Forums | MacLife

And isn't that the point of state primaries? To encourage focused campaigning?

resedit wrote:

Statements like "all candidates should be included" is the same mentality on King of the Hill where the guys son was one of 22 co captains of the soccer team.

Do you want to feel warm and fuzzy about everyone being included, or do you want a useful debate that has time for candidates to go in depth?

resedit wrote:

Statements like "all candidates should be included" is the same mentality on King of the Hill where the guys son was one of 22 co captains of the soccer team.

Why are they including Fred Thompson then, when he's below Paul in the NH polls?

He did well in the national polls because he was on a popular TV show. He's been dropping ever since.

Farmerkev wrote:

BTW, there is a debate on now.

Yep, and Ron Paul is bitch slapping those other candidate across the room.

bedstuy wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

BTW, there is a debate on now.

Yep, and Ron Paul is bitch slapping those other candidate across the room.

You really think so? Maybe I missed something.
McCain is going after Romney pretty hard.

after-life wrote:

resedit wrote:

Statements like "all candidates should be included" is the same mentality on King of the Hill where the guys son was one of 22 co captains of the soccer team.

Why are they including Fred Thompson then, when he's below Paul in the NH polls?

He did well in the national polls because he was on a popular TV show. He's been dropping ever since.

Because they are not basing their inclusion on NH polls.

resedit wrote:

I have nothing against Ron Paul in a debate, but too many people makes for a bad debate that is meaningless as far as telling me anything real about the candidates. I'm sorry - but that's the way it is. Too many people make for a lousy debate.

If you want a high quality debate, you kick out Thompson. He didn't say anything that McCain and Romney and Guiliani and Huckabee didn't say. Paul provides something to debate about.

They're going to have to cut people soon over viability. When they do that, Ron Paul will be out of it for sure, but so will Thompson. Probably Guiliani, too.

Now isn't really the time. It's a disservice to the viewers.

jeremiah256 wrote:

Jaligard wrote:

resedit wrote:

I have nothing against Ron Paul in a debate, but too many people makes for a bad debate that is meaningless as far as telling me anything real about the candidates. I'm sorry - but that's the way it is. Too many people make for a lousy debate.

If you want a high quality debate, you kick out Thompson. He didn't say anything that McCain and Romney and Guiliani and Huckabee didn't say. Paul provides something to debate about.

They're going to have to cut people soon over viability. When they do that, Ron Paul will be out of it for sure, but so will Thompson. Probably Guiliani, too.

Now isn't really the time. It's a disservice to the viewers.

Agreed except on Giuliani.  He may stay above the cutoff.  And can't wait until Richardson falls below the standard.  I'm only halfway through the Democratic debate and the man can't answer a question without rambling.

Richardson should be out soon. Giuliani will be soon, though, too. He's dropping pretty fast.

I can't speak for Fox.
I can say that too many candidates makes for a poor debate.
Personally I wish they would have limited it to four, but six is way too many for the debate to really allow all the candidates to do more than pander at the questions and smile a lot while the other candidates are pandering at the questions.

Had they picked the four candidates doing best in NH - I would have been fine with that too, and Ron Paul would be there. They chose to pick the candidates that are most appealing to a national audience.

They did not exclude Ron Paul because he's against the war, as the article linked to in the beginning of this thread suggests. Well, I don't know that for sure, I don't work for fox, but given that the candidates they did pick are all doing better than Paul nationally - that's a much more logical conclusion to draw.

As has been pointed out - Ron Paul was in a debate today. He's having his opportunity to have his POV heard by the NH voters. Just not on Fox - which IMHO is already allowing too many candidates in their debate for it to be a good debate.

resedit wrote:

I can't speak for Fox.

You're not required to "speak for" anyone.  This is a question of judgment and of what should be done, not what is legally required of the network.  It seems like you so often focus on how one might be required to act in a given situation and refuse to stake a position on what should happen.

Paul has been running ahead of Thompson in NH, he has raised more money than Thompson, and he has had a much larger presence in NH than Thompson has.

However, Paul is largely unpopular in the Republican party and is certainly not 'on message' when it comes to most major issues.  It doesn't take a genius to see what is going on here....

Mr paul might take on spoiler leadership within the party (a back bench revolt), to try to swing the party instead of leaving it.

A libertarian-leaning rather than statist Republican party will be able to retain most of its support while refreshing its policies and repudiating some without doing too much damage to their base.

A Libertarian party under Paul would flounder because the Republicans and even the Democrats could split away their support over a variety of issues.

Last edited by Ribtorus (2008-01-06 10:31 am)

Ron was bitch slapping those guys last night.  Everything he said was true and the rest of the republicans seemed very annoyed by it. 

I pretty much agreed with everything he said, although I know if he was elected the chances of him pulling all that off are real slim.

-mark

Right now, there is massive appeal of the populist candidates (Edwards, Huckabee, Paul, Obama, Kucinich).  It definitely cuts across race, sex, class and politics.  It's the fears about the economy, anger that free trade is more important than public safety, and increasing executive salaries vs working joes being hammered by inflation.