tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post880203143654937600..comments2024-03-26T05:22:08.256-04:00Comments on Frontloading HQ: On Defining "Similar Contest" and Candidate Boycott PledgesJosh Putnamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06301836432446874997noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-33099638177829405552011-10-13T20:03:21.358-04:002011-10-13T20:03:21.358-04:00Hmmm, I didn't think about that from Nevada...Hmmm, I didn't think about that from Nevada's perspective. My thought was that the candidates could hit them twice and threaten to boycott the debate as well. That's all about the timing for both sets of players.<br /><br />The candidates would have an easier time of boycotting the debate than the NVGOP banning them. I would imagine it would be more difficult for the party to change the debate rules without also gaining at least some consent from their media partners first. It isn't impossible but there are more fetters on their end than on the candidates'.Josh Putnamhttp://frontloading.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-60288431375385639452011-10-13T17:20:59.390-04:002011-10-13T17:20:59.390-04:00Obvious question for next week's debate in Nev...Obvious question for next week's debate in Nevada:<br /><br />"Will you compete in the January 14th caucuses? If not, then why are you here?"<br /><br />Of course, if the Nevada GOP was really bold, they could make pledging to compete in the caucus a requirement for appearing in the debate. Does Newt Gingrich value the sanctity of the New Hampshire primary more than he values getting face time on TV?astrojobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06643324377144064814noreply@blogger.com