« An Evangelical In Iowa Deals With the Media, Reaches Exactly the Same Conclusion I've Reached | Main | Oh Yeah? Well, I've Got Proof! »

01/05/2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Such a debate would resemble your comments section. Of course, were we involved, I have no doubt any one of us would win.

By the way, I thought Duncan Hunter was excluded too, and it was because all candidates had agreed to meeting certain benchmarks of vote getting in Iowa to be included in this debate. Is this not the case?

While I won't go along with all of Tom's extrapolations, he does have a damn good basic point here.

Paul got 10% of the delegates in Iowa. McCain and Thompson each got 13%. Guiliani got way less that than. Paul is polling in NH ahead of Thompson. But both Thompson and Guiliani are in, and Paul is out.

So unless Fox is saying that in Iowa the threshold is over 10% but under 13%, which seems arbitrary to say the least, what Fox is doing is... to be honest, completely and disgustingly indefensable.

Seriously, yuk.

Great idea, Tom. It's a kind of back-to-the-basics for politicians. Someday, we might even get to see such a debate.

I'm not holding my breath, though.

I like a lot of what Dr Paul has to say (not all of it, but that goes for all of them), but the fact is, he's NOT a Republican. He's a Libertarian and should have run as one. But, of course, you don't get elected if you're not a Republican or Democrat.

The comments to this entry are closed.