Quantcast

Why Do We Have Only Democrats And Republicans At The Debates?

Little Angel 2012/10/21 16:22:33
I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
I believe in the two Party System....
I believe the two Party System is unconstitutional...
Undecided
None of the above
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala were arrested for trying to enter the Hofstra University debate. If this was a debate of the candidates for President then why aren't all the eligible candidates allowed to debate? It seems our Government only wants us to hear the voices of the two Political Parties who have made such a mess of our Country.

Isn't it about time that America is allowed to have a Country Governed by the people and for the people? Since we are supposed to have freedom of speech, wouldn't it make since to have all candidates be in the debates?

http://news.yahoo.com/green-party-candidates-arrested-preside...

http://news.yahoo.com/green-party-jill-stein-takes-presidenti...

Go to these websites to learn more about this and about the Green Party.

httpnews yahoo comgreen-party-candidates-arrested-preside httpnews yahoo comgreen-party-jill-stein-takes-presidenti websites learn green party
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Dan ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2012/10/21 17:42:01 (edited)
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    Dan ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    +4
    The rules are set up to keep third party candidates out. First, the bar is set so high only the two parties can attend. Second, the media only speaks of the two parties (if they bring in a 3rd or independent its very rare). Third, if someone comes close to or manages to reach the high standards, the two parties run scared and change the rules.



    In short, the system is designed to not only disallow anyone else, but also they change the rules when their monopoly is threatened.



    P.S. How do you get 15% if you arent allowed on the polls?

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Guru_T_Firefly 2012/11/11 21:42:21
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    Guru_T_Firefly
    +1
    Well, I think that most people would say it's because we've been mostly a two-party nation for the last hundred years or so, but I don't think that's completely honest or even accurate. The simpler explanation could be because peer influence plays such a large part in the development of political opinions and complacent, low-information voters regularly resist new perspectives. Having to follow multiple candidate's arguments could easily result in those individuals becoming even more confused than they already were.
  • TuringsChild 2012/11/11 21:36:12
    None of the above
    TuringsChild
    There is a reason that the 2 Party system developed. It IS Constitutional. While it would be nice to have all candidates at every debate, there are practical realities that will make that difficult. The real problem is that the 2 Parties have both been corrupted and taken over by monied interests - the SAME monied interests who control the Major Media. Until THOSE Plutocratic interests are controlled, one way or another, no one will be safe.
  • Peewee ~PWCM~ 2012/10/31 15:54:41
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    Peewee ~PWCM~
    +1
    They are presidential candidates too.
  • Devil Woman 2012/10/28 17:48:07
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    Devil Woman
    +1
    I would really like to hear what the other candidates from third Parties have to say. I have had enough of the lies and name calling from the Democrats and Republicans.
  • Gracie - Proud Conservative 2012/10/26 03:25:15
    None of the above
    Gracie - Proud Conservative
    We have had the third party involved when they had a chance. Ross Perot was allowed in the debates. You can't have anyone who wants to be in it, you'd never hear anything important. Like Roseann Barr is on my ballot in Florida, should she have been in the Presidential debates? I think NOT!
  • Cuthbert Allsgood 2012/10/24 19:30:26
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    Cuthbert Allsgood
    +1
    The limits imposed as to whether or not you will get an invite are too harsh and only create a self fulfilling prophecy of dems or pubs.

    The real reason that no one else is invited to the debates is because the two ruling parties don't want the general populace to hear the ideas from the 3rd parties.

    As it stands now, I don't see any real reason why Jill Stein and Gary Johnson weren't invited to the debate other than artificially created rules to specifically exclude them and prevent them from possibly gaining converts.
  • Andrew 2012/10/22 22:39:19
    Undecided
    Andrew
    I think it's because these are the two strongest political parties.
  • Racefish 2012/10/22 17:16:46
    None of the above
    Racefish
    If the media had its way, only the Democrat would be there.
  • ray 2012/10/22 15:46:16
    None of the above
    ray
    the debate is are an Invitational event , the debate sponsors decide who they would like to hear from .

    Sorry Jill and Gary , you weren't invited to the party . Line up you own sponsors and have a debate with all the other parties and candidates .

    Yes, you have freedom of speech, Buy your own advertising time and speak away.
    Nobody is obligated to provide or pay for your pleasure .
  • Philo® ~PWCM~JLA ✩ 2012/10/22 09:01:12
    None of the above
    Philo® ~PWCM~JLA ✩
    +1
    My understanding is that these debates are run by private organizations. They can invite or exclude who they wish, for any reason they wish.
  • AGPhillbin 2012/10/22 03:58:18
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    AGPhillbin
    The reasons that third parties are not allowed in the debates is because the two "parties" set the debate conditions, especially regarding who may be in them. The media also ignores third parties, and even attempts to ignore "major party" candidates like Ron Paul because our ruling economic/political/social elite (of which ALL our media executives, whether Fox, CNN, or MSNBC, are a part) considers them beyond the pale, and wants us to do so as well, and thus creates the illusion of their "unviability" by ignoring them as much as possible. The circular media logic goes like this: 1) candidate X is unviable, therefore 2) we (the media) will ignore candidate X, thus insuring that 3) candidate X is unviable.
  • JimTheGeek 2012/10/22 03:34:02
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    JimTheGeek
    +1
    And lets have proportional representative government as well.
  • TheR 2012/10/22 00:38:29
    None of the above
    TheR
    wake up dear, they are the same. It's just a show to make you think you have a choice, and that your vote counts. They don't count votes. There are too many to count in deciding who wins the election in such a short time. The Media knows before who will win. Just like they did in stealing the election for GW.
  • Hippygirl 2012/10/21 22:02:05
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    Hippygirl
    +2
    I did not know who jill stein was until I took that quiz and found out she is the candidate I side with in most issues. I think the reason they won't let them in is they are scared they will loose if people hear what they say. And I did not know about them being arrested I think that may have earned her my vote. I was leaning that way already.
  • Little ... Hippygirl 2012/10/22 23:16:24
    Little Angel
    I agree! A lot of my friends have decided to vote for her and some of them weren't going to vote until I told them all about the Green Party. They are even passing out fliers in their States.
  • No nonsense NanC...don't BS... 2012/10/21 20:25:56
    Undecided
    No nonsense NanC...don't BS me!
    +1
    They are the only viable candidates.............. no matter what you might think!
  • AGPhillbin No nons... 2012/10/22 03:38:54
    AGPhillbin
    According to who? The debate commission? The media? Republiscums and Democroaches? If they got the same press, and at the very least, a spot at the debates, they might BECOME viable. Their "non-viability" is simply the result of a self-fulfilling media prophesy, nothing more.
  • Sister Jean 2012/10/21 20:11:51
    Undecided
    Sister Jean
    +1
    good question
  • Illjwamh 2012/10/21 19:48:46
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    Illjwamh
    +2
    All viable, registered candidates, anyway. But yes, limiting everything to D and R is incredibly restrictive, and it is perpetuated by a media culture that acts like that's all there is, to the point where most people simply accept that as the truth.
  • seattleman 2012/10/21 19:45:17
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    seattleman
    +3
    I support Jill Stein for president. I am proud of her willingness to face arrest in order to get her message out! Right on Jill Stein! I will chip in for the bail, and then cast my vote on Nov. 6.

    two wings of the same bird
  • \V/ 2012/10/21 19:16:52
  • Ol'Dave 2012/10/21 18:06:42
    None of the above
    Ol'Dave
    +1
    We are in a system that is MONOLOLIZED by two parties. There are ONLY two candidates that have a reasonable 'shot' at getting 270 electorial votes to become president. To allow more than 2 'reasonable chance' candidates the electorial college & the way a candidate gets them (winner take all or propotioned) needs to be changed!
  • Dagon 2012/10/21 18:04:09
  • JwonGalt 2012/10/21 17:48:05
    None of the above
    JwonGalt
    I learned this in class, but the two party system , the Pubs and Dems have it so that it is much more difficult for third party candidates to join debates, or even get on the ballot.

    Heck with the exception of Gary Johnson (simply because he is the presidential nominee for the Libertarian party, the third largest in the country)

    Jill Stein, and Cheri Honkala probably wont even make it on 10 percent of the ballots, and thats the unfortunate truth about our system.
  • Little ... JwonGalt 2012/10/21 18:04:11
    Little Angel
    +3
    Wrong! They also obtained the matching funds needed!
    wrong matching funds
  • JwonGalt Little ... 2012/10/21 18:10:30
    JwonGalt
    Well You proved me wrong on Jill Stein, congrats, still doesnt change the fact that the two party system we have in place makes it difficult for third party candidates to debate. Its been that way for decades

    Although I personally wouldnt vote for her , my choice is between Obama And Johnson
  • Gracie ... JwonGalt 2012/10/26 03:27:57
    Gracie - Proud Conservative
    That's hysterical because you couldn't pick two candidates further apart than Johnson and Obama!
  • JwonGalt Gracie ... 2012/10/26 03:47:58 (edited)
    JwonGalt
    +1
    Your wrong, Obama and Romney are further apart than Obama and Johnson lol. But you are right, it is hysterical. I am a registered independent who leans Libertarian.

    But considering that Johnson is socially liberal much like Barack Obama, than you can see why I would have him as a choice.

    Plus although Johnson is economically conservative, he has a plan, unlike Romney.

    Obama generally is completely liberal on all issues, I am not.

    But Alas, voting Johnson would be a waste of a vote.
  • Gracie ... JwonGalt 2012/10/26 04:00:51
    Gracie - Proud Conservative
    +1
    When I checked Johnson's stances, they were very conservative and similar to mine with one exception, and it was weird but I can't for the life of me remember what it was. Obama and I have absolutely nothing in common.

    I'm not sure why people believe Romney is shortchanged on economics, it's entirely untrue. The guy knows the economy and economics.
  • JwonGalt Gracie ... 2012/10/26 13:17:35
    JwonGalt
    Understandable.

    And its true he knows economics, but to many times he acknowledges himself as "small business". along with other big businesses. Plus he just isnt consistent overall, which is the main thing I look in a leader. Ryan has more consistency than Romney. And so does Obama, whether people want to admit it or not

    Thus, i choose the lesser of two evils. Its not like I can vote for Luke Skywalker.
  • Gracie ... JwonGalt 2012/10/26 16:41:28
    Gracie - Proud Conservative
    Obama is consistently bad, but even then he has been all over the place with his stances. It doesn't really matter if you vote for Johnson or Obama, either is a vote against Romney. I just feel better knowing that you wouldn't have voted for him anyway. I'm hoping that Johnson steals a lot of Obama votes.
  • Gracie ... Little ... 2012/10/26 03:27:09
    Gracie - Proud Conservative
    Because no one knows or cares who she is?
  • Dan ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2012/10/21 17:42:01 (edited)
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    Dan ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    +4
    The rules are set up to keep third party candidates out. First, the bar is set so high only the two parties can attend. Second, the media only speaks of the two parties (if they bring in a 3rd or independent its very rare). Third, if someone comes close to or manages to reach the high standards, the two parties run scared and change the rules.



    In short, the system is designed to not only disallow anyone else, but also they change the rules when their monopoly is threatened.



    P.S. How do you get 15% if you arent allowed on the polls?
  • S and S 2012/10/21 17:25:53
  • Striker 2012/10/21 17:14:35 (edited)
    I believe the two Party System is unconstitutional...
    Striker
    +2
    I really don't pretend to know if the 2-party system is constitutional and I don't give a rat's ass one way or the other. What I do care about is that the Dem-RINO monopoly has become a marxist travesty upon the citizens, who are left with no way of correcting this or any wrong. For a century or more, voting has become choosing the lesser evil, in a system in which majority rules and everyone else must bend over and eat their crap.

    If our human species is to survive and prosper, we must replace the system of Force with a system of Voluntary. That requires actually applying some of the rumored intellect which supposedly makes humans somehow superior to all other critters.
  • sandra 2012/10/21 17:06:17
    Undecided
    sandra
    +1
    Very Smart Question!I
    I don`t know either by I hope someone her does.
    Now I am curious.
  • Miss Fiona 2012/10/21 16:58:24
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    Miss Fiona
    +2
    I've seen Jill Stein speak, and her eloquence and knowledge on green energy do save her from people calling her a loon. I'm very conservative, but I have respect for politicians of other political persuasions. If a candidate has a large following (hundreds of thousands) from a third party, then that candidate should have representation.
    Why can't we have Merlin Miller of the American Third Position Party at the earlier debates or Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party? Americans who vote on principle need some freedom from the two-party system of Republicans and Democrats.
  • Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO 2012/10/21 16:49:34
    None of the above
    Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO
    +1
    its a closed system only open to those who are already compromised
  • RTHTGakaRoland 2012/10/21 16:41:08
    I believe the Debates should be open to all Candidates...
    RTHTGakaRoland
    +2
    And theoretically they are, since they invite any candidates that are polling well enough to be competitive.

    The alternative parties' problem is not that they are locked out it is that their platforms and candidates do not enjoy adequate voter support to be taken seriously.

    Alternative parties' focus on the POTUS race is nonsensical. If they are serious and viable they need to actually get some candidates elected in state and congressional races and build their bases.
  • Striker RTHTGak... 2012/10/21 17:18:47
    Striker
    +2
    Our Rulers insist that we have "chosen" to be Governed, the biggest lie ever.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/23 16:59:50

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals