It seems to me that the Republican candidates should be split up randomly into groups of seven or eight for two debates of, say, two hours. The case against doing this is as far as I can tell is (1) it’s unfair to give an also-ran like George Pataki the same consideration as someone who has built a real campaign and (2) it’s important for the top candidates to get a chance to clash. Both of these points have merit. But I don’t think they outweigh the disservice done to the top candidates by jamming them onto a stage of eleven for a three-hour ordeal, where they still might disappear for long stretches. Is Ted Cruz, for instance, who has a real operation and a real chance, better off barely getting a chance to speak on a stage of eleven, or perhaps getting picked for the non-Trump stage along, say, with George Pataki and Lindsey Graham, and reliably speaking and perhaps even getting a chance to finish his thoughts? I think it’s the latter. Debate sponsors would be chagrined if they couldn’t be assured that Trump and Jeb Bush would be together, but — I know this is naive — that largely theatrical consideration shouldn’t outweigh everything else.