Brilliant idea from DailyPaul regarding a Paul debate:

[Thane Eichenauer]

Opponent: Any Republican Presidential candidate (Gary Johnson would be the least interesting due to the number of issues they agree on but they could still slug it out on abortion, the so-called Fair Tax or legalizing heroin.
Debate style: Lincoln-Douglas (no moderator) - alternately have Ezra Klein moderate à la KrugmanDebate.com
Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich did it on C-SPAN.

http://www.c-span.org/Events/Cain-Gingrich-Debate-Lincoln-Douglas-Style/10737425199/

 

[jcarcinogen]

Freedomwatch as a debate venue does nothing. The audience that watches freedom watch is aware of Ron Paul.

 

[idiom]

Gingrinch can't escape. He set a trap for himself. But it would need someone like John Stewart moderating to have any credibility. How screwed up is the world?

 

[GreenBulldog]

Something like the krugmandebate.com where donated money will go to a food bank?

Imagine a million dollars going to a food bank in Iowa or one of the important states if Romney will go one-on-one with Ron. It'll be a lose-lose for Romney...unless he can beat Ron in a debate (Yeah, right!)

 

[Paulistinian]

Freedomwatch as a debate venue does nothing. The audience that watches freedom watch is aware of Ron Paul.

True, but if Gingrich is the opponent, you better believe all the programs on the Fox News network will be talking about it and showing clips. Judge's show runs opposite O'Reilly, so the viewers we need to reach are O'Reilly viewers... so, include Gingrich or Perry as the challenger to Ron and it is guaranteed that the Freedom Watch Debate will be the news story cycled through all the Fox News broadcasts for that entire week.

 

[SwordOfLiberty+4]

I think Gingrich is the easiest target. The key to exposure would be the moderator. Where has Sarah Palin been? Hasn't she recently semi-endorsed some of Paul's foreign policy? The media would be all over it: "What is Sarah up to?"

Sarah: "The debates this election cycle have been dismal. We are going to have a real fair debate and get straight to the problems... blah blah..."

 

[SwordOfLiberty+4]

You mention Bill O'Reilly... how about Paul debate O'Reilly (with Juan Williams as moderator?)... Bill would never.

 

[Paulistinian]

You mention Bill O'Reilly... how about Paul debate O'Reilly (with Juan Williams as moderator?)... Bill would never.

Bill "Do It Live" O'Reilly would never agree to this... but I am certain the next day he would play clips of the Freedom Watch Debate and discuss it with his favorite douchebag Dick Morris.

 

[SwordOfLiberty+4]

Bill "Do It Live" O'Reilly would never agree to this...

At first, I thought you were suggesting a live debate 'Do It Live' - took me a second... hahah.

 

[Eric21ND]

The best moderator would be Jack Cafferty.

 

[Eric21ND]

LOL. Alex just throws weird NWO stuff, but he lets his interviewees talk!

Alex Jones is such a terrible interviewer I can't even listen to his show when Dr. Paul is on. I usually devour every appearance or interview by Ron Paul, but with Alex I can't take it.

 

[Paulistinian]

Hey Eric that is a great idea! On DailyPaul they were thinking Freedom Watch for accessibility, but Cafferty is probably just as accessible. Cafferty would host a really excellent debate... Someone has to get the word out there to the campaign to contact Cafferty or The Judge and set up a 1on1 Paul debate... Who has the direct line to the campaign around here?

 

[Revolution9]

I guess the Judge could host it on his show with a guest moderator? I just assumed its faster and easier to just use his show as the vehicle for this debate... it could be whipped together real quick.

Guest moderator->Jon Stewart. This would give a good balance to viewers and draw some of Stewarts viewers over. Other FOX viewers may realize Stewart is not a liberal monster just because he bashed a whole lot of Bush. He has been smacking around Obama pretty good too. Let Huntsman come, Bachman, Gingrich. Whomever, but don't diss them if they don't come.

Rev9

 

[ShaneEnochs]

None of the candidates would ever agree to a 1on1 debate with Paul. It's purely fantasy. That should be obvious.

All he can do is keep doing what he's doing. Lots of TV/radio interviews, articles, advertising, etc.

Come on. As arrogant as Gingrich is, you don't think he would accept the challenge?

 

[Danemicus]

Brilliant idea. The only bit I'd disagree with is not considering Cain on the basis of a silly assumption that he's already all but down. He has been abysmal in the debates and flip-flopping constantly, but it's not turning people off him. Certainly not at this rapid rate that some people think. Just read the comments of some Cain articles and you'll see that the level of blind support he has is astounding.

A 1on1 with any of the front-runners would be brilliant. If they all declined though, how about inviting Bachmann, Huntsman and Santorum for a 4-way debate? MSM creates the illusion that Ron Paul is on par with them, so it would only be us who see it as "punching down". Nevertheless, give them a total of 10+ minutes speaking time alongside each other and any fool would see that Ron is in a very different league to these three. By default, Ron Paul would look every bit the front-runner he is. As an added bonus, perhaps there's a chance that Bachmann/Huntsman/Santorum would be grateful enough to be at least slightly more likely to endorse Ron when they eventually drop out?

 

[Paulistinian]

Brilliant idea. The only bit I'd disagree with is not considering Cain on the basis of a silly assumption that he's already all but down. He has been abysmal in the debates and flip-flopping constantly, but it's not turning people off him. Certainly not at this rapid rate that some people think. Just read the comments of some Cain articles and you'll see that the level of blind support he has is astounding.

A 1on1 with any of the front-runners would be brilliant. If they all declined though, how about inviting Bachmann, Huntsman and Santorum for a 4-way debate? MSM creates the illusion that Ron Paul is on par with them, so it would only be us who see it as "punching down". Nevertheless, give each of them 10+ minutes speaking time alongside each and any fool would see that Ron is in a very different league to these three. By default, Paul would look every bit the front-runner. As an added bonus, perhaps there's a chance that Bachmann/Huntsman/Santorum would be grateful enough to be at least slightly more likely to endorse Ron when they eventually drop out?

Yup... great ideas... if Perry/Romney/Gingrich or even Cain refused, Bachmann Huntsman and Santorum certainly would not.

 

[Krugerrand]

I think Ron Paul should have shown up to the debate in an orange gitmo jumpsuit.