First of all, Palin isn't above debating any serious contender about the state of the country, and which solutions are best for fixing it.
Where you err, is in attaching any value to the current dog and pony shows that some are calling 'debates'. Mitt Romney and Rick Perry have (or had) enough name recognition and standing in the polls, that they could have delayed their entry into the race, and skipped most of these 'debates', just as Palin is doing.
They would have avoided being damaged by their opponents, and would have kept the chances of their losing any points to a minimum, as well. In addition, they could have continued to get their messages out to supporters and potential supporters without being a part of that demolition derby - and saved a whole lot of campaign cash and energy to boot.
But, for whatever reason, they felt they had to jump in with both feet and battle it out with the second tier. Now that they have, what have they gained? More support? No.... Better standing in the polls? No.... A strengthened message? No.... Better positioning as front runners? Not exactly...
So, tell me again why Sarah Palin is making a mistake by delaying her entry into the race?
Great post.
These “debates” resemble a joint news conference, with the questions asked by liberal pundits.
I would much rather see the GOP contenders ask each other questions, instead of fielding gotcha questions from the so-called moderators.
I agree with you. The current format seems designed to prevent any real discussion of issues and its funny to see them scrambling whenever a debate actually threatens to break out.
Questions are asked usually from a Dem mindset, and usually only a couple of candidates are allowed to answer a given question before moving on to another question, to which again only a couple get to answer. And they get all of a minute to answer. Pitiful.