I don't really understand this part of the logic in the OP:
"When a question on the Iraq war is asked, Paul answers of course condemning it. The forum celebrates him and there are cheers from the debate hall. We don't really concentrate on the other candidates. They talk of 'patriotism', 'winning the war' and 'a responsibility which comes with being a superpower'. Guess which one Republican voters would prefer to vote for? Paul is preaching to the choir, and alienating himself."
I already voted according to the 5 questions selected as a result of the other debating going on anyway. I liked their potential for opening up cans of worms, people's eyes, etc.
"When a question on the Iraq war is asked, Paul answers of course condemning it. The forum celebrates him and there are cheers from the debate hall. We don't really concentrate on the other candidates. They talk of 'patriotism', 'winning the war' and 'a responsibility which comes with being a superpower'. Guess which one Republican voters would prefer to vote for? Paul is preaching to the choir, and alienating himself."
I already voted according to the 5 questions selected as a result of the other debating going on anyway. I liked their potential for opening up cans of worms, people's eyes, etc.