ACHTUNG: This is not a “fair and balanced” story. It is an editorial by the editor.
I hereby urge America’s two major p
olitical parties to include both the Libertarian and Green Party presidential nominees in the anticipated debates this fall.
I sincerely doubt either party will agree to such an impertinent request, so part two is to ask the major television networks if any would be willing to have a one-on-one debate between Libertarian candidates Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein. This second request is made in the name of somehow obtaining quality political discourse and letting the American people examine alternatives.
It should be no secret to anyone there has been massive disappointment in having to choose between Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton for our next president. Both have more negative qualities than the personality of Bill O’Reilly.
I hear tell these two have the highest negative poll numbers of any who have been nominated for president since such statistics were tracked. Furthermore, it has been reported that 26% of voters identify themselves as Republicans, 29% as Democrats and 42% as Independents.
So it is past time to remove the barriers and invite Johnson and Stein to speak with Clinton and Trump about the most important issues of the day.
As I have written in this space earlier this year, I have come to believe our two-party system has deteriorated over the years. Too many people have come to believe our choice is between tweedledum and tweedledee.
And too much of the primary season was filled with vitriol, name-calling, poor attempts at public relations gotchas and finally demonstrating to too many of us that the two major parties no longer can effectively deal with issues that actually are important. We have sunk into the abyss of spectacle that’s long on style and short on substance.
Republicans and Democrats used their clout to keep George Wallace out of the debates in 1968, to keep John Anderson out in 1980 and Ralph Nader in 2000. They only let in Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996 because he was polling at 19%. Granted, Johnson and Stein have been polling around 10%, but together they have picked up support from almost one-fifth of the electorate.
I feel like we’re not really getting a choice here. It’s a lot like having to choose between Coke and Pepsi while ignoring 7Up or Dr. Pepper. It’s like having only a choice between Bud and Miller without a chance to check out craft brews. It’s like having to choose between Tide and Gain laundry detergent without testing what Arm & Hammer can do.
So I submit that indeed the game is rigged by monied interests that offer us a choice between only two to lead the free world for the next four years. The stakes are too high to overlook somebody with alternative ideas. Though I don’t know all that much about Stein and Johnson, what I have learned is intriguing enough to prompt me to call for letting them speak in the big circus arena we’ve come to accept as the presidential election.
I urge fellow citizens to put pressure on the TV networks to let us hear from voice that have been quieted too long. Maybe one or both of them could put a little excitement into an otherwise drab and clownish campaign.
