tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post3808929501597620692..comments2024-03-26T05:22:08.256-04:00Comments on Frontloading HQ: Candidates who participate in unsanctioned debates should be penalized 30 percent of their delegatesJosh Putnamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06301836432446874997noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-46077651921366686322013-09-16T11:45:27.366-04:002013-09-16T11:45:27.366-04:00All valid questions.
As I said, this is just an ...All valid questions. <br /><br />As I said, this is just an idea at this point. One that I don't think is necessarily fully baked. It is a potential move rife with unintended consequences. Josh Putnamhttp://frontloading.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-23283997682806770252013-09-16T08:50:53.188-04:002013-09-16T08:50:53.188-04:00I don't see how this is remotely feasible. A ...I don't see how this is remotely feasible. A 30% penalty against the *national* delegate total that the candidate wins? I can't imagine that that would ever be enforced in a scenario where the penalty would have a determinative impact on who the nominee is. Can you imagine, for example, a 2008 Clinton vs. Obama style fight to the finish on the GOP side in 2016, a tight race between two candidates for the nomination? But the candidate who comes out on top in terms of votes and delegates ends up losing 30% of his delegates and losing the nomination, because he participated in an unsanctioned debate 9 months ago? How would the party leadership ever explain that one to the voters?<br /><br />OK, so how about sanctioning delegates in individual states where the debates took place? OK…..except, who really cares if your delegate total in New Hampshire is reduced by 30%? The state has very few delegates to begin with, and the election night story is about who won the most votes there, not the most delegates. If the sanction is counted against the state delegation that hosts the debate, what do you do about debates that don't involve state parties? Last time, we had some debates sponsored by entities like "Tea Party Express", not affiliated with any state party. How is the GOP state party in Michigan, for example, supposed to prevent some outside group like Tea Party Express from holding a debate in the state and inviting the presidential candidates?<br /><br />Or what about if groups like that decide to host "rogue" debates in places like Washington, DC. DC has no Republican party to speak of, and virtually no delegates. None of the candidates were ever going to bother campaigning within the district anyway, so what difference does it make if the district's delegates are sanctioned?astrojobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06643324377144064814noreply@blogger.com