Most of the time, presidential primary debates are largely forgotten. In 2016, for example, the Republican Party’s White House contenders gathered for twelve debates and nine candidate forums over the course of seven months, and looking back, there were only a handful of moments that remain memorable.

When Gov. Chris Christie humiliated Sen. Marco Rubio, it stood out. When Donald Trump became the first major party presidential candidate to reference the size of his genitals during a televised debate, it made history. But by most measures, we’ve collectively forgotten the other events.

Will last week’s GOP primary debate follow a similar trajectory? Will we have forgotten the spectacle once the dust has settled on the process? Maybe, but there was one element of the debate that continues to generate considerable conversation.

Halfway through the event, Fox News’ Bret Baier paused to “talk about the elephant not in the room.” The co-host added, in comments directed at the candidates on the stage, “You all signed a pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee. If former President Trump is convicted in a court of law, would you still support him as your party’s choice? Please raise your hand if you would.”

Vivek Ramaswamy wasted no time in raising his hand up high, and former Ambassador Nikki Haley and Sen. Tim Scott soon followed. Then Gov. Doug Burgum raised his hand, as did Gov. Ron DeSantis — but not before the Floridian looked to his left and right to see what others had decided to do. Finally, former Vice President Mike Pence joined them.

Two former governors — New Jersey’s Chris Christie and Arkansas’ Asa Hutchinson — did not raise their hands. Asked for an explanation, Hutchinson said, “Obviously, I’m not going to support somebody who’s been convicted of a serious felony.” He added, “I hope everybody would agree with that.”

Everybody did not agree with that: The governor was booed for saying he wouldn’t support a convicted felon for the presidency.

On “This Week,” Christie also elaborated, telling ABC News’ Martha Raddatz, “[T]he truth is that, you know, we can’t have a convicted felon as our nominee for president and expect we’re going to win. And it was really the most amazing part of the debate to me was the idea that, you know, the majority of my competitors believe that you can have a convicted felon as our nominee for president, and that they support that and that he could win. I think that’s an impossibility.”

It was around the same time when Pence appeared on “Face the Nation,” and CBS’s Nancy Cordes reminded the former vice president, “You were one of six candidates on the stage who said that you would support Mr. Trump even if he is convicted of a felony. Why do you feel that way, especially since you also said on the stage that you felt that he asked you to put him before the Constitution? Why should someone like that be president?”

Pence replied, “Well, look, I signed a pledge to be on that stage to say that I would support the Republican nominee.”

The funny thing is, he wasn’t necessarily wrong. The Republican National Committee established some rather specific standards: Qualifying presidential candidates hoping to participate in debates had to agree to support the party’s eventual nominee, no matter who prevails in the primary process. There were no asterisks. White House hopefuls couldn’t add caveats or addendums in the margins of the page. By signing their name, these candidates were committing to support the Republican ticket. Period. Full stop.

Common sense might suggest, as Hutchinson tried to argue, that an exception would have to be made in the event that Republican primary voters nominated a candidate who was ultimately convicted of a felony, but as far as the party is concerned, there is no such loophole. If a criminal wins the Republican nomination, then his intra-party rivals are wedded to the criminal’s candidacy.

The Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus added in her latest column, “It would be possible to caveat this answer with the reservation that convictions are subject to appeal and that, although judges are generally reluctant to second-guess jury verdicts, there might be legitimate legal arguments available to Trump. This is not the level of sophistication and nuance on which the candidates were operating. They were simply backing Trump, reflexively and completely.”

I won’t pretend to know what will happen in the coming months — in the GOP primary process or in the criminal proceedings surrounding the former president — but when it comes to moments worth remembering from the first Republican debate, I’d suggest keeping this one in mind.