Indiana Democrat Senator Joe Donnelly and challenger Mike Braun agree on one thing: at last night's debate, they ignored Libertarian candidate Lucy Brenton. She was making good points, but she might as well have not been in the room as Mr. Braun and Sen. Donnelly rehashed their campaign ads at one another. Repeatedly asked by the moderator to stay on topic, they never strayed from their talking points.
Remember Dems saying, "Listen to the women?" Ms. Brenton might as well have been hollering down a well. And while the GOP likes to claim they embody old-fashioned, chivalrous politeness, that didn't appear to apply to listening and responding to points made in a debate. She said it best: "These two gentlemen are part of the problem," she remarked during the debate.
I'm not impressed by either man.
And I'm still voting for Lucy Brenton.
BUILDING A 1:1 BALUN
4 years ago
8 comments:
Politicians make me say frequently "is this the best we can find"?
I suppose it has always been true. It takes a certain breed to assume they are best equipped to decide laws and policies for you and me.
I think the universal problem is that those we would like to be in office would never think of running, leaving the field to people who want the power and perks, but are exactly the type of people no sane person would want in charge.
I'm not surprised how the Libertarian was treated. The 3rd party canidate is often treated that way by the Big 2. Allowing the 3rd opinion gives them legitimacy and possibly stealing voters from them
"Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." ~~ George Carlin.
Think of the stuff Carlin and Kinnison could put out today.
Ignoring the third party candidate at the debate?
That is how Minnesota elected Governor Jesse Ventura.
It really helped that Jesse had name recognition, lots of free media, and a larger than life personality. (Sounds Familiar?)
Too bad he gave up on all his campaign promises after he fulfilled the first one, returning the billions of excess tax dollars Minnesota collected.
We need more people breaking up the two party one establishment government as usual.
At one time there was a proposal that all ballots should contain the choice, "None of the above". If "None" wins, new candidates would have to be brought to election until a suitable candidate was elected. I think we need this choice.
The two major parties always agree on one thing: they'll do as much of what is good for politicians as the voters will stand for. And what is best for politicians is expanding the government. They have to ignore the true smaller-government candidate, because actual engagement with her would reveal that the Dem is pushing policies that have already failed, and the Rep wants the same thing, only by stealth.
Jerry, as an alternative, in case of "None of the above" the incumbent would leave office and the job would go unfilled until the next election cycle. This has the advantage of the next election, the question would be "Abolish this position or not?"
Post a Comment