RadioBDC Logo
Float On | Modest Mouse Listen Live
 
 
< Back to front page Text size +

Foolishness on the GOP presidential debates

Posted by Garrett Quinn, Less is More  May 16, 2011 10:33 AM

E-mail this article

Invalid E-mail address
Invalid E-mail address

Sending your article

The first and only GOP presidential debate in this election cycle was informative at best and entertaining at worst. We learned that Herman Cain thrives in a debate setting as he has great presence, we heard ending the drug war discussed in a mostly mature way, and we saw some of Tim Pawlenty's potential flaws exposed. It wasn't the greatest night in American political debate history but it was certainly an interesting one but it didn't come without detractors.

Conservative talker and blogger Hugh Hewitt thought the debate was a joke and that the RNC should control future debates. Oh, and he's not a big fan of libertarians either.

This is why the GOP needs to rethink its debate schedule and why the RNC should take over the operation of the debates and exile Cain, Johnson and Paul as well as every other candidate without a prayer of winning. (Santorum is a long shot, but he has a realistic though small chance of winning the nomination, while the others do not.) The seriousness of the fiscal crisis requires the GOP and its candidates to act seriously, and allowing marginal candidates to eat up time and distract from the enormous problems facing the country is not serious.

So, let me get this straight: Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, and Herman Cain are bigger longshots to win the GOP nomination than Rick Santorum?

The guy who when you Google his name the first thing that comes up is a term for a crude sex act? The guy who got lit up like a Christmas tree in his last election? Santorum, the candidate who hasn't registered above a 3% in any major poll yet?

There is solid criticism of Hewitt's thinking over at The Liberty Papers


The truth is, I think, you don’t want Cain, Paul, or Johnson in the debates because you are an establishment guy not because they are 1%ers. You don’t want to see any of these men in the debates because they are a threat to the status quo of the Republican Party (this is probably more true of Paul and Johnson than Cain though Cain would still be an outsider). I don’t believe for a minute that if any of these men became contenders you would suddenly welcome them in the debates.

It’s my hope that the RNC doesn’t take your advice seriously.

The hostility towards libertarians from GOP gatekeepers never ceases to amaze.

This blog is not written or edited by Boston.com or the Boston Globe.
The author is solely responsible for the content.

E-mail this article

Invalid E-mail address
Invalid E-mail address

Sending your article

 

About the author

Garrett Quinn began writing for newspapers at age 17 with CNC in his native South Shore. He has been published in BlueMassGroup, RedMassGroup, Pioneer Investigates, and Wonkette. He is a More »

More community voices

Child in Mind

Corner Kicks

Dirty Old Boston

Mortal Matters

On Deck

TEDx Beacon Street

archives

Browse this blog

by category