Posted on 10/10/2022 10:56:03 AM PDT by RandFan
Republican U.S. Sen. Rand Paul did not respond to an invitation to debate Democratic challenger Charles Booker on Kentucky’s statewide public television network, KET.
The forum, scheduled for Oct. 3, was the only scheduled appearance between the two candidates. Paul is running for his third six-year term in the U.S. Senate.
In a statement, a representative from KET said Paul had met candidate criteria and was invited to the debate but his campaign had not responded to the invite by the deadline. Instead, Monday’s episode of Kentucky Tonight will only feature Booker.
Paul was asked by WKYT earlier this week if voters will have a chance to see him debate Booker. In response, Paul said his campaign was “troubled by some of the advocacy for violence coming from the campaign and that’s given us some pause.”
In a statement, Booker responded that Paul’s use of “violence” to characterize Booker’s campaign was a “dog whistle.”
(Excerpt) Read more at wfpl.org ...
Last ditch effort to play the race card.
not good. He’s doing the Arizona gov race thing where the dem is refusing to debate.
Paul is not debating on the public TV station. If “moderated” by the public TV anchor then Paul doesn’t see it as a debate, but an ambush.
Paul has first hand experience with whacked out Democrats as did his father. Kentucky is a place where politically motivated violent urges surface with ease. A few years ago a county sheriff standing for re election was shot and killed at a campaign barbeque by his opponent. I don’t blame Paul for nixing a debate when his opponent has suggested violence.
Ah his opponent suggested violence? Hmmm... Didn’t really pick up on that. I was thinking it was a cop out like the AZ democrat saying she doesn’t want to give attention to the Kari Lake.
Is this race tight or is Rand Paul a sure winner?
If it’s the latter, that would be another reason to decline.
It is not unreasonable for a popular incumbent to decline sharing a debate platform with a long shot challenger, as he is already vetted.
And strategically, it is the smart play if you can get away with it, since a debate can only hurt the front-runner and can only help the challenger.
For this very reason, I was hoping President Trump would completely blow off the debates in 2020, and simply say:
“The American people already know who I am and what I stand for - they don’t need to see me win another debate.”
He won the election fair and square and they stole it from him.
That’s right, and with every passing day I’m more pissed off.
I knew there was always election fraud in certain corrupt city precincts, but I really didn’t think it could be that coordinated - with conspirators at the highest levels of government.
And then the disappointment of watching while nearly everybody either denies it, or shrugs it off.
Unbelievable how far we’ve fallen.
On KET, the anchors have actually always been very even handed and fair to all candidates.
Not tight at all.
If Paul gets less than 55% it would be shocking.
In a rare coherent moment, Biden publicly said about ten days before the election that the democrats had put together the best election fraud scheme ever created.
It is the opening vid to 2000 Mules.
Paul was asked by WKYT earlier this week if voters will have a chance to see him debate Booker. In response, Paul said his campaign was “troubled by some of the advocacy for violence coming from the campaign and that’s given us some pause.”..........................
for-q-clintoon, the above may need some Hooked On Phonics work for you but here it is.
That’s what I thought - so it makes sense he wouldn’t stoop to a debate - debates only helps the underdog.
Oh so you believe FAKE NEWS. I don’t. I prefer some confirmation of what really was the “advocacy for violence”.
What did they actually do?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.