PDA

View Full Version : Alan Keyes In The Debate Today!




jasonoliver
12-12-2007, 11:38 AM
This is great for making Ron Paul not look like the token crazy candidate.

Also this may pull votes from Huck!

philipsantamaria
12-12-2007, 11:39 AM
yeah but it's less time for the other candidates.

brings it back up to 9 Candidates??? terrible.

jasonoliver
12-12-2007, 11:40 AM
yeah but it's less time for the other candidates.

brings it back up to 9 Candidates??? terrible.

The more candidates = More splitting up the Pro-War vote!

yongrel
12-12-2007, 11:40 AM
I really hope that Alan Keyes calls out Huckabee and tries to fight over who is more Christian-er.

Good times ahead.

FSP-Rebel
12-12-2007, 11:41 AM
Why don't they just make a spot for George Phillies as well:rolleyes:

jasonoliver
12-12-2007, 11:41 AM
Why don't they just make a spot for George Phillies as well:rolleyes:

This is a REPUBLICAN debate!

Paulitician
12-12-2007, 11:41 AM
I actually do not understand why he hasn't been invited to more debates. For a while I've been thinking that he'd make the frontrunners look bad, mostly due to their social conservative (or lack thereof) stances.

R_Harris
12-12-2007, 11:43 AM
Why is Keyes suddenly allowed in a debate? This makes no sense, something seems fishy here.

He is registering, what - 0.0001% of the polls? Talk about irrelevancy- and that guy is REALLY obnoxious to boot! He is not a great "orator." He just screams loud and is grating to me.

Paulitician
12-12-2007, 11:46 AM
It's just one debate. I don't think he's going to be invited to the other national debates.

Quick
12-12-2007, 11:46 AM
I have a hard time saying that he doesn't deserve being at the debate being a Ron Paul supporter who has seen others try to exclude Paul.

But we're a month or so away from voting. Give me a break.

jasonoliver
12-12-2007, 11:47 AM
Why is Keyes suddenly allowed in a debate? This makes no sense, something seems fishy here.

He is registering, what - 0.0001% of the polls? Talk about irrelevancy- and that guy is REALLY obnoxious to boot! He is not a great "orator." He just screams loud and is grating to me.

He is the ULTRA SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE........Lets hope he can pull 5% from Huck!

His website says "Alan Keyes - Americas Revival" - Fundies will drink his kool-aid.

Keyes would Ban Pornography and make Homosexuality Illegal!

FSP-Rebel
12-12-2007, 11:51 AM
This is a REPUBLICAN debate!
I was just likening one flake to another.:D

EotS
12-12-2007, 11:53 AM
Maybe he'll take a few shots at Ron, and get the floor mopped up with himself.

That'd be fun.

Mithridates
12-12-2007, 11:59 AM
I've never heard Keyes before but having seen one of his videos he's quite annoying. Imagine four years in the White House of Can I finish Can I finish Can I finish to every question.

http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=SG5u04Gbg0A

(best part of the video is towards the end)

maeqFREEDOMfree
12-12-2007, 12:00 PM
i don't like that he's suddenly invited to the debate either... what is he going to run? when i watch a presidential debate, i'm not interested in what other people think on issues, i'm interested in what the candidates think on issues... why is he invited?

i wonder if i could get invited to a debate for no reason....

Paulitician
12-12-2007, 12:07 PM
Alan Keyes being invited to today's debate is not some sort of mystery. PBS invited him to their last debate and they invited him again. He probably shouldn't be there (since he has no chance), and neither should Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter.

MrCobaltBlue
12-12-2007, 12:12 PM
Anyone know if this is streaming on the web?

Revolutn
12-12-2007, 12:15 PM
Yeah I get queasy about the "he has no chance" argument for excluding ANY candidate.

Also, had you been following ALL the debates to date, you'd know he has appeared, in at least one other one, maybe even 2 of the earlier debates.

He is a bit annoying with his presentation style.
Keyes' is a complete lackey to the R party and he goes wherever they want him whenever they 'need' him to be a token ....whatever... person of color, social conservative, scare rationale people away to the D candidate.....you name it, and Keye's will be there for the party.

I don't pretend to understand it, I just can observe that it is true over many years.

In either event, he will be loud, obnoxious, boisterous and eat up more than his 'fair' share of time since like the others he'll just rant and yell over the moderators to finish making his point(s)....but he can't really hurt us other than the time issue...he's got nothing to lure people away from Paul and no grounds on which to attack Paul that wouldn't end up blowing up in his face and benefiting us at least....so...let him take swipes at Romney and pHuckleberry. (the p isn't silent ;) )

Rev

Rev

Pete Kay
12-12-2007, 12:17 PM
He is not even actively campaigning for President. I think one of the key factors for determining whether a candidate should be included in the deabates is whether they are even trying. Look at Tancredo and Hunter. After all these months they haven't gained any ground and neither of them have any money. Why are they even there? At the very least, Tancredo has a single issue to promote. Hunter and Keyes have nothing besides their egos.

jasonoliver
12-12-2007, 12:17 PM
http://www.inthesetimes.com/images/28/21/keyes.jpg

Lois
12-12-2007, 12:19 PM
What 'debate today'? Is there a debate today? When? Where?

Micahyah
12-12-2007, 12:19 PM
Keyes won't hurt Huckabee because he has 0% chance of winning and Christians in Iowa know that.

All he is doing is sucking more time from Ron Paul. This sucks.

SIXSHOOTER13
12-12-2007, 12:20 PM
I Bet Alan Keys Gets More Questions Than Ron Paul? Same Old Suposed Debates. I Never Get News From The Boob Tube!!

Mithridates
12-12-2007, 12:22 PM
He is not even actively campaigning for President. I think one of the key factors for determining whether a candidate should be included in the deabates is whether they are even trying. Look at Tancredo and Hunter. After all these months they haven't gained any ground and neither of them have any money. Why are they even there?

It's good to remember though that more candidates can be a good thing in the long term, some four, eight, twelve years later. Some are certainly going to be annoying and will simply take up space, but having more candidates could set a precedent for the next time that could make the difference between a potentially really good candidate deciding to run or not.

shrapnel88
12-12-2007, 12:25 PM
http://www.inthesetimes.com/images/28/21/keyes.jpg

that pic is just begging to be photoshopped.

SovereignMN
12-12-2007, 12:30 PM
Having Keyes in the debate could be a good thing OR bad thing for Dr. Paul. It remains to be seen.

McDermit
12-12-2007, 12:31 PM
he's still running?

kylejack
12-12-2007, 12:36 PM
I think this is the last debate before Iowa and NH vote.

sirachman
12-12-2007, 12:40 PM
They are doing this so they have the excuse to only give Ron paul like 30 seconds the whole time saying they need time for keyes too who they will also shaft but instead of giving ron 3 minutes like the youtube debate they will split that between ron and keyes so he will get 1.5 minutes total or less.

Goldwater Conservative
12-12-2007, 12:44 PM
I have a hard time saying that he doesn't deserve being at the debate being a Ron Paul supporter who has seen others try to exclude Paul.

Well, there are dozens more candidates than Alan Keyes and John Cox that aren't invited to the debates. I think at least one reasonable requirement is having held elected office, which Keyes and Cox haven't.

Primbs
12-12-2007, 12:46 PM
Keyes could get 100 to 1000 votes in the Iowa caucus. He has run before. I think he does takes votes away from Huckabee. At this point many of the minor candidate may make the difference between who gets first, second, third, fourth and fifth in the Iowa caucus.

The margins may be very small between the top vote getter and the fifth place finisher.

SovereignMN
12-12-2007, 12:48 PM
Well, there are dozens more candidates than Alan Keyes and John Cox that aren't invited to the debates. I think at least one reasonable requirement is having held elected office, which Keyes and Cox haven't.

I don't like that requirement. That would have excluded Steve Forbes in 2000, Pat Buchanan and Steve Forbes in 1996, Pat Buchanan in 1992, Pat Robertson in 1988.

Goldwater Conservative
12-12-2007, 01:10 PM
I don't like that requirement. That would have excluded Steve Forbes in 2000, Pat Buchanan and Steve Forbes in 1996, Pat Buchanan in 1992, Pat Robertson in 1988.

Well, I didn't say I necessarily wanted it, just that it was reasonable. When you have this many candidates, I think drawing the line somewhere makes sense. If there were two or three fewer candidates running I'd say we should loosen the requirements.