Paul's Decsion To Drop Out Of NKy Chamber Debate Sparks Controversy

He might be as much as 20 points ahead of Trey Grayson so Rand Paul's decision to drop out of a planned debate sponsored by the Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce needs to be examined in that light.  First, as any seasoned adviser will tell you, when you are that far ahead you need to keep your head down.

Debates rarely change minds unless someone makes a major gaffe.  Take for example the debate between Scott Brown and Martha Coakley.  During a debate with the republican candidate, Scott Brown, she was asked about the war in Afghanistan. She was asked how we can succeed there.  Her response?  She expressed doubt that we can succeed, adding that the Taliban and the terrorists are gone.

That flub up was credited with giving Scott Brown the edge which carried him on to victory.

Paul would likely not win enough votes in a debate with Grayson in his home town where his father's influence in the business community is still very much alive.  While some in the Chamber and among it's businesses are rightfully upset with Paul, it had to have been a careful calculation on his part to drop out.

First, why give Grayson any more attention?  Second, why risk being sucker punched by a cheap shot designed to get a news frenzy started, a tactic used by others polling poorly like Grayson in the past?  And third, why risk your lead in a debate when you can come and talk with that same group in a less adversarial setting anytime between now and election day, just by showing up at one of its many events.

For a first time candidate Paul's decision will certainly seem arrogant to many, and it might be to some extent.  But cold calculations sometimes result in decisions which upset a few, but have less of a down side than decisions which appeal to only a few yet expose you to the risk of losing the support of many more.

Comments

[Noah]

I have absolutely no reason at all to think Grayson would have cancelled an appearance for political reasons after he had committed to be there, where they had worked around his schedule, and where significant expense was incurred. No, Grayson would not have cancelled after making the commitment. You might ask how I am so confident, because I have known Trey Grayson for 9 years, have arranged several different meetings with him which he might have conveniently been unable to attend. He has never cancelled anything I've worked with him on for any reason nor have I ever heard of him doing this with anyone else I know.

[Frank]

So what you're saying is that Rand Paul is turning into just another politician right in front of us. I though he was different...

[polly pelvis]

Trey Grayson reminds me of a nose picker that I dated a few times in college.

I'm glad his daddy was rich; because, I could barely stand him otherwise.

[RandFan]

Noah is that kind of like how your candidate promised to fight till the very end, and is now at home for every game of the NCAA Tourney? (not to say I'm not jealous)

The fact of the matter is that all debates from here on out are cheap political shots. This is a time for the Republican Party to join together, not to attack one another.

Apparently there are some who are happy with the events of this past weekend. Either that or they are so egotistical that they would rather see such legislation continue than to concede to the fact they have lost and bloody up the Republican frontrunner before the general election.

[TCE]

Noah: If Grayson was where Rand is right now, he would be doing exactly the same thing. He would refuse to debate and coast to victory.

[Bernie Kunkel]

Rand Paul has accepted one debate in Paducah, two debates in Louisville, one debate in Northern KY, one debate in Eastern KY, one debate in Bowling Green, and one debate on KET as well as over 30 "debate-like" Lincoln day dinner appearances. It is Trey Grayson who has been avoiding the debates.

[John Jay]

Lying? Come on Noah, he CANCELED an engagement. That's all.

Sure, it was for political reasons, but surely you don't think Grayson would have attended a debate if he were ahead by 15 points at this stage of the game do you??? Do YOU?

[Noah]

No it's political calculation if you don't commit to be there. Once you commit and drop out it's called lying. Surely you know the difference.

[John Jay]

I think the chamber is over-all a pretty decent group. I know many businessmen who are members, and while they may not be "Howard Roarks"(apparently to the dismay of some), they are decent and hardworking Americans who love their country and wish to limited the growth and scope of government.

That being said, I completely agree with yout analysis of this latest flareup between the campaigns. If anyone thinks Grayson would be attending debates with Paul if Paul were 15 points behind is smoking something other than KY's finest tobacco. Paul has realized that this isn't a philosophical discussion, this is a hard-nosed camapign to May 18th. That being taken into account, his determination to withdraw is absolutely understandable.

Some may say he's Machiavellian, but in truth, he's just adopting the best road-map to the electoral triumph of his brand of conservatism.

[Mel]

I don't think you have a very good grasp of the Paul revolution Marcus especially when you talk of national defense and neoconservatives.

[Proud Conservative]

My local chamber is filled with venomous socialists only interested in more federal funding! The Chamber used to be pro-capitalists once upon a time and perhaps some still are.