Should Ron Paul be included in the Republican debates after Super Tuesday?
The National Review brings up the question of including Republican candidate Ron Paul in the debates after Super Tuesday (Feb 5).
excerpt
...I can imagine the tide of angry e-mails from Ron Paul folks as I write this, but if he hasn’t broken out in the first 20 debates (I’m not exaggerating, tonight is the twentieth Republican debate) then I don’t think it’s going to happen for him in the 21st. Depending on whether you prefer CNN or RCP’s count, Paul has either six or four delegates. To his credit, he finished second in Nevada. But he’s gotten ten percent in Iowa, eight percent in New Hampshire, six percent in Michigan, four percent in South Carolina, and three percent in Florida...
* * * * *
The question does make sense. We all know there comes a time where the candidate field must be narrowed down to two or perhaps three individuals so Republican party members can finally decide on who is to lead their party for the presidency in November.
But when you compare McCain and Romney, there's really not much difference there. Both have been accusing each other of being "more liberal" than the other. I don't know if Huckabee would help, he's more of the faith and religious type but he may choose to drop out if he does not do well in the southern states on Super Tuesday.
Sure, there are rational arguments calling for McCain and Romney to go nose-to-nose but it seems we are stuck with picking the candidate who is less evil, not good versus bad.
Ron Paul injects more civility and intelligence in the debates than the combination of the two top-tier candidates. Ron Paul is more truthful than them, had a more consistent record than them, and even much more conservative than them.
Plus if Ron Paul is excluded, except viewership to drop substantially.
Comments