Have you ever sat in front of your TV, watching the Presidential Dabates going "well, this is s***". Yes? Well, here's why:
The Republican and Democratic parties teamed up (two sides of the same coin, as ever) and constructed the Commission of Presidential Debates.
This commission's job is to control the debates and make sure things don't get too hot for the candidates.
Big surprise, it's managed by Dem. and Rep. party-members themselves from both parties and is funded by corporations.
This commission is a puppet organisation serving the Democans and Republicrats. It makes sure nothing "bad" happens to either candidate and keeps minor parties out of the arena.
The CPD director said in 2002 "I think it's obvious that independent candidates mess things up". - This is a poor excuse for actively excluding minor parties and makes their anti-democratic agenda (by which i mean against democracy rather than against the party) fully visible.
Reps of both politicians sign a contract that puts into ink the agreement that it shall be nothing but an utterly uninteresting facade.
The 1996 contract included this phrase:
No follow-up questions by the moderator will be permitted, and no-cross-questions by the candidates or cross-conversation between the candidates will be allowed under these rules.
This contract phrasing was taken from a copy leaked by the non-profit group "Open Debates", which wants to put the debates under the control of a citizens' commission.
Until this happens, we can expect future Presidential Debates to have all the excitement of watching paint dry.
The Republican and Democratic parties teamed up (two sides of the same coin, as ever) and constructed the Commission of Presidential Debates.
This commission's job is to control the debates and make sure things don't get too hot for the candidates.
Big surprise, it's managed by Dem. and Rep. party-members themselves from both parties and is funded by corporations.
This commission is a puppet organisation serving the Democans and Republicrats. It makes sure nothing "bad" happens to either candidate and keeps minor parties out of the arena.
The CPD director said in 2002 "I think it's obvious that independent candidates mess things up". - This is a poor excuse for actively excluding minor parties and makes their anti-democratic agenda (by which i mean against democracy rather than against the party) fully visible.
Reps of both politicians sign a contract that puts into ink the agreement that it shall be nothing but an utterly uninteresting facade.
The 1996 contract included this phrase:
No follow-up questions by the moderator will be permitted, and no-cross-questions by the candidates or cross-conversation between the candidates will be allowed under these rules.
This contract phrasing was taken from a copy leaked by the non-profit group "Open Debates", which wants to put the debates under the control of a citizens' commission.
Until this happens, we can expect future Presidential Debates to have all the excitement of watching paint dry.