Independent President candidate, Ralph Nader, wrote a letter today asking the debate commission if they would allow him to at least be in the audience and access the press and offer his responses to the questions that will be asked. The Commission on Presidential Debates is a corrupt and biased establishment that is owned and operated by the Democratic and Republican parties and has consistently raised the poll requirement used to qualify for a spot on the debate. Furthermore, the poll that the commission has used in the past, Gallup, doesn’t include Ralph Nader or any of the other third parties in their questions, instead they choose to generalize and just ask whether the person is going to vote for someone else.
What is the media’s logical argument for blacking out the third parties from any major coverage? Could it be that their motives are monetary? Could it be because the third parties candidates are publicly against corporations? If this is true then the public broadcasting would offer air time, but they don’t. Could it be that the public air waves are biased as well? I urge you all to ask yourselves these questions.
When we retire our opposition and accept the Democratic and Republican candidates, we are effectively destroying our democracy. These smaller voices that come from the third party candidates speak on behalf of the majority of Americans. They are asking for single payer health care, an end to the wars, getting the budget under control, and holding Wall street accountable. Yet, we don’t here anything from them. Yet our news doesn’t cover them. Yet they don’t win.
There is a good example behind the bias of American media it it goes by the name of Ron Paul. I recommend that you go to Google Trends and see the comparison between Internet searches for Ron Paul and his mainstream news coverage. The difference is outstanding. Had the news media covered Ron Paul equally to the demand of the public, then we could very well have Paul for the Republican nominee. Now that would be someone worth our vote.
Despite that fact the Ralph Nader isn’t going to win in 2008, I am convinced that what he is doing is for the betterment of our democracy. If things are ever going to get better, then we need to open the debates and allow these third parties to have a voice. The duopoly of government is the cancer of our society. As the third parties push harder and achieve more and more votes and get on more and more ballots, they are making it easier for a third party to one day be in the White House. Then and only then, my dear Obama supporters, will we really have change.
Nader is one of those people who talks to much common sense to be allowed anywhere near politics.
The two parties have worked very hard for their duopoly and they are not about to give it to Nader.
Naomi spells it quite well.
Thanks for the comment and the link but I already have seen that video. In fact, I have the same video posted in the entry for Oct. 3rd. That being said, Naomi is a hero.
Thanks again for reading and commenting,
John
Truly, our democracy is destroyed, and it’s facade is supported by our government in league with our corporations. You need not look for evidence for this, it’s clear, but if you ask, I will provide. The biggest question is how deep is this treachery?
I believe having 3rd party candidates in T.V. debates is ridiculous thing to do. Everyone in America has heard of Ron Paul and Ralph Nader. The problem is that the majority of Americans immediately dismiss them because we all know they’re not going to win. There is various reasons they’re not going to win, too many to enumerate here. Possibly the biggest reason is because the corporate controlled news never gives them attention, and when they do, it’s negative attention. We cannot change corporate controlled news, nor can we control what these corporations want on TV, and as long as both sides of the “linear spectrum” still work for corporations (as evident), you will never, ever see viable 3rd party candidates.
Now, suppose Ron Paul, in all his amazing abilities, was actually successful with his viral campaign marketing abilities, and he did receive the majority of the vote, would he be in office? Look no further than the elections of 2000 for your answer. Thomas Jefferson, “If once elected, and at a second or third election outvoted by one or two votes, he will pretend false votes, foul play, hold possession of the reins of government.”
I am much more concerned with how to restore democracy, more than I am trying to participate in this…thing…what ever the fuck type of government we have.
Oh hey! Check out this video, “Unequal Democracy” …the sound kinda sucks though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJHrw8tO0U8
I <3 Paul Krugman
Make good choices.