noteworthy wrote:
] flynn23 wrote:
] ] So in your world, having a website is equal to being on a
] ] nationally televised debate appearing on all major
] television
] ] networks?
]
] Who said anything about equality? I didn't.

you implied that since they have the ability to appear on news channels and have their own websites extolling their views, that somehow this is the same as appearing in the televised debate. To most people that would be considered equality in the context you used.

] I don't know about yours, but on November 2, my presidential
] ballot is going to list a lot more than four candidates.

that's not the point. what good is a name on the ballot if you haven't had the same amount of exposure to that name's ideals?

] So, you'd admit Badnarik and Cobb to the Bush-Kerry debate.
] What about all the rest of the candidates? You're still
] excluding them. I guess some are more equal than others?

I'm not excluding anyone. I think that candidates should engage in more freeform debates like they used to in the early part of the 20th century.

If anything, I can support each party's nominee appearing. I'd even support a minimum polling number for support, say 5%, to qualify. But the current system is rigged to support a duopoly, which does nothing but a disservice to the public which it's supposed to reflect and represent.

Tell me honestly, if you were looking for a CEO candidate for your workplace, would you only want to have two choices to pick from? Two choices that are simply there because they've been able to raise the most money and bombard the employee base with rhetoric more?

RE: Badnarik & Cobb arrested at debate in STL