The GOP looked like a bunch of idiots anyway for not wanting to appear at the upcoming CNN/YouTube Republican debate. No one gave a credible answer as to why and after the Dems appeared and answered the queries, how could the Republicans not?
According to the Washington Times, several are already in:
Initially, only two of the 10 declared Republican candidates agreed to participate: Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas.
The number is now at four and, the sources said, the full field could be announced as early as this week. The debate now likely will take place in November or December.
"The Democratic CNN/YouTube debate was a success, and we have equally high expectations for the Republican CNN/YouTube debate," added a YouTube spokesman. "We remain confident that all of the Republican campaigns will participate."
Kudos to those who were in from the beginning, but it wouldn't be much of a debate with John McCain, whose campaign died when he posed with Teddy Kennedy pushing the amnesty bill and Ron Paul who has zero shot and is polling at <1% and is predicted to finish with zero votes in the Iowa Straw Poll (second item)..
Anyway, when the Democrats shot down any chance of appearing on Fox News to debate, I rightfully smacked them for it. The GOP deserved to be whacked upside their collective heads as well and according to the Times, it was the right-leaning blogosphere that set them straight:
Two weeks ago, a number of prominent conservative bloggers launched an effort called "Save the Debate" that generated what one of the campaigns referred to as a "full-court press," from conservative activists.
Mitt Romney looks like he may threaten to hold out but that would effectively end his campaign and he has to know it. He's got some bruised feelings about videos on YouTube and the portrayal of him but that's presidential politics and he better learn that quickly.
H/T: AP who gives credit where it is due.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 1)
1. Ron Paul who has zero shot and is polling at 100% growth) in the span of a few months is very impressive considering he hasn't spent millions on advertising like all of his competitors.
As for the straw poll, the RealClearPolitics article is an aggregate of projections made by 30 Iowa Republican officials. That these "experts" all dismiss Ron Paul is irrelevant.
If you had read the next paragraph, you would have seen this:
Ron Paul has been consistently getting 12-15% at straw polls around the country so there is no reason to believe he won't get that here. That should be good enough to vault him into a third place finish.
In summary, your statement about "0 zero votes" is erroneous and misleading. I don't know you, so I assume it was simply and oversight and you will correct your statement.
Thank you!
Jeff Molby at 11:24AM on Aug 8th 2007
2. 'predicted to finish with zero votes'? Funny summary. If you actually read the article you would see that of the thirty Republican chairs they asked, none thought that Paul would finish in 5th or better. While I wouldn't expect Paul to do especially well (he hasn't campaigned much in Iowa compared to some of the other candidates) I imagine he'll get one or two thousand votes at least, and could easily do better.
bbartlog at 11:42AM on Aug 8th 2007
3. You Tube is probably a little too high tech for these guys. How many could find their own website without help?
Seriously, who selects the questions in a debate like this? Hopefully, if they are not fair, they should at least be evenhanded.
Steve Bonomo at 6:51PM on Aug 8th 2007