Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
12. I watched the 3rd Party Debates with intense interest in 2012.
Wed Apr 15, 2015, 06:19 PM
Apr 2015

They actually debated ISSUES, and had to answer questions.
It was enlightening, refreshing, and energizing.
I was amazed at how many important issues were "left out" of the MSM "debates"
because BOTH Parties agreed 100%....nothing to debate there so America doesn't have to know!


Here is what the League of Women Voters said about the Presidential Debates when they refused to be a part of the circus anymore.

In 1987, the LWV withdrew from debate sponsorship, in protest of the major party candidates attempting to dictate nearly every aspect of how the debates were conducted. On October 2, 1988, the LWV's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a press release:

" The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."

According to the LWV, they pulled out because "the campaigns presented the League with their debate agreement on September 28, two weeks before the scheduled debate. The campaigns' agreement was negotiated 'behind closed doors' ... [with] 16 pages of conditions not subject to negotiation. Most objectionable to the League...were conditions in the agreement that gave the campaigns unprecedented control over the proceedings.... [including] control the selection of questioners, the composition of the audience, hall access for the press and other issues."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_debates



Let me repeat:
It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."


I would LOVE to see Hillary (or any other 3rd Way "Democrat&quot enter a legitimate DEBATE
with Rocky Anderson or Jill Stein.
They would tear her up and throw away the pieces.


Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2015 #1
If Hillary hasn't learned "Populism" yet, bvar22 Apr 2015 #2
Exactly. peacebird Apr 2015 #5
I doubt it, also..but a bit of hope if Populists can seize the moment.. KoKo Apr 2015 #7
Obama did all that "Populist" stuff while running, bvar22 Apr 2015 #8
We've got to find someone else to run to force a Primary.... KoKo Apr 2015 #10
I watched the 3rd Party Debates with intense interest in 2012. bvar22 Apr 2015 #12
Wow, that's wild. lovemydog Apr 2015 #13
Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats want them back. bvar22 Apr 2015 #14
Unreal. Thanks for the info. lovemydog Apr 2015 #15
They are working on challenging Voter I.D. Laws, Campaign Finance Disclosure and other issues.... KoKo Apr 2015 #20
I want to know the truth from each candidate. Enthusiast Apr 2015 #11
Indeed, Indeed, Indeed. 2banon Apr 2015 #21
...besides, there is lots of video from the 2008 campaign that demonstrates bvar22 Apr 2015 #23
that's really interesting flash from the past, so glad it's recorded. Did you see that vile look she 2banon Apr 2015 #24
No matter what, I do believe populists will do exactly that. Enough is Enough! mother earth Apr 2015 #3
Why? She will say anything to get elected, then return to her DLC, corporatist, warhawk roots peacebird Apr 2015 #4
My thoughts exactly. F4lconF16 Apr 2015 #9
"Populists shouldn't be quiet but should organize and yell louder" Phlem Apr 2015 #6
I prefer the speak softly but carry a big stick approach myself. lovemydog Apr 2015 #16
Agreed, Phlem Apr 2015 #17
Thank you for your kind response, Phlem. lovemydog Apr 2015 #18
Right now is the time to FIGHT BACK! NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #19
Yes! 2banon Apr 2015 #25
I totally agree. We may lose in the primary but we need to continue working to promote rhett o rick Apr 2015 #28
I don't get why we are supposed to be impressed by Hillary parroting Elizabeth's words. AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #22
YES! SPOT F**KING ON! EVERY WORD! 2banon Apr 2015 #26
Aw, shaddup Jackpine Radical Apr 2015 #27
Nothing weaker than sucking of the energy of the real article. NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #29
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Populist Reform of the Democratic Party»Turn Up the Heat! Hillar...»Reply #12