Idea: Paul-Kucinich debate tour [Archive] - Ron Paul Forums / Liberty Forest

PrimarilyPaul

11-17-2007, 09:37 PM

Someone at reddit posted a very good idea here (http://politics.reddit.com/info/60uez/comments/c02hjhc)

we should propose to both Kucinich and Paul, respectively, that the two of them should embark on a cross-country debate tour, Lincoln-Douglas revivial style. i'm sure that both would relish the press coverage that it would create and the fact that it would call america's attention to the real issues, not the idiot-style debates TV.

Thoughts? I think it is a GREAT idea and would as the poster said, would draw huge crowds and bring attention to the real issues America faces.

me3

11-17-2007, 09:40 PM

Adamsa

11-17-2007, 09:42 PM

Nah, Kucinich is way behind Ron in the polls and it'd decrease Ron's credibility.

PrimarilyPaul

11-17-2007, 09:42 PM

Richandler

11-17-2007, 09:50 PM

Kucinich is a nobody and even more uknown than Paul. He is a hardcore socialists but a decent man. He flails around his pocket constitution as if he ever read it, unaware, that much of what he wishes to do with the country will extremely financially unsound and overtaxing to tax-payers.

Flash

11-17-2007, 09:55 PM

I really was disgusted at Kucinich in the Democrat debate. Hes not anywheres near Ron Paul. Ignore him.

ClayTrainor

11-17-2007, 09:57 PM

I really was disgusted at Kucinich in the Democrat debate. Hes not anywheres near Ron Paul. Ignore him.

really? i was actually pretty impressed by him, and can see that he understands the constitution better than most candidates.

I also respect his bravery for trying to get america to impeach cheney right away and not wait!

Adamsa

11-17-2007, 09:57 PM

Kucinich had the best line of the debate.

"Wouldn't it be nice to have a President that gets things right the first time?"

born2drv

11-17-2007, 10:03 PM

I was really sickened by Kuchi as well in the debate.... his insistence that illegal immigrants are NOT ILLEGAL? Not criminals? So what do you call someone that breaks a law? Who commits a crime? He says we should call them "undocumented"... hmmm....

Like it or not entering the country illegally is a crime. Maybe he should look that up in his little pocket constitution.

Paul at least upholds the constitution as is ... and if there is something he disagrees with he says so and tells us that we need to amend the constitution, not just ignore it whenever we want. Just like wanting to end birthright citizenship. Paul would never ignore laws or refuse to uphold something in the constitution just because he disagrees with it.

Kuchi is a joke.

Now a national Paul Vs. Edwards debate would be good. I'm sure Edwards would have lots to disagree with Paul on and get his talking points in regarding socialism, and both of them could use more publicity especially in primary states.

NewEnd

11-17-2007, 10:05 PM

aksmith

11-17-2007, 10:07 PM

Yeah, great idea. Let's not debate Rudy and Mitt anymore. Let's get a Democrat with almost zero support and prop him up all over the country. Do people actually think before they write stuff?

Yeah, I also think Kucinich is a principled man, who does his best. But he is a committed socialist and no matter how decent one of those is, he doesn't rise to admirable in my estimation.

PrimarilyPaul

11-17-2007, 10:14 PM

I think a tour would be awesome, and it would expose alot of liberals to new ideas... andI think Paul would win alot more than he would lose.

Exactly, the part from the OP that I like the best is "it would call america's attention to the real issues, not the idiot-style debates TV."

SeanEdwards

11-17-2007, 10:16 PM

I hate the idea.

Now, substitute Hillary for Kucinich and then I'd approve.

Chibioz

11-17-2007, 10:18 PM

I support this idea, regardless of whether Kucinich is less popular than Dr. Paul, word would spread and people would see a real socialist vs. free market debate. This is something we have not had and it has big potential.

This is what I posted on reddit:
Paul and Kucinich traveling the country debating could educate a lot of people and do wonders for their recognition. I think the internet would be the most effective method of coverage as word would spread virally, especially if they debated regularly. Once it gets popular enough the mainstream coverage wouldn't be able to ignore it.

traviskicks

11-17-2007, 10:34 PM

I really was disgusted at Kucinich in the Democrat debate. Hes not anywheres near Ron Paul. Ignore him.

heh heh... Kucunich is a socialist, about as far from Ron Paul as one can get.

lbrtylvr

11-17-2007, 10:36 PM

Would have been a decent idea if it happened this summer, but its now to close to the finish line.

Northern_Observer

11-17-2007, 10:44 PM

Ron Paul commenting on Kucinich:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJcnoDfFWhM

Shii

11-17-2007, 10:45 PM

heh heh... Kucunich is a socialist, about as far from Ron Paul as one can get.

Both socialists and libertarians have a plan for change. Hillary, Giuliani et al. have no plans.

It would be nice to have a Kucinich-Paul debate so people could make up their minds which strategy is better for the country, rather than getting lulled to sleep by all the meaningless stuff the other candidates dump on us. Then they could make an informed decision. But everyone else is right-- Kucinich is going down right now and Paul is going up. It'd marginalize him, which is not what we want at this point.

Chibioz

11-17-2007, 10:51 PM

I don't agree that Kucinich is going down right now, he is getting more popular. He's nowhere near as popular as Paul, but the reason people don't know about him is due to poor media coverage, just like Ron Paul.

I see this as our opportunity to usurp the frontrunner crown and set an example for real debate. Anyone exposed to a debate between Kucinich and Paul would have a real comparison for what a joke the mainstream debates are. While this would be a boost to Kucinich, I know Dr. Paul's arguments are stronger and most importantly constitutional. There is potential here to finally bypass the MSM gatekeepers and take the election into the hands of American people.

dsentell

11-17-2007, 10:54 PM

I like the idea, but not Kucinich. He is more unknown that Dr. Paul and has little following. Many who have heard of him, think he is crazy (UFOs). Of course RP would win debating him, any of us would he is a socialist.

I don't see that a debate would benefit RP in any way and could even be harmful. . .

"Rep and Dem Longshots Travel the Country in Head to Head Debates"

I think in the eyes of the public RP would be lowered to the status of Kucinich . . .

literatim

11-17-2007, 10:57 PM

really? i was actually pretty impressed by him, and can see that he understands the constitution better than most candidates.

I also respect his bravery for trying to get america to impeach cheney right away and not wait!

So much that he has no qualms about a federal ban on firearms.

Hope

11-17-2007, 10:57 PM

Kucinich is an all right guy, but this isn't a good idea. We need to mainstream-ize Ron Paul, not preach to the choir of fringe political types.

gyrmnix

11-17-2007, 10:57 PM

I was really sickened by Kuchi as well in the debate.... his insistence that illegal immigrants are NOT ILLEGAL? Not criminals? So what do you call someone that breaks a law? Who commits a crime? He says we should call them "undocumented"... hmmm....

From what I can tell, the phrase "illegal immigrant" implies that the immigrant is illegal and a person themself cannot be illegal. A person can commit a crime but, the person is not illegal.

The only reason why I would prefer calling them undocumented is because illegal immigrant leads the person to believe that the person is the problem, versus their action. But, that is all just my opinion.

Kucinich was definitely the best at the Democrat debate. Which isn't saying much, considering his competition. And this can't go by unsaid; is FOX News and CNN competing to see who can host the worst debate?

Chibioz

11-17-2007, 11:05 PM

The reasons the debates have sucked so much in the past was because the mainstream media has had a monopoly on presidential debates. Just as we have innovated new fundraising techniques through our grassroots movement, I believe we can also innovate around the MSM debate roadblock. It doesn't have to be Dennis Kucinich, but I see him as one of the few likely to accept and also provide a good debate. I wouldn't mind watching Dr. Paul crush any of the other candidates however if anyone were to accept.

Edit: I can't find a source, but I believe Dr. Paul has also already said publicly that he would debate anyone 1 on 1 if he was challenged to a debate.

hasan

11-17-2007, 11:18 PM

there wouldn't be much of a debate between the two because they are both honest men who simply have differing political ideologies. Their ideologies aren't compatible even though both are applicable depending on ones views and thats why there wouldn't be any conclusive outcome from such a debate.

Chibioz

11-17-2007, 11:21 PM

Birdlady

11-17-2007, 11:27 PM

Isn't Kucinich the guy who wants to ban all guns and make the department of peace (how tacky) :rolleyes:

Just Come Home

11-17-2007, 11:29 PM

Paulitician

11-17-2007, 11:32 PM

My opinion is: we keep wasting time discussing ridiculous crap like this on these forums.

Chibioz

11-17-2007, 11:33 PM

The top tier stuff is media baloney that is used to supress undesirable candidates. Kucinich isn't as unpopular as you all make him out to be. Those of you buy into fox news UFO smears disappoint me, sure he said it but is it really significant? No it's just garbage. Would you like it if people smeared Ron Paul for liking chocolate chip cookies? We get smeared with stupid stuff all the time that we hope people will see past.

hasan

11-17-2007, 11:34 PM

Their incompatible ideologies would be the debate. When have we had a real high profile factually honest socialist vs. free market debate ever? Especially between presidential candidates. It would definitely be popular on digg, reddit and many other internet sites, and from there word is sure to spread.

I just don't think this is the right time for such a debate. For one it will associate Ron Paul with democrats in a way the MSM will definitely spin negatively and will erode any potential support ron paul might have from republicans

davidhperry

11-17-2007, 11:36 PM

I know... A fundraiser on Osama Bin Ladin's birthday. That one might top this terrible idea.

That's hilarious man - good thing I wasn't drinking something at the time.

Just Come Home

11-17-2007, 11:39 PM

Kucinich isn't as unpopular as you all make him out to be.

Then why can't he raise any money?

Kuckinich is novel.

Our guy is going to be president.

SeanEdwards

11-17-2007, 11:43 PM

I'm trying to think of a worse idea than taking our top tier candidate, and matching him up with their bottom tier candidate... And I'm having a hard time coming up with it.

I know... A fundraiser on Osama Bin Ladin's birthday. That one might top this terrible idea.

Are you just another hater trying to alienate Ron's supporters who want to fundraise on OBL's birthday?

/sarcasm off

Just Come Home

11-17-2007, 11:45 PM

Are you just another hater trying to alienate Ron's supporters who want to fundraise on OBL's birthday?

/sarcasm off

Wait until you see my you tube! ;)

Chibioz

11-17-2007, 11:47 PM

Paulitician

11-17-2007, 11:49 PM

It serves no purpose to even entertain the thought. One, because it's stupid. Two, because it's not going to happen.

Just Come Home

11-17-2007, 11:59 PM

I'm not saying he is as popular as Ron Paul or raising as much money.. I see it as an opportunity to introduce real intellectual debate to the people. The arguments against Kucinich in this thread are pretty weak. The majority of the participants in this thread seem to think it wouldn't be to Paul's advantage. I disagree, I think it would be letting the market decide instead of the monopoly MSM, and Paul would benefit.

My only argument against Kucinich is that his own party sees him as a clown, and his base is non-existant as evidenced by his fundraising (er, lack thereof). Once Kucinich can raise $4 million dollars in a single day, I say let's urge the campaign to do it. Until then this idea lacks fundamental common sense and understanding of cause and effect.

You want to see Ron Paul free fall in the polls and our movement lose all of our hard earned gains, then keep associating him with the most bottom tiered fringe candidate that the democrats have to offer. Kucinich has no support, no fundraising ability, and no chance.

Our guy is going to be president.

Chibioz

11-18-2007, 12:08 AM

My only argument against Kucinich is that his own party sees him as a clown, and his base is non-existant as evidenced by his fundraising (er, lack thereof). Once Kucinich can raise $4 million dollars in a single day, I say let's urge the campaign to do it. Until then this idea lacks fundamental common sense and understanding of cause and effect.

You want to see Ron Paul free fall in the polls and our movement lose all of our hard earned gains, then keep associating him with the most bottom tiered fringe candidate that the democrats have to offer. Kucinich has no support, no fundraising ability, and no chance.

Our guy is going to be president.

You have a point, but if Kucinich doesn't win the nomination I don't think we'll be seeing much of an intellectual debate at all this election. However, Ron Paul winning the race supercedes other priorities, if you guys don't think it's a good idea right now, than alright. I think some real intellectual debate would wake a lot of people up. I'm a bit disappointed, but I just want Ron Paul to win above all else.

Edit: Fixed some grammar.

SeanEdwards

11-18-2007, 12:19 AM

I'll admit that I would like to see Kucinich defend his position on slavery reparations.

As long as Ron Paul doesn't have to share the stage with him.

me3

11-18-2007, 12:21 AM

Then why can't he raise any money?

Kuckinich is novel.

Our guy is going to be president.
Kucinich doesn't have a base like the Old Right, Goldwater conservatives etc. to draw on. Don't forget, Dr. Paul appeals to the Libertarians, Constitutionalists, Reformers as well.

And Ron Paul has already done one run at the Presidency. His congressional and previous presidential candidacy mailing and supporter lists probably provided a lot of the initial start up.

I think it is important to look at this as a process. It's not going to be one or two terms and done. There is a real opportunity to select some high character individuals to other branches of government as well, establishing a new tradition, an opportunity for something that lasts (as long as we can keep it that is).

PredatorOC

11-18-2007, 05:18 AM

Not an idea I'd endorse. Their disagreement is on economics, which will put people to sleep.

Also, I don't know if Kucinich has studied economics, so it might devolve into a reason vs. emotion type of debate. Besides, Kucinich is a Keynesian (the folks who believe random government funded shoveling is good for the economy) and the world has been run by their ilk for far too long.

Ron LOL

11-18-2007, 05:20 AM

Dennis is a fringe DEM. We're moving up. I don't think it will be of any benefit, not with the primaries so close. Everything right now has to be IA, NH, SC, NV and lots of boots on the ground making sure we have delegates, and registered Ron Paul voters.

If we do well in the early primaries, he'll have all of the attention he could ask for throughout the campaign.

If he doesn't do well at the ballot box, no amount of gimmicks or interviews will help.

Right on the money. Kucinich is a good guy, but we have nothing to gain by associating with him. Especially if it takes time away from things like, oh, winning NH and making sure we don't go totally belly up in IA.

Just Come Home

11-18-2007, 05:25 AM

I'll admit that I would like to see Kucinich defend his position on slavery reparations.

I've always wondered if Ron Paul doesn't agree with this position. Ron Paul is all about ensuring that the government fulfills its commitments.

That's a can of worms I hope stays closed.

jrich4rpaul

11-18-2007, 06:37 AM

I guess it's moved up from Gravel/Paul to Kucinich/Paul. Next month will be Dodd/Paul.

How about.. just Paul.

ButchHowdy

11-18-2007, 06:41 AM

Kucinich is in 1st place (as is Ron Paul) in the Vote.com poll.

I agree with his stance that the "people of the influx" simply being here perhaps violates civil law but not criminal law.

LBT

11-18-2007, 07:40 AM

This idea is not beneficial for several reasons.

1. Firstly it puts to Politicians who are respected for having integrity, and being of a similar voice on important issues such as the war and rejecting the establishment into a position where all they do is pick each others ideas apart in a debate. That's divisive. If Ron Paul does get the nomination there would seem no chance he will be up against Kuchi, but such a debate would have alienated some of his supporters from crossing over to RP.

2. Makes them look like fringe kooks, playing in their own sand basket. The media would likely ignore or mock it.

3. Kuchi could go broke half way through it.

etc etc

Anyway, we need to start converting registered republicans from now through the primaries. I think to do that we need to show Ron is a smart conservative in the old right, Goldwater, Reagan tradition and that he is the best bet to beat Hillary. After that we can worry about how to take on the Dem nominee.

LibertyEagle

11-18-2007, 07:46 AM

People shouldn't be so hard on Kucinich, I like him, he is a good man, and is trying ot do whats right for America, alot like Paul. He speaks his mind, and that is admirable in a politician.

I think a tour would be awesome, and it would expose alot of liberals to new ideas... andI think Paul would win alot more than he would lose.

Huh? :confused:

Kucinich = gun-grabber, pro-illegal alien, pro big government. Basically, he's a socialist.

The ONLY thing I see that Kucinich and Paul have in common is that they are both against the Iraq war.

foofighter20x

11-18-2007, 08:03 AM

RegularRon

11-18-2007, 08:03 AM

Nope, not a good idea at all. First and fore most, we are knocking at the door of the Mainstream. Why would you want to hurt that???

Secondly, AGAIN KUCINICH IS A SOCIALIST. To people who say he's trying to do good things for the U.S and he's a "decent" man, Would you be saying that about Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Hitler, and all the rest of the morons who were "just trying to do good for his country"?

I'm still amazed at the support you people have for someone who doesn't agree with Dr. Paul on anything, well besides the IRAQ war.

Why are you Voting for Dr. Paul again??

jrich4rpaul

11-18-2007, 08:05 AM

If we're trying to get people to register Republican to vote for Ron Paul, we shouldn't be promoting democrats.

FreeTraveler

11-18-2007, 08:17 AM

Secondly, AGAIN KUCINICH IS A SOCIALIST. To people who say he's trying to do good things for the U.S and he's a "decent" man, Would you be saying that about Stalin, Lenin, Marx, Hitler, and all the rest of the morons who were "just trying to do good for his country"?

I'm still amazed at the support you people have for someone who doesn't agree with Dr. Paul on anything, well besides the IRAQ war.

Why are you Voting for Dr. Paul again??

+1

Adamsa

11-18-2007, 08:49 AM

Woah, Kucinich is a socialist, but he isn't a ruthless dictator like Lenin or Stalin. But you're right, with the exception of foreign policy, Kucinich is wrong.

mjt

11-18-2007, 09:04 AM

Kucinich is wrong on every issue except Iraq. The man about as big gov as you can get.

Bruehound

11-18-2007, 09:38 AM

The sooner some RP supporters take the time to research his 30 plus year career and come to understand his positions the sooner we can stop hearing this Kucinich nonsense.

Enough.

RegularRon

11-18-2007, 09:39 AM

+1

Nice to see someone else who get's it on this board

constitutional

11-18-2007, 09:45 AM

worst idea ever.

TruckinMike

11-18-2007, 09:47 AM

Kucinich does NOT trust the citizens of this country!

Gun Owners of America gave him a F-.

That is the true test of a candidate in my mind. How can they control you or enslave you if you are armed? They can't. Kucinich is a gun grabbing Dufus, he obviously does not understand what freedom/Liberty means. Or on the other hand....he is just another manipulating, sheep herding, lying politician.

Your choice --- either he has no wisdom or he is evil.

TruckinMike

RegularRon

11-18-2007, 09:48 AM

The sooner some RP supporters take the time to research his 30 plus year career and come to understand his positions the sooner we can stop hearing this Kucinich nonsense.

Enough.

"Some supporters"? Is it me or does it look like that a good PORTION of supporters like that Socialist Rat Bastard? Yes, I said it.

Rob

11-18-2007, 09:51 AM

What everyone seems to be missing here is that the potential gains of Ron Paul are nearly minuscule. All of Kucinich's supporters are intelligent and dedicated. It will take hours of reasoned explanations to even get these people to consider changing their allegiances.

I completely agree this would be the most intelligent debate held in some time, but the majority of voters will simply ignore them. In addition general rule of debates is that they hurt the leader and help everyone else almost without regard to who has a better debate. This is why 3rd parties are so regularly excluded from them and why the front-runners rarely want to debate. A Paul vs. Obama or Romney debate would be wonderful, because odds are the "more popular candidates" would lose more than they would gain. However, all major political players realize this and so the front runners would never willingly agree to it.

I hate to say it but many of you on these forums think that our general campaign strategy should be to purely appeal to reason and intellect. What many fail to realize is that only a small percentage of the nation is intellectual. If we want to win the primaries we need to focus our efforts on both the politically uniformed and the sheep. Take it from someone who's has been a life-long student of politics and has done much campaigning on the front lines: you have a much higher voters won to campaign resources invested ratio with these people.

It usually takes only a few minutes to convert someone who is politically uniformed to Ron Paul vs. hours of detailed explanation and argument to even have a chance at converting someone who is politically knowledgeable.

Sheep are impressed by national media coverage and big numbers, intellectuals find them interesting but are rarely persuaded by them. It will be much easier for the Paul campaign to win by getting good MSM coverage and finding ways to create perceptions of momentum and winning than by attempting to promote the most intelligent platform backed the most reasoned positions.

NewEnd

11-18-2007, 11:24 AM

Huh? :confused:

Kucinich = gun-grabber, pro-illegal alien, pro big government. Basically, he's a socialist.

The ONLY thing I see that Kucinich and Paul have in common is that they are both against the Iraq war.

That doesn't matter. Hes honest, like Paul, and Ron Paul has said Kucinich is the only other nominee he likes.

And also, not just the Iraq war, but also against illegal wiretapping and such.

Alot of you people sound just like the mindless democrats that hate Paul over some small issues, but are missing hte bigger picture. Foreign policy is the prime responsibility of the president, and the most important.

winston_blade

11-18-2007, 11:58 AM

Kucinich who? I have a better chance of winning the Presidency than he does. No thank you.

winston_blade

11-18-2007, 11:59 AM

That doesn't matter. Hes honest, like Paul, and Ron Paul has said Kucinich is the only other nominee he likes.

And also, not just the Iraq war, but also against illegal wiretapping and such.

Alot of you people sound just like the mindless democrats that hate Paul over some small issues, but are missing hte bigger picture. Foreign policy is the prime responsibility of the president, and the most important.

Socialism is no small issue. It will change everything.

JMann

11-18-2007, 12:27 PM

Why do we see pro-Kucinich stuff here every three or four days trying to tie him to Ron Paul? Other than the fact they both want out of Iraq and Kucinich is a friendly Socialist as Paul has a friendly approach to his libertarianism the two have nothing in common.

SeanEdwards

11-18-2007, 02:21 PM

I've always wondered if Ron Paul doesn't agree with this position. Ron Paul is all about ensuring that the government fulfills its commitments.

That's a can of worms I hope stays closed.

I'd bet every cent I own that Paul does not support slavery reparations. What could be more collectivist thinking than that? Make a bunch of non-slave-owners pay a bunch of non-slaves.

Would white people be the only ones taxed to pay for these reparations? Which black people would get the reparations? Will Bill Cosby, Michael Jordan, and Russell Simmons be handed tax money taken from middle-class white people? What about black people who emigrated to the US from the carribean in the past 50 years and who were never slaves, do they qualify for the gravy train too?

And as far as government committments, isn't 600,00 dead union soldiers enough of a reparation for Al Sharpton?

This reparation idea is the best idea I've ever heard of for inflaming racial tension and hatred.

RevolutionSD

11-18-2007, 02:25 PM

I like Kucinich, and he's a good guy, unlike the rest of the democrats running. He's also a good speaker. I don't like a lot of his ideas. A Kucinich/Paul debate would be interesting.

Imagine how much more substantial this would be than these circuses we have had so far?

I don't think it would hurt Paul. As long as it was covered by one of the major networks, it would be good publicity.

RevolutionSD

11-18-2007, 02:27 PM

I'd bet every cent I own that Paul does not support slavery reparations. What could be more collectivist thinking than that? Make a bunch of non-slave-owners pay a bunch of non-slaves.

Would white people be the only ones taxed to pay for these reparations? Which black people would get the reparations? Real dark-skinned ones, or all? What about black people who emigrated to the US from the carribean in the past 50 years and who were never slaves, do they qualify for the gravy train too?

And as far as government committments, isn't 600,00 dead union soldiers enough of a reparation for Al Sharpton?

This reparation idea is the best idea I've ever heard of for inflaming racial tension and hatred.

Of course Paul would not be for slavery reparations!
Might as well start writing checks to all the countries we've messed with in the past too! This would be complete collectivism and the opposite of what RP stands for.

NewEnd

11-18-2007, 02:30 PM

It seems to me, alot of people are afraid somehow kucinich's ideas would beat Paul. Paul would win hands down, and would really be able to bring many socialist/apologists etc into our fold. Many people support Kucinish because he is a left wing Ron Paul. He is honest, decent, and speaks his mind... and gets elected.

A Kucinich?paul debate would be substantive, full of ideas, and philosophies, it would not be an act of caution, where every word is watched, so as to not offend anyone. In the end, it would be very positive for America.

Also, admittedly, Ron Paul is not perfect. He has some positions, which simply are no trealistic, and I think everyone, deep down, knows it.

Many Kucinich supporters will be homeless if Hillary wins the nomination.

VoteRonPaul2008

11-18-2007, 02:33 PM

NewEnd

11-18-2007, 02:36 PM

I think all the pro-Kucinich..should convert to Paul supporters.. and I don't like the idea of a debate either.. Kucinich went drove Cleaveland to bankruptcy..

I'm far to the left so Kucinich matches my views.. but I can't wouldn't vote for him with his background he already flipped flopped on abortion

I'm all for and only for Ron Paul!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How would they convert? BTW, do not underestimate his supporters, I saw their power in the caucuses... they were very influential during 2004. They really got alot mroe votes than they should have, simply by knowing what they were doing.

A tour would be bad.. too much time, btu a debate would be awesome, IMHO.

NewEnd

11-18-2007, 02:41 PM

As a matter of fact, I think any 1 on 1 debate with Paul would be great.

Perhaps even an informercial 30 minute debates, that we pay for. It would be honest, and watched.

Or maybe even a PAC, since the debates would not directly be an endorsement for Paul*

*allthough they would, I have no doubt in his debating skills.

Energy

11-18-2007, 02:57 PM

Whether it's Paul vs Kucinich or whoever, I think the big point is not being at the mercy of old media. Why do we have to put up with CNN/Democrats and Fox/Republicans and their 30-second limits and rigged audiences? As for 1-on-1, who the hell is brave enough to pit against Paul besides Kucinich?

The youtube debates is a step in the right direction. Many major news programs are featuring mega-popular YouTube links now. I can see the media putting the youtube debates on msnbc and other news channels.

Dan D.

11-18-2007, 03:04 PM

NewEnd

11-18-2007, 03:07 PM

Any single 1-1 debate would be good. A tour of them would waste too much time I think, and frankly, an opportunity for a 1-1 debate should not be wasted on Dennis Kucinich. It should be against Giuliani, Romney, Clinton, or Obama. Failing that, Edwards or Huckabee, who I think have the best chances in Iowa.

It would not be wasted on Kucinich. the best one would be with Kucinich. Huckabee would probably be the only other candidate to accept, besides some of the no-names like hunter or tancredo. (which WOULD be a waste)

Electric Church

11-18-2007, 03:19 PM

lousy idea. Paul's ready to go for the juggler of the number 1 contender not some sparring exhibition with a bottom ranked unknown.

PredatorOC

11-18-2007, 04:30 PM

I went through Kucinich's positions out of curiosity. Now, I've always considered Kucinich as a tolerable, honest politician. But after going through the issues on his site, I have to say that he is essentially a populist. A lot of promises. He wants to fight poverty worldwide? That one really reduced my respect for him (since direct aid rarely helps and the problems are too complex).

Triton

11-18-2007, 04:49 PM

Someone at reddit posted a very good idea here (http://politics.reddit.com/info/60uez/comments/c02hjhc)

Thoughts? I think it is a GREAT idea and would as the poster said, would draw huge crowds and bring attention to the real issues America faces.Why in the world would ANYONE think it would be a good idea to elevate Kucinich (and lower Paul) by putting them together? Come ON people, THINK! I swear there are moles here.

Kucinich may be well-meaning, but he is the ENEMY.

Chibioz

11-18-2007, 05:56 PM

Seems like most people are quick to put this idea down. Some contend that it's a bad idea to debate because they disagree on some things.. isn't that why it would be a good debate?

SeanEdwards

11-18-2007, 06:01 PM

Seems like most people are quick to put this idea down. Some contend that it's a bad idea to debate because they disagree on some things.. isn't that why it would be a good debate?

No, it would be bad because Kucinich is a nobody flake loser. A debate between Paul and Kucinich would elevate Kucinich, and marginalize Paul. We should be trying to push debates between Paul and the front runners, not debates with UFO watching gun grabbing troll-looking freakazoids.

FreedomLover

11-18-2007, 06:01 PM

Almost as dumb as the Paul-Gravel 08 ticket idea.

This would basically cement the idea in everyone's mind that Rp is a kook, if he's traveling around with Kucinich, who is a complete joke.

FreedomLover

11-18-2007, 06:02 PM

See sig.

thebestofronpaul

11-25-2007, 08:06 PM

I Just don't like Kucinich at all, he maybe against the war and for the impeachment of that monster cheney, but he's a socialist who supports the UN and open borders.

that would be a recipe for disaster.

MozoVote

11-25-2007, 08:33 PM

For the love of God(s) people, **please** stop the Paul / Kucinich match making. :mad:

Nathan Hale

11-25-2007, 08:59 PM

Someone at reddit posted a very good idea here (http://politics.reddit.com/info/60uez/comments/c02hjhc)

Thoughts? I think it is a GREAT idea and would as the poster said, would draw huge crowds and bring attention to the real issues America faces.

Bottom line?

Kucinich isn't polling high enough for it to be worth Paul's time. Right now Paul is at 8% in early states and 6% nationally. Plus, he's still running in the primary, so he needs to debate a Republican. He needs to debate McCain or Thompson, not an also-ran like Kucinich.