Campaign to Stop Corruption in the Presidential Debates

Forums: Politics, Political, American Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I wanted to ask you to join a recently launched letter writing campaign designed to stop corruption in the Presidential debates. Go to Independent Votingfor more info.

In the last five months, a number of nationally prominent journalists have been making the case for a well-financed, mainstream independent candidate to run for president in 2008. Wall Street Journal points to an emerging gap between the Washington elite of both parties and ordinary Americans, proposing that only an independent movement can bridge that gap.

These opinion-makers have become convinced that only independent political leaders and movements can take the country beyond the current partisan stalemate.

No barrier is more damaging and regressive than the current design of the nationally televised presidential debatesIndependent Votingto sign the pledge (to write a letter) and find out more. You can find a sample letter there too. Send me a copy of your letter, [email][email protected][/email].
Thanks, Gwen

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,243 • Replies: 7

No top replies

@gwenmand cv,

I checked out the site. I failed to find any thing that qualified as corruption.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Can you say more about what you mean? The corruption of the debate process seems pretty clear cut to me, but it would be helpful to hear how you see it.

Gwen

0 Replies

@gwenmand cv,

Corruption to me means illegal operations. There is nothing illegal about what they are doing.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Drnaline;5098 wrote:

Corruption to me means illegal operations. There is nothing illegal about what they are doing.

Well, actually an argument can be (and has been made) that the CPD is an illegal entity. It receives corporation contributions for being non-partisan when in fact it is controlled by the chairs of the DP and RP. Of course, given how partisan the whole set-up is, from the FEC down to the legislature, there's no shot at proving that (hence, the word political corruption - "the use of political power dishonestly") which is why we are asking the nation's prominent opinionmakers (as well as local columnists and other movers and shakers) to make this an issue. You can't just talk about possibilities (the possibility of an independent running) without engaging the legal and political realities which are set up to keep that from being a reality.

Gwen
Independent Voting

0 Replies

@gwenmand cv,

What is wrong with a private company accepting contributions? There terminoligy reads to me that the "nonpartisan" is in reference to being run by two opposing partys. That by nature does not entitle some one looking in from the outside to demand equal time when they never invested equal time in the venture.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Drnaline;5134 wrote:

What is wrong with a private company accepting contributions? There terminoligy reads to me that the "nonpartisan" is in reference to being run by two opposing partys. That by nature does not entitle some one looking in from the outside to demand equal time when they never invested equal time in the venture.

Except the private company you are talking about happens to be the organization which gives the country an opportunity to hear our candidates, it's not a family enterprise. Being run by two parties means bi-partisan, not non-partisan (and lets not even get into the fact that choosing between the two is not much of a choice at all). A plurality of voters (more than Dems and Repubs) choose not to align themselves with either parties, so to say that we are on the outside looking in, might be accurate, but that doesn't justify it.

1 Reply

@gwenmand cv,

gwenmand;5139 wrote:

Except the private company you are talking about happens to be the organization which gives the country an opportunity to hear our candidates, it's not a family enterprise. Being run by two parties means bi-partisan, not non-partisan (and lets not even get into the fact that choosing between the two is not much of a choice at all). A plurality of voters (more than Dems and Repubs) choose not to align themselves with either parties, so to say that we are on the outside looking in, might be accurate, but that doesn't justify it.

Quote:

Except the private company you are talking about happens to be the organization which gives the country an opportunity to hear our candidates, it's not a family enterprise.

Most private company's are selling something. That is the nature of business. So if it were family run you would be alright with it?

Quote:

Being run by two parties means bi-partisan, not non-partisan (and lets not even get into the fact that choosing between the two is not much of a choice at all).

So what do you consider yourself, nonpartisan? Could you do there job without being partisan? Who is forcing you to choose between the two?

Quote:

A plurality of voters (more than Dems and Repubs) choose not to align themselves with either parties, so to say that we are on the outside looking in, might be accurate, but that doesn't justify it.

There is more then just two partys. They don't have to justify anything to any one from a private business standpoint. Corporations can give what ever it's share holders allow. Whether they are partisan or non. I think what offends you is there nonprofit status?

0 Replies

Campaign to Stop Corruption in the Presidential Debates

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know