Ron Paul to be left out of debate?

[Chessic]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/31/debate.limits.ap/index.html

They may want to invest in a bigger bus.

Though he's only at 3-6%, I think he deserves the chance to debate.

 

[KJVkid]

Who is Ron Paul?

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Since the country is ruled by corporate lobbyists, are we surprised when the media corporations get to choose the President? How does someone meet the criteria of scoring high in the polls for inclusion if they are excluded from televised debates?

 

[Martin]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/31/debate.limits.ap/index.html

They may want to invest in a bigger bus.

Though he's only at 3-6%, I think he deserves the chance to debate.

==This is an example of how the media trys to control the election process. Considering Ron Paul's support, position in Iowa (ahead of Rudy, tied with Thompson), and his fund raising, he should be allowed to debate. FOX News is losing its reputation fast. Their dislike for Ron Paul is spewing out all over the place.

 

[Ps104_33]

Ron Paul has had enough time to raise his poll numbers. There is no point in wasting any more of any one's time on someone who will never be more that 6% in the polls. But have no fear, he will run on a third party ticket in spite of what he has said in the past. Dont forget. He is for term limits and is in his tenth term.

 

[Martin]

Ron Paul has had enough time to raise his poll numbers. There is no point in wasting any more of any one's time on someone who will never be more that 6% in the polls.

==So you believe that Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and others who are in the single digits in certain states should not be allowed to debate either? What about the rise of John McCain? Just a few weeks ago he was considered "out" and now look at him. Putting major candidates out of debates simply because of low poll numbers is a good way to control the elections and make sure the anointed candidate wins. That is dangerous and threatens our democracy.

There is talk, among mainstream political thinkers, that Ron Paul could pull a third/fourth place surprise in Iowa. If that happens, he could prove to do better than you think. Keep in mind he has rasied large sums of money and has a lot of support. The only issue is whether he can get his supporters to the caucus and polls in large enough numbers to make a difference.

Anyway, the caucus is unpredictable. Polls really tell us nothing. It all depends upon a candidate's ability to get his/her supporters out. For all we know Paul and Biden could win Iowa. Btw, I think that kind of shake-up would be a good thing.

 

[KenH]

who will never be more that 6% in the polls.

Paul is at 9% in Iowa:

www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071231/NEWS09/71231042/-1/iowapoll07

Paul is at 9% in New Hampshire:

www.usatoday.com/news/polls/tables/live/2007-12-20-nhpoll.htm?loc=interstitialskip

I do hope that Ron Paul will take advantage of the wiggle room that he left himself and will run as a Libertarian Party/Constitution Party fusion presidential candidate this year if he does not win the GOP presidential nomination. It would certainly make the general election a lot more interesting to me.

 

[Bob Alkire]

Dont forget. He is for term limits and is in his tenth term.

Well put, if that is what he said.

 

[KenH]

Ron Paul has never been subject to a term limit law. So many elected officials have talked favorably about term limits and yet continued to run for re-election that this is not an issue with hardly any voters nowadays.

 

[carpro]

Ron Paul has never been subject to a term limit law. So many elected officials have talked favorably about term limits and yet continued to run for re-election that this is not an issue with hardly any voters nowadays.

It is a notable departure from the consistency of Paul's message.

 

[KenH]

Post deleted.

Whoops. Wrong topic.