Are ALL the Republicans participating in the GOP debate? If so, why?

[Atman]

If so, why and how has this been allowed to happen? The GOP debate is also being conducted by General Electric Media, which unilaterally determined which Democratic voices American people would be allowed to hear last night, based upon some arcane bullshit criteria about viability. So why should Ron Paul or Rudy Guiliani or Fred Thompson be allowed anywhere near a podium? They're all hopeless candidates by any stretch of the imagination...yet General Electric Media didn't pull their invitations, did they?

:shrug:

.

[Atman]

1. Hello? Is this thing on?

Does anyone know?

.

[dmallind]

2. All those do far better than DK. Is Keyes included? NT

hkj

[Tarc]

3. It has to do with polling %'s

Giuliani and Thompson hit the 20-25 in various polls, while Paul scrapes by in the 5-6 range. Kucinich is even less than Paul, so the comparison is a bit uneven.

See: http://www.presidentpolls2008.com/

[ClassWarrior]

4. Except the Rape-Publican percentages represent a drastically smaller number of voters.

Is that really fair? Just basing it on an arbitrary percentage?

NGU.

[Tarc]

6. "Rape-Publican" ? C'mon, we can be better than that

Look, I despise the Republican Party and what they stand for as much as the next guy or girl here, but how bout a bit of maturity here? "Rethug" is silly enough as it is ", but tying "Rape" into a political epithet is a crossing the line.

As to an "arbitrary percentage", well it has to be drawn somewhere. 5% is pretty anemic; below that and you're pretty much non-existent.

[ClassWarrior]

7. Can't argue the point so you attack my phrasing?

Given the size of the two parties' voting pools in Iowa, a Dems with 5% represents more voters than a Rape-Publican with 15%. Doesn't sound "anemic" to me. But then again, I'm not afraid to say that the Party of Nixon rapes the public.

NGU.

[Tarc]

10. I argued both. Learn to read, please

You aren't fit to have Lennon as an avatar, honestly, with this juvenile attitude.

You can't have different thresholds for the two parties, the Pandora's box of problems that that would open is unbelievable. Face facts, kid; the vast majority of the voting public rejects Kucinich as presidential material.

[Freddie Stubbs]

5. Paul got 10% in Iowa

Kucinich probably couldn't get 10% in his own neighborhood.

[Kingofalldems]

8. If you think Kucinich has no chance

Why are you so damn concerned about him?

[Freddie Stubbs]

9. I find him amusing

But picking the next President is serious business. That's why it is useful to keep the limit the debate to only the candidates who have a reasonable chance at becoming President.

[Atman]

11. So his ideas shouldn't be heard?

He is a real candidate, with millions of supporters. That those millions don't hold a candle to Clinton's or Obamas should not EVER be an issue. If DK were sitting at that table last night and made some of his usual salient points about BushCo, and the crowd went wild, the media-anointed candidates would listen. They'd hear what the American people respond to. Sometimes it isn't about being a sure thing, it is about making sure the sure things don't forget that not every one of us is one of their supporters.

.

[Freddie Stubbs]

12. He has already participated in over a dozen debates, yet

his poll numbers hover close to zero, he has raised little money, and has received few votes in the states which have already voted. His campaign is a miserable failure by any measurement.

[jackson_dem]

13. Hunter, Keyes have been excluded from recent debates and Fox excluded Paul

Hunter and Keyes are excluded for the same main reason Kucinich is.

[Atman]

14. Who?

:hi:

Gotcha. Thanks...that's why I asked! But seriosly...Keyes is running? Really? :rofl:

.