Having all presidential candidates debate takes away from process

We are entering the heart of presidential primary debate season.

As the proverbial cream rises to the top, we have seen several candidates in the GOP be pushed to the “undercard debate.”

In order to participate in “main stage” debates, candidates typically must average at least 2.5 percent in an average of several polls.

Some believe all candidates should be located on the same stage and given the opportunity to compete with the leaders of the pack. However, this would only prove to muddle the debate process.

The easiest way for a candidate to bring themselves up is to attempt to bring others down. It is a tactic frequently seen by those dropping in the polls.

Soon the debates could stray from the issues voters want to hear and turn into a venue that opens the floodgates for attacks on the frontrunners.

It is also crucial to analyze what the purpose of these debates are.

Most would agree that the main purpose is for the candidates to be able to make their case to the voters and further explain their policy positions.

When there are up to 16 candidates on the main stage, voters are not able to hear as much about the candidates who actually have a chance to get elected.

Every minute of time Rick Santorum takes up explaining his unfavorable positions is a minute that candidates such as Marco Rubio are not able to appeal to voters.

The undercard debate system works perfectly. Simply because they are in the undercard does not mean that candidate cannot have their opinions heard.

For example, Carly Fiorina began the debate cycle in these undercard debates, but after several strong performances in them she has worked her way onto the main stage.

These debates are for the benefit of voters, so we should continue to allow voters to decide who they want to see. Eight mainstage candidates is already a lot, and we should not further muddle an already muddled event.