Fox News Excludes Ron Paul

Napoleon17 · 12-30-2007, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by falconplayer11

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=59442

He was not uninvited. I'm sure if there was a debate, he would be there. There is no way Fox was really going to exclude him.

Um, a debate may have been cancelled, but we are talking about a forum, which is different from a debate.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071227/...he2008_trail_7

There is no way Fox is really going to exclude him? haha, they're trying real hard.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news...xed_for_n.html

falconplayer11 · 12-30-2007, 09:22 PM

ronpaul2008.com

Look on the front page. Now it says that there is in fact an event on Jan.6, and that Paul may still be invited. This is all really weird. I don't know what to believe and what not to.

I still don't think there is any way they are going to exclude him. It would end up being the biggest story of the debate/forum, and the point here is to get his name off the headlines.

"BrooksB" · 12-30-2007, 11:32 PM

If Ron Paul doesn't make it through the primaries, he won't get nominated, right? What do we know about the primaries? That's where all the life-long party members go. Who are life-long party members? Definitely not the age group which has the strongest support for Paul. That's why he won't get elected... not because he wouldn't be electable in a general election, but because young people don't go to primaries. I know I wouldn't have time to make it to one even if I knew when it was going to happen. They don't make a big issue about informing the young population about them because they assume we don't care, plus we typically think differently from the more established members and would thus contribute negatively to progress. Not to mention we're "young and invincible" and mostly ignorant, so the older population doesn't really listen to us. And even if they made a point to get a good young voter turn out at primaries, many of us couldn't go because we either work all the time (I know I work a LOT more than my parents) or go to college away from our home states.

Napoleon17 · 12-31-2007, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by "BrooksB"

If Ron Paul doesn't make it through the primaries, he won't get nominated, right? What do we know about the primaries? That's where all the life-long party members go. Who are life-long party members? Definitely not the age group which has the strongest support for Paul. That's why he won't get elected... not because he wouldn't be electable in a general election, but because young people don't go to primaries. I know I wouldn't have time to make it to one even if I knew when it was going to happen. They don't make a big issue about informing the young population about them because they assume we don't care, plus we typically think differently from the more established members and would thus contribute negatively to progress. Not to mention we're "young and invincible" and mostly ignorant, so the older population doesn't really listen to us. And even if they made a point to get a good young voter turn out at primaries, many of us couldn't go because we either work all the time (I know I work a LOT more than my parents) or go to college away from our home states.

Young people, in the past, may have had a lower turnout than the older populous in the primaries, but I think it is going to be much different this time around. True, us young folk don't really have that much time, but we had time to go to straw polls (which Ron Paul has consistently won), we had money to donate to his campaign (he has raised over 19 million dollars this quarter from about lots of little donations. For example, I am very, very poor, but I still donated $22.00 because I believe that he is the best hope for our nation's future). People are passionate enough about Ron Paul do act. It doesn't matter how old someone is, if they believe in something enough to act, they will, time after time. I know I will.
Also, I go to college in VA, but I am from Ohio, and I am planning to vote in VA. I believe that as long as you aren't planning to go back home after college, and you have been at college for a year, you can vote in your college state's primary. At least, that's the way it is in VA. Not sure about elsewhere.

Bryan · 12-31-2007, 09:03 AM

there is also absentee voting.

**Chrysostom** · 12-31-2007, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by "BrooksB"

\What do we know about the primaries? That's where all the life-long party members go.

Actually, not necessarily. It's whoever is most committed, not just whoever is a life-long party member. I mean, if I were going to vote for US President, I'd be much more likely to vote in a primary than a general election.

Quote:

Originally Posted by "BrooksB"

Who are life-long party members? Definitely not the age group which has the strongest support for Paul.

If your only support base is young people, chances are you're running on the wrong ticket. I wouldn't try to make excuses before the primaries even start. But he does own the life-long party members who were run out by the neo-conservatives.

Jay Tea · 12-31-2007, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by "BrooksB"

That's why he won't get elected... not because he wouldn't be electable in a general election, but because young people don't go to primaries.

On the other hand, there was a column in our local newspaper last week regarding a rumor that Democrats in Michigan consider him unelectable enough that they're thinking of voting for him in the primaries, since Clinton is all but guaranteed to win the Democratic nomination in Michigan.

"BrooksB" · 12-31-2007, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysostom

Actually, not necessarily. It's whoever is most committed, not just whoever is a life-long party member. I mean, if I were going to vote for US President, I'd be much more likely to vote in a primary than a general election.

Tom "eh" to, Tom "ah" to....

Quote:

If your only support base is young people, chances are you're running on the wrong ticket. I wouldn't try to make excuses before the primaries even start. But he does own the life-long party members who were run out by the neo-conservatives.

Well, it's not his ONLY support base, it's his STRONGEST, like Huckabee's strongest base are evangelical Christians, and Clinton's are, well... polarizing novelty-lovers (ice cream lovers?

).

Napoleon17 · 12-31-2007, 03:04 PM

Booyah. haha, I called Fergus Cullen's cell phone the other day and complained. I think he probably got tired of his phone ringing.

+SEAL+ · 01-01-2008, 12:07 AM

Here's one I just saw in my feed, an article that hopefully clarifies the way things are currently, barring potential changes like the above poster notes, and which I'm hoping for...

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS...ref=rss_latest

tht00 · 01-02-2008, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by falconplayer11

I still don't think there is any way they are going to exclude him. It would end up being the biggest story of the debate/forum, and the point here is to get his name off the headlines.

Kucinich was left out of the last Iowa debate... IIRC. That certainly didn't make much of a splash outside the internet.