Slashdot Mirror
Networks Ignore 3rd Party Candidates
freedomfighter writes "The major media networks have been willfully ignoring alternative voices in this presidential election, focusing only on the two major parties, Democrat and Republican."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
I know that the Greens, the Libertarians, the Natural Law Party, the Constitution Party and others would like to have their voices individually heard and to be covered more in the news, what's the chance that they could collectively make "breaking up the Republican-Democrat duopoly" the #1 goal in their platforms? If they were *all* in agreement on this point I think there would be more notice given to all "third party" candidates.
There's nothing wrong with this.
This election's too important to putz around throwing protest votes at candidates who don't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning.
The fact is that each of the two parties is fairly flexible; the primary system allows for a wide range of ideas to be heard, and then they're narrowed down in the final vote. Anybody who's remotely close enough to the American mainstream to win the general election is going to fit reasonably well into one or the other of the two major parties.
People need to stop insisting that there's no variety within the major parties and that the only way to get "alternative voices" is through someone who's officially designated as part of a third party. That's just not true at all. People should stop complaining about the system and understand that most viewpoints can be expressed well from within it.
No, they don't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning, but if they change the debate then they've won. More importantly, if we were to hear any coverage about the third parties we would hear a message that MANY of us care a great deal about which neither of the "major" parties will dare discuss: immigration. Have you heard one word from Kerry or Bush about stopping the flood of ILLEGAL aliens across the southern border? Have you anything about rounding up all the ILLEGAL aliens currently here and throwing them out of the country? Laws don't mean a hell of a lot when neither the elected executives nor the do-nothing legislators completely ignore such a massively important problem like ILLEGAL immigration, one with huge negative economic and national security implications!
Perot might not have won in 1992, but he DID make Tweedle-dumb and Tweedle-dee talk about NAFTA... the same could happen now if the third parties were allowed to raise the issue of ILLEGAL immigrants, and that would be a win for democracy!
It's bad, but the US election system really is designed for people to chose between only 2 candidates. A third party has never won, so I think it's a good idea to keep third parties out of the debates. It would have a negative impact on the election, because a vote for a 3rd party is truly a wasted vote in the US, so voting for a 3rd party when you otherwise would have voted for a major party fundamentally alters the results. It's horrible that it's true, but it is.
What we really need is to completely overhaul the voting system and the electoral college. Until we move from regular majority voting, there is no realistic alternative to the two parties.
For more about why majority voting (and many voting systems) are fundamentally flawed, research Arrow's Impossibility Theorem. Approval voting is probably the simplest method to avoid Arrow's Paradox.
Oh please for the love of Pete, NO! I've said this many times on \. already too, but this is LJ post is the only recent one I can find. IRV is a provably flawed system, please stop advocating it! Pushing for voting reform is great, but we need Condorcet voting, not IRV.
And BTW, we need to keep the EC.
Constitutionally Correct
Let's see, that means it's the Federalists against the Whigs again? I thought TFA said it was Republicans and Democrats now.
A third party vote is not a wasted vote.
All we need to do is vote our mind and trust the system. Quit worrying about who everyone else is voting for - vote with the herd and you may as well stay home.
The Electoral College is set up to pick a winner, or if there is no majority, the House votes from the top three; if the House can't pick by majority, then the Senate votes on the top two. The system was set up for multiple parties.
sigs, as if you care.
I know Badnarik won't win. I'll vote for him anyway. Why? Because I am sick and tired of seeing corporate shill #1 versus corporate shill #2
Neither guy has the balls to balance the budget. Neither guy delivers on his promises. The government grows ever larger, civil liberties are being removed, ignored and trodden upon.
Our government IMO is like a crack addict on a binge. They'll keep taxing and spending or borrowing and spending just to keep their 'high'. No one seems to care we are in debt up to our eyeballs.... Yet we keep voting for these guys. Wake up people, someone is going to pay for the bread and circuses. It will either be you or your kids!
The only way this is going to change is if people start saying "Screw This!" and vote for ANYONE else, Nader, Badnarik,Peroultka, Cobb etc.
Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
No, threatening to secede from the Union if one candidate wins is extreme. And then doing so.
Breaking your opponent's spine by throwing your chair at him during a debate is extreme. Burning out your neighbors because they voted for the other candidate is extreme. Brawling on the Senate floor is perhaps a bit extreme.
Negative ads are trivial by comparison. Read enough history, and you learn that every generation thinks their politics are the worst/dirtiest/most locked-in/whatever-bad-thing-you-can-think-of. Almost all of them are wrong. This generation is thinking the same as last generation did. They're both wrong - the most extreme American politics happened in the period 1850-1865.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Do you really believe that government can do anything better than private industry? Do you really believe that not working for the government makes us slaves? What does that say about the first 4 or 5 months of the year that we work to pay taxes?
I don't mean to have this seem like a flame. I'll admit I'm pretty set in my ways against government all around, but really, it just doesn't compute for me. Government run programs mean waste, fraud(hell, look at out most recently nationalized industry -- TSA), etc.
If I was that drunk, I would have remembered it -- H. Simpson
2. Vote Fraud that makes Florida look like a day in kindergarden.
3. Riots immediately following the election results because...
4. Bush wins (due to 1 and 2).
Assuming I'm right, vote for your favorite 3rd party candidate.
Assuming I'm wrong, vote for your favorite 3rd party candidate.
I think it's pretty sad that freedom, justice, honesty, and hope have taken a more-or-less permanent vacation from this country. I didn't even want to post this, because of stupid fear of reprisal. But, what the hell. I hear the weather is nice in Gitmo.
I hope I'm wrong on all counts, but even a tree knows which way the wind blows.
"The networks are not interested in covering the major party platforms, why on earth would they have the slightest interest in parties with less than 1% of the vote?"
I don't know, but I do know that a search on CNN.com for 'nader' returns 530 results.
Yet a search for 'badnarik', who is on more ballots and got himself arrested outside a Presidential Debate, returns zero results. Doesn't that strike you as downright impossible if it were covering the election fairly?
Personally, I think that's a pretty critical issue right there. You have to wonder how bad things would be if there was no internet...
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Do you really believe that government can do anything better than private industry?
Given the examples of corruption, mismanagment, and downright short-sightedness on the part of private industry over the last 40 years, culminating in the current job market collapse, I think it would be VERY hard for government to do WORSE than private industry, which has shown itself to be an abject failure at absolutely anything long term.
Do you really believe that not working for the government makes us slaves?
I didn't say that- I said not working for ourselves, in very small corporations, will make us slaves- either to the government or to corporations- and it doesn't really matter which one because either way there won't be enough jobs available until we put taking care of people at a higher value than profit.
What does that say about the first 4 or 5 months of the year that we work to pay taxes?
A tax system driven by corporate interests is not from the government, it's from private industry. We don't have a real government in the United States anymore- just a puppet duopoly with it's strings being pulled by the MNCs. Most of that tax money is going right into the pockets of private industry- with a small kickback to the politicians.
don't mean to have this seem like a flame. I'll admit I'm pretty set in my ways against government all around, but really, it just doesn't compute for me. Government run programs mean waste, fraud(hell, look at out most recently nationalized industry -- TSA), etc.
The problem is- private industry isn't any better, at all.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Given the examples of corruption, mismanagment, and downright short-sightedness on the part of private industry over the last 40 years, culminating in the current job market collapse, I think it would be VERY hard for government to do WORSE than private industry, which has shown itself to be an abject failure at absolutely anything long term
Maybe you don't realize that government has had a direct hand in guiding and regulating the industries that have collapsed over the past 40 years? One might say that the collapse was inevitable with the upper echelons of both groups milking the entire system dry.
A tax system driven by corporate interests is not from the government, it's from private industry
Maybe you're unfamiliar with the term collusion?
The only answer is to minimize the government and let the people deal with the corporations. If our government would quit backing the corps with our own tax money, we'd have more resources available to stage an effective strike.
The problem is- private industry isn't any better, at all
Private industry can't take money from your paycheck by fiat.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
The people haven't had a say in how government is run for 40 years now
Excellent point. It is logical that, as government becomes larger and larger, the people still will have no say in government. The only solution is to minimize the government. We can't keep both big business and big government under close watch, but if we minimize one, we can watch the other.
to being of, by, and for the corporations
By minimizing government, we will take away their supporter and level the field for the rest of us.
that gave the corporations the extra money they needed to effectively reverse the power structure of the United States
The only way to return the power structure to the people is to minimize it. We cannot legislate corporations into good behavior. If we try we will only increase the size of government and the big corporations will once again find a way to buy it out.
If it wasn't for the corporations- we'd have that smaller government
If our government hadn't backed the banking industry in the Civil War (under the guise of freeing slaves) the people would have kept their authority over the government. Without government (and banking) backing to legitimize their pillaging, the corporations would have been kept in check through natural means by the workers and consumers. This is a 150 year old problem to which the only solution is: The 9th and 10th Amendments. Minimize government, keep it in its place. Let the people wrangle with the corporations on a fair field.
I'm for the separation of corporation and state- but it's not going to be accomplished by cutting the taxes of the corporations
I agree completely. It's also not going to be accomplished by giving the government more authority over the corporations. You've pointed out quite well that corporations and perfectly capable of buying control of the government. The only real solution is to put the government back in its proper minimal role and let the people wage their natural struggle against market driven greed on a fair field.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80