4 votes

Will anyone besides Pawlenty show up to debate Ron Paul on May 5, 2011?

Look like only Ron Paul, Pawlenty and Romney meet the requirements to participate in the SC May 5 debate, and Romney has not indicated he will show up.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/04/29/first-gop-debate-wh...

**** 5/3 Update, final lineup set ****

Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty
former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum
Texas Rep. Ron Paul
former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson
businessman Herman Cain.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/03/lineup-set-f...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Don't forget that besides name recognition

Ron Paul's awesome money bomb total before the debate will give all the pundits something to think about.

Ron Paul - best known candidate in lineup

What a difference four years makes!


"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."

Minarchism
track

If these 5 participants are accurate, this early debate will

give an early example of how Gary Johnson will attempt to differentiate himself from Ron Paul. And, will he actually dare to get a little too hostile or contentious with Ron? I doubt he would be that stupid, but this is about the only interesting thing about this particular debate.

I mean the rest of the participants are not even running (for all intents and purposes)

If I were Gary J.

I wouldn't try to back up Ron. He can always point out his abortion (or Pro-Federal Reserve) positions when Hannity interviews him after the debate.

Well since "nobody" is showing up I wouldn't be surprised if

the question and the post-debate is about as tame and/or non-televised as you could get.

Lineup is set: five participants

Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty
former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum
Texas Rep. Ron Paul
former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson
businessman Herman Cain.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/03/lineup-set-f...


"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."

Minarchism
track

SteveMT's picture

More trash from NY Times: Republicans Are Pursuing a Wider Field

....for 2012 Race

Every possible person named, but no mention of Ron Paul...Nothing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/us/politics/01republicans....

Fox will probably....

just cancel it if their golden children don't show up.
They will run a rerun of Hannity,

I thought only people with an

I thought only people with an exploratory committee could attend. Who besides Dr. paul has done it?

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

pawlenty has launched...

an exploratory committee. Gary Johnson has said he is running (no committee needed). Don't know about the others.

I think it would be hilarious if no one else showed up.

The ratings would be just as high or higher and Ron would have the chance to debate his adversaries on Fox News. He'd win, hands down.

Good

The less bozos on stage with Ron the better.

I want Ron to give this country an education on liberty, not play politics like all the other clowns.

Gingrich?

I saw a piece at Foxnews that said Newt was going to be in it. I hope not, I am fine with Pawlenty and Mittens, but having the love boy of the neocons up there would not be fun to watch. He could turn out to be the Guiliani and go right after Paul and start all of this again.

If you think they took it to Paul this time, wait until he is outraising them and polling well.

Maybe that is a good thing.

Maybe that is a good thing. After all the Guiliani incident was Ron Paul's moment, as it turned out.

I agree,

there might have been no Ron Paul Revolution without Guiliani getting in his face.

New Hampshire and Ecuador.

Running Away From Ron Paul

Kind of funny, in a way.

More time for Ron. That's justice after what they did to him last time. Then we can call a victory by default.

What do you say about the other team when they don't show up for the game?

That's right!

If no one shows up then this

If no one shows up then this is a good opportunity for Ron Paul to campaign. Voters need to be aware of the abdication of other candidates who chose not to debate Ron Paul. Ask away all the questions you want...but make sure he doesn't ramble. I sense that sometimes Interviewers want RP to appear eccentric by allowing him to ramble on. ...but usually Ron Paul hits the mark when there is interaction.

I would rather have the truth

I would rather have the truth heard on national television with viewers new to his message of liberty than not. Who cares if there aren't any other candidates, more time for RP to speak the truth. The debates will happen no matter what and the message of liberty cannot be squelched as easy as one may think. The past four years have proven this. This movement will only grow from here. Botton line.

T.

Great News !!!

More time for RP !!! :D

Not like with 8 candidates up there like before. This is going to be awesome, I am just hoping Trump shows up. RP would totally dismember Trump, there is no way Trump could withstand to so much pressure from RP in so much time.

This is going to be glorious.

donvino

SteveMT's picture

Will Pawlenty even show up?

Ron Paul has a huge advantage over every other candidate.

He speaks the truth. When you do that, there is nothing to remember.

This is a Fox News debate. I

This is a Fox News debate. I seriously doubt only Ron Paul and Pawlenty are going to be the only ones showing up. It would be an insult to the voters in SC

T.

The voters in South Carolina insulted themselves by giving us...

The voters in South Carolina insulted themselves by electing Lindsey Graham.

They merely follow the lead of whatever New Hampshire does.

The people of South Carolina clearly do not think for themselves or Lindsey Graham would not be a US Senator from South Carolina.

.

@AnAppealToHeaven You have a

@AnAppealToHeaven

You have a point, but this is a Fox News debate that will be nationally televised. Even if I was an idiot neo-con loser that voted for Lindsey Graham, I would still be a little embarrassed if two candidates show up.

T.

Ron should stand down from this debate. Period.

It is too early and he is going to become the rabbit in this race and poop out at the end if we are not careful.

.

I might agree with that if he

I might agree with that if he were just another candidate, but his problem has been exposure. No matter how much he gets, his message remains the same. He's not going to play politics with the rest of these bozos. He's just going to keep speaking the truth. Boy, I've been impressed by him this year when he's spoken. It seems that he is exuding a lot more confidence and has his rap down so much more easily and articulately.

never would agree with that.

never would agree with that. The more exposure the better...

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

I disagree

that might be the case if RP was trying to play politics, or something like that, but he is just out telling the truth, that's why we like him, the more people hear the truth, the more support he will get. Any chance to spread the word of liberty is a good opportunity.

My brother-in law told me last night he'd like to vote for T-Paw

I asked what Pawlenty stood for. My brother-in-law said it didn't matter, Republicans just need someone who can win. I said look what the Democrats got when they did that. He said I was naive.

So goes political discussion in my family.

Sometimes...

discussing the similarities that both candidates share can go along way. (Guys don't like to show that they can be swayed directly.) Then, when T-paw drops because his money firecrackers fizzle and he drops out, bro-in-law could feel more likely to concede that RP is the worthiest, most acceptable candidate (and you will not have already alienated his potential support for RP).

I have used this (rather than argumentative approach) with supporters of other candidates... especially Palin's. We just have to accept that others have strong feeling about their other candidates. Pissing them off now does us no good when RP is one of the last standing. We gain so much credibility when we embrace others and then welcome them with open arms when (not if) the time comes. Don't pound sand, inspire and gain the support of others.

Following is my dialog yesterday with a die-hard Palin supporter:

Bryan (me): People are sheep (and too many are immoral) as I'm sure you know Sandra. Most follow & repeat what their favorite T.V. or radio demagog spew(s) out without really understanding the issues at all. And whether it's Palin or any other constitutionally-oriented leader that gets reamed for simply adhering to true principles, I truly admire their conviction. Rest assured that so long as you promote and support leaders that support what our country was founded upon you are on the right track Those others exhibit severely flawed principles and character. This (constitution) card trumps all others and should be the most basic measure of a candidate's or leader's qualifications. By this measure alone, most run-of-mill "leaders" fail miserably. Palin rates among a select few at the higher end of the political and character spectrum.
23 hours ago · Like · 1 person

Sandra: I know I've gotta watch out for you, Bryan... ;-) You're onea them (paul) guys! LOL!!! :-D
23 hours ago · Like

Bryan: I've got your back. Palin and Paul are very similar. Palin calls Paul "cool". But yeah.. don't be surprised if I ever elbow you if start sounding like a neocon. :)
23 hours ago · Like · 1 person
Sandra: oh phewwwww.....I'm no NeoCon. Trust me! I like a lot of RPs ideas...but I just don't care for the man himself. I'm not as libertarian as he is. I'm registered here on FB as a "Conservative Libertarian". Voting-wise I'm reg as a Republican so I can vote in the primary. But I've voted for Libertarians several times. But some of the RP people like on the Judge's site can get downright vicious. I get called even worse names by them than I do by most liberals. :-)
23 hours ago · Like

Bryan: Yeah we can be passionate in our beliefs but too many libertarians tend to come across as combative. As for the man himself... I consider nobody in D.C. more respectable, consistent, and principled than him. He (like Palin) has walked the "talk." An interesting thing most don't know about him, is that long before all of these current leaders began invoking Reagan's name for this or that, Ron Paul was one of only 4 U.S. congressmen to endorse Regan in the primaries vs. Gerald Ford. What RP usually says usually comes to pass. Please forgive my libertarian friends... they're just purists about the constitution. :)
23 hours ago · Like · 1 person

Sandra: Oh I won't hold it against them. :-)
23 hours ago · Unlike · 2 people

[Somebody else]: I am an RP supporter myself, but see no need for conflict within our own side. Sandra and i went through some stuff in our Palin group, so I think we both see the need for unity XD XD
21 hours ago · Unlike · 1 person
**********end of dialog*************

Notice, I held my nose and propped up Palin a bit more than I would care to, but I only did so to gain credibility and trust from this person who I don't even know, but who asked me to be their "friend" because she's liked/agreed with what I've said elsewhere. So you purists out there, don't hammer me for my nauseating Palin comments... rather slap me on the back for prepping someone for RP.

Smart thinking. I've been

Smart thinking.

I've been thinking we need to start a thread for conversation tactics to position ourselves to win people over. I saw a great post yesterday (sorry I forgot who to credit this idea) but they said that when liberals attack economic freedoms that they ask them why they don't believe in a "democratic" marketplace and the ability of all people to vote with their wallets.

These kinds of prepared tidbits could help us all counter objections and open peoples minds.