than trash-talking Trump.
In a little-noticed moment in the debate, moderator Wolf Blitzer asked Kasich whether Trump’s plan to reduce the budget deficit by cutting “waste, fraud and abuse” would work. Rather than take a clean shot at Trump, Kasich responded with a recitation of his own record as chair of the House Budget Committee and Governor of Ohio.
If the Republican race were to come down to Trump, Cruz and Kasich, how would the Ohio governor do if he treats debates as dignified policy discussions, not raucous reality shows? Are Trump’s exchanges with Carly Fiorina a preview for how he might, to use a word that may be fashionable this fall, try to “manhandle” Hillary Clinton? And how will the electorate respond to someone who casts himself as an alpha male attacking an accomplished professional woman.
Stay tuned for the end of campaign debates as we knew them.
Republican Debate Schedule
Click the schedule to return back to the top of the page.
See also
- Presidential debates (2015-2016)
- Presidential candidates, 2016
- Presidential election, 2016/Polls
- 2016 presidential candidate ratings and scorecards
- Presidential election, 2016/Straw polls
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 CNN Politics, "CNN's Wolf Blitzer will moderate Republican debate in Houston," February 19, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Preliminary CNN and Telemundo debate ratings: Highest since December," February 26, 2016
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 The Washington Post, "The CNN-Telemundo Republican debate transcript, annotated," February 25, 2016
- ↑ NPR, "On The Clock: Trump Dominated Debate In Speaking Time," February 25, 2016
