Since I linked below to the Des Moines Register's announcement of their decision to consider Tancredo, for example, but not Ron Paul, in their series of issue-by-issue endorsements, here is the email I sent to them:
Ron Paul "didn't make the cut" to even be in the running for the Register's endorsement. That would be unfortunate if he is, in fact, the best candidate.
I must say I'm disappointed and surprised that you would choose to exclude Ron Paul--the only GOP candidate who voted against "the mistaken invasion of Iraq" before it commenced and who is campaigning against it. Nobody forced the Register's editorial board to design a rule that excludes the candidate who is the likely top fund-raiser this quarter, who has been climbing in state and national polls, who has won 24 (non-online) straw polls (including yesterday's by the Republican Party of Virginia), and who has views markedly different from the pack on at least four of the eight issues you outlined. Nobody forced you to include, instead, a candidate who is stagnant and next to last in the polls, who blends in with the mean candidate's views, and who has no significant financial support nor grassroots enthusiasm.
You write that "the deciding factor was time spent in Iowa."
This might be helpful for maintaining Iowa's standing as an early proving ground, but is it the most important basis for deciding who will be in a position to defend or degrade our Constitution? Who will be able to bomb--or not bomb--our "enemy" du jour?
I hope that you will reconsider these unfortunately contorted criteria, and the resulting homogeneous set of candidates, in time to give due consideration to who is credibly advocating the most important principles of our time.