This is getting old. If he’s on the ballot, he deserves to be heard at the debates.
As I recall (and you can correct me if I am wrong), the candidates must have garnered a minimum % of votes in the NH Primary to be invited on. And Hunter didn’t.
Fox will point to Hunter’s numbers, but those are a self-fulfilling prophecy. They and their pals in the MSM created Huckster with their coverage which exceeded his standing, and now they are trying to kill Hunter’s chances, with their lack of coverage, which is also disproportionate.
I agree! Unless a candidate has withdrawn from the race, he should be included in the debate.
Anyway they also excluded John Cox, Alan Keyes, and Hugh Cort. Gotta draw the line somewhere.
They’re not going to cover the debate because Hunter is there?
Do I have this right?
>WAY TOO EARLY in the race for the media to eliminate serious candidates
What were the requirements to be considered for the debate? Just being on the ballot? Bah. Just because YOU think that YOU are serious? Nah.
For a good vetting of the issues and candidates, you have to start paring it down. It’s completely unrealistic to believe that someone with a following of 1%* is going to be nominated. So why waste our time?
*Just throwing out a number as an example.
Hunter was my favorite but if he was going to catch on it would have happened. He’s gone. Unfortunately, I think Fred will be too, before long. Voting for any of the other clowns would be like choosing your own method of execution.
I called. They said he hasn’t met the criteria they set up several months ago.
I guess all that needs to happen is to have a few Hunter supporters throw bottles and chase Sean Hannity around...then they’ll let Duncan in. /s
Thank heavens Fox has the sense (unlike many here) to distinguish the difference between a relevant candidate and an irrelevant one.
Candidates who received invitations to participate in the debate have announced formal campaigns for president; filed the necessary paperwork with the Federal Election Commission and the South Carolina Republican Party to run for president; paid all candidate filing fees associated with their candidacy; met all U. S. constitutional requirements; and garnered at least 5% of the national electorate as determined by an average of the most recent national telephone polls of registered voters conducted by non-partisan public opinion polling organizations leading up to the registration deadline as determined by the South Carolina Republican Party and FOX News Channel; or, place in the top five in the New Hampshire Republican Presidential Primary on January 8, 2008.
"I'd like to know why SCGOP has excluded Duncan Hunter from the SCGOP debates when he garnered as much support in the New Hampshire primary as did the liberal, abortion advocate, Rudolph Guiliani?
Do you intend to exclude Guiliani as well?"
Free Hunter!
LOL.
The RINO shill who answered the phone tried to deny the S.C. GOP straw ballot had any validity, as that was supposedly "bought and paid for by the candidates." He said that is what he personally observed. Then I replied he was not seeing clearly:
Duncan Hunter who finished in a defacto three way tie in S.C. didn't buy a single vote. I informed him of that. He hung up.
You know, I’m beginning to think that Soros has his filthy hands on the Republican party almost to the extent he has on the Rats.
Hunter could not raise enough of what Republicans call free speech. Liberals raise big money, conservatives don’t. Hoisted by their own petard. Campaign finance to the rescue?
Duncan Hunter seems to be a truly decent person and a good man, and I have no doubt that he personally would add to the debates.
But honestly, there comes a point at which, after a candidate is not garnering much, if any real support, they should be excluded.
At some point, they have nothing to lose from trying to skew the thrust of discourse. This sort of action can really hurt the other, more viable candidates.
I see Ron Paul doing this sometimes. Some of his answers are so “out there” that the other candidates have to correct Ron Paul rather than put their own agendas forth in the alloted time.
It is up to the debate sponsors to decide when “enough is enough” and it is up to the candidates to decide if they stand together and reject these rules or stand apart from those being excluded and advance their own candidacies.
I don’t have an issue with any of this.
It makes me sick.
The GOP could and should fix the problem. But won’t.
jw