Every legitimate candidate should be included in the debates.
Every legitimate candidate should be included in the debates.
Based on recent decades, any well spoken conservative will be either excluded outright or not asked questions.
If that isn’t enough, the Tokyo Rove wing of the party will remove conservative challengers from the primary ballots, which they had to do with Dole.
For this reason, getting the teaparties going and gaining control over the state parties is critical.
Based on recent decades, any well spoken conservative will be either excluded outright or not asked questions.
If that isn’t enough, the Tokyo Rove wing of the party will remove conservative challengers from the primary ballots, which they had to do with Dole.
For this reason, getting the teaparties going and gaining control over the state parties is critical.
I propose a different approach, and one that would be appreciated by most Republicans. Set up the debates as “friendly” speeches between two, and just two, random candidates who *agree* on the topic.
Strict ground rules for these “preliminaries”. Candidates will not argue, talk each other down, or behave in any way in a contentious manner.
Instead with the agreed topic, say “deficit reduction”, given to them at least a week before the discussion, they are each to do a presentation with the following format:
1) Describe the problem in detail.
2) Describe how the problem came about.
3) Explain how best to address the problem.
4) Explain how “the president” fits into the solution.
5) Describe the consequences of inaction.
Importantly, advantage goes to both candidates, as the candidate that speaks first will in essence give a speech, but the second candidate will be able to edit his speech on the fly, to take into account what the first candidate said.
This will give the audience a chance to evaluate the first speaker as a communicator of ideas. If they cannot give a public speech, or if they babble niceties and platitudes instead of addressing the issue, they will not do well.
Then the audience will see how the second candidate thinks after being given new information from the first candidates speech. If and how they are able to adjust what they say based on new information.
More than anything else, both candidates will be dealing in ideas instead of personal conflict. It will also get the Republican candidates new ideas from each other, free knowledge and advice for whichever is elected.
As “preliminaries”, the intent here is for them to act as “qualifying rounds”, that do not cost very much, are designed for smaller venues, and gets the candidates out there to speak to their constituents. And also to get some of the Republican ideas out there as well.
It should be decided by; who ever shot the most Moose!
If they spend money in Iowa they get invited.
This otherwise irrelevant State helped us get McCain.
Thanks, Iowa.
Historically, it is based on oh well an individual polls. Some events have a cutoff of usually 10% it just depends who is running the event.
Disclaimer: I left the GOP when McCain garnered enough delegates to win 2008 nomination. I helped form what quickly became the third-largest national party as measured by number of registered voters -- America's Independent Party. AIP's structural design is unlike any other party, and was developed to best ensure that we can avoid the root causes of the miserable failure of the Democratic and Republican parties