General Question

SquirrelEStuff's avatar

Do you think Ron Paul should have been excluded from the FOX forum tonight?

Asked by SquirrelEStuff (9171points) January 6th, 2008

He did better than Guiliani in Iowa. Should do better than him in NH. What logical reason does Fox have for doing this?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

11 Answers

ezraglenn's avatar

can you provide some background on this situation for those of us who are not as saavy with the current events?

breedmitch's avatar

Who’s Ron Paul?
Sorry, I just thought it’d be fun to see Chris’ head explode.

damianmann's avatar

Remember when Nader was excluded from th debates? Same thing. And, in my opinion, it will lead to the same results. People who support Ron will be furious and stick to him to the end. In some cases, it will bring new voters. It hurt the Democrats when they agreed to keep Nader out. But, they , at least, had the cushion of the fact that the Republicans kept him out as well. This one falls on the Republicans alone.

chaosrob's avatar

Any candidate that fails the “laugh test” for electability should stick to blogging and leave debate to serious contenders. Actually, I’m surprised Fred Thompson made the cut.

(Wanna see a head explode? There you go.)

damianmann's avatar

George Bush passed the last test? What’s the criteria? I mean, Ron Paul has shown, through raising money and media presence, that he’s serious about all this. It’s arguable that anyone takes him seriously. But, that’s not the point.

thegodfather's avatar

Simply put, Ron Paul is a libertarian (even though he is a registered Republican) and Fox News is staunchly Republican. They don’t include him not because of poll numbers but because he does not fit in well at all in the debate. Now, I don’t agree or disagree with Ron Paul, I’m pretty indifferent about him. But that to me seems the objective reason why Fox News execs would not invite RP.

damianmann's avatar

He, also, takes away from their message…which is pro-war…attack anyone who looks at us funny…stick our noses in people’s personal lives…type government. He’s not the message they want associated with the party….which is stupid on their part.

I’m not voting for the guy. But, he’s a refreshing voice coming from, of all places, the Texas Republicans.

Jaybee's avatar

The question should be why Fox should be aloud to exclude any candidate.

thegodfather's avatar


Well, it’s their channel and they own it, so they could make the most absurd decisions and that’s their right.

richardhenry's avatar

@thegodfather: In my opinion, any good national news channel should voluntarily abandon some rights; especially the right to opinion.

In the same way that a postman is duty bound to deliver mail to it’s intended destination safely and in one piece, the job of a news reporter is to deliver news and only news. They can have whatever opinion they will off camera, but to deliver opinion on camera defies the point of their job.

Excluding someone from a discussion as to evade their participation and angle on the matter – especially when their presence is highly relevant – is a very heavy form of bias.

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther