Ron Paul gets the Libertarian Debate Treatment?

[Borodog]

So apparently Romney will not participate in the CNN-YouTube sponsored GOP debate, because it is beneath his dignity, and Giuliani has just announced that he won't participate either, supposedly because of a "scheduling conflict."

To a formerly very active former Big L Libertarian, it's obvious what is going on. The front-runners got burned by the inclusion of Ron Paul; his exchange with Giuliani, far from sending him into oblivion, increased his media profile and coverage of him ten fold. What're the front-runners to do?

Refuse to attend debates where the Libertarian, I mean, Dr. Paul, is invited, that's what. Since they know that the debates are a money-making enterprize for the sponsors, and that the sponsors believe (probably rightly) that many fewer people will tune into a debate with no "big names", they can effectively shut down any real debate where they would have to actually face a Libertarian, I mean, Ron Paul, or simply pressure the sponsor behind the scenes to exclude the underdog.

The anti-Paul contngent will pop up in this thread and call me paranoid, call it a conspiracy theory, etc. But I saw this over and over and over again when I was actually involved in Libertarian politics and running for office, at all levels. It was blatant and open. "You want to sponsor a debate? Great! Oh, you're inviting the Libertarian? In that case, we won't be attending." This was one of the first factors that opened my eyes to the fact that the whole process was a sham.

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
The anti-Paul contngent will pop up in this thread and call me paranoid...

[/ QUOTE ]

Who's going to do that, it's obvious what's going on. If you know you're not as good as another player, don't play a hand with him, hell don't even sit at his game.

Cody

[j555]

I don't think they're so much worried about Ron Paul as they are of being exposed on some issues. Romney for flip flopping and Giuliani on the encounter with Ron Paul where he said he had never heard of blowback. I'm not sure why these guys would be worried about this though because even though ordinary You Tube viewers are asking the questions, the same people who run the regular debates are choosing the questions.

I do agree with what Romney said about some of the questions in the Democrat debate being really stupid and not even relevant to the election, but he and Giuliani should be there or it makes them look like they're running away from answering different questions.

As far as I know, all the candidates will be at the August 5th ABC debate in Iowa and the other debates scheduled in September so I don't think they're out to avoid him whenever he is invited. I think that they just don't want to be shown in a negative light on national tv by Ron Paul's massive internet support.

[cpk]

Debates are a joke at this phase, anyway. A candidate gets like, what, 1 minute total? A steady diet of soundbites is what you get. Worse than pointless.

[MrMon]

Alternative Theories:

A. All the frontrunners in both parties are starting to demand the second tier get knocked out so they get more air time and not have to deal with the sub-1%ers. It's not just Paul, it's no one wanting to deal with the Tancredo's and Gravel's any longer, when it's clear they're not going to win. There's nothing to gain by debating them. Front-runners snub riff-raff all the time. Heck, in some races, front-runners snub the other major party candidate. At some point, you realize you can only lose by participating in a debate, you gain little, but risk a lot.

B. Possible payback for the Demo snubing of Fox.

[AzDesertRat]

republicans suck at the internet?

[JackWhite]

After the CNN selected questions from YouTube, which came overwhelming from a left of center slant, I wonder if they will select right of center questions for the Republicans, if they actually have the debate. With CNN you never know. Maybe they will be fair and select folks worried about high taxes and wasteful spending, or they might stick with vegan lesbians worried about global warming.

[iron81]

Boro, you really have to stop seeing every campaign issue through the prism of your guy. Since I can't imagine the front runners being specifically afraid of a candidate who will command 5% of the airtime, I think there's a more plausible explanation. The front runners are going to simply sit on their lead.

In HU general elections, it is pretty standard for a front runner to dodge debates with their challenger, because the front runner feels that the only way they can lose is to give their opponent a big platform and give themselves a chance to screw up. In the large primary debates, you add on how all the other candidates tend to gang up on the front runners.

I suppose the reason this hasn't happened much in previous Presidential Primary debates is that there are so many candidates that the network can hold the debate anyway and the front-runners lose the free media. Romney and Giuliani might have made the calculus that they can either get CNN to drop coverage or make the debate a back page story by not showing up.

[Zygote]

id bet their main motivation involves being scared of facing up to some of their controversial issues.

i do agree they probably figured the event will be cancelled without them or at least a non-issue.

[j555]

According to Ron Paul's website the debate has been postponed. Maybe they're working around Giuliani's scheduling conflicts so he'll be able to be there. If all of the other Republicans are there I think Romney will change his mind like he so often does.