The "Debates"

So, I watched the second installment of the Presidential "debates" last night. I thought Obama did well against McCain, who always comes off looking like somebody's crotchety old grandpa. "Get off my lawn, you damned kids!" I think Obama speaks well, I think he actually stops and thinks about his answers, and I think he has a good vision for the country, one that I personally resonate with. I don't think he'll get to do any of those things, because of the financial mess we're in right now, but I like concept of "prioritizing" your nations' values. If he accomplishes what he'd like to do with green/clean energy, that would be great.

But my big bitch about the so-called debates is the fact that there are several other people running for President right now, and they are routinely ignored by the media and shut out from the process. What is the harm in letting them answer the questions, too? Find out what Nader has to say about green policies. Find out what Ron Paul thinks about the economic situation right now. Ask the Constitutional Party guy why he's such a Xian nutter. Those people have ideas, and we never get to hear them in the debate forum. That should change.

If the big party candidates actually had to account for these other voices, there would be a lot less focusing on sound byte politics ("drill, baby, drill") and more actual attempts at distinguishing themselves through policy. Imagine how much more articulate you'd have to be about green energy with Ralph Nader standing there looking at you. Imagine trying to make the case for more regulation with Ron Paul ready to jump at it. Imagine all the weird looks you'd get from the Constitutional Party guy Chuck Baldwin. There would be more people to call you on your crap, making you rethink what you're getting ready to say.

The main reason third party voices need to be heard is because they often shift the grounds of politics. Abolitionism, women's votes, civil rights, all that stuff started out as third party platforms. Eventually, the parties in power had to account for it because of all the awareness raising that had happened, and so the stream of politics shifted in its bed. That's the value of alternative voices--they push you past the stiff boundaries drawn by those in power. Environmental issues used to be considered nutty (some people still think that way, but *they* are the nutty ones now). But the Greens pushed on, and now it's a mainstream issue. Think of how many times Obama and McCain talked about green technology, reducing emissions, the kinds of stuff Nader et. al bitched about for years. It's finally mainstream, and they're the ones who've pushed it into the spotlight. That's the value in third parties--they force those in power to think about issues that might not matter to them otherwise.

I know that coalition governments or governments with multi-party systems are pains in the ass when it comes to deciding things or fighting for power. But to me it's far more representative of what people actually want than what the two party system we have right now. Let them debate, dammit. Let's hear what this guy has to say:



-- Virgil