Having agreed with Ed Morrissey one post below, let me strenuously disagree with his desire to keep Duncan Hunter on the debate stage:
Those objective standards leave Duncan Hunter off the stage, which is really a shame. Hunter provides a clear, rational conservative voice in these events. Fox used a fair standard for inclusion this time; three states have now held caucuses or primaries, and it’s significantly less whimsical than their last attempt. However, I’d still like to see Hunter in the mix, especially given the inclusion of Ron Paul.
Somehow Ed has lost sight of the purpose of these debates: They’re for people seriously running for president. Duncan Hunter is not going to be president. He’s polling at one percent. He’s done. Unlike Tom Tancredo, who did yeoman’s work keeping folks honest on immigration, then dropped out when things got serious, Hunter makes no real contribution. He isn’t significantly more serious about defense than the other, real, candidates.
Hunter started this process about even with Gomer in the polls. Like it or not, people voted for Gomer, not Hunter. Hunter should be out.
Ron Paul is a special case. Yes, he will consistently draw ten percent in GOP primaries. But he will never draw more than ten percent, especially after the revelation of his newsletter contents (the main subject of Ed’s post).
This is a unique circumstance in my lifetime, a field so fractured that any one of four (McCain, Gomer, Romney, Giuliani) or perhaps five (Thompson) candidates can win the nomination. We need to hear from them, pin them down, not hear from the also-rans.
