If you didn’t like it because I sent $20 a month to the DNC, then you will be happy to know I quit sending the money. I would have continued my contribution if the DNC ran the debates with fairness as the uppermost goal and discouraged the media from pre-deciding the winner.
As I’ve said before, I’m a big fan of getting the candidates out the door and on the road to the White House as early as possible. How else can they expect to reach 300 million citizens before November, 2008? It is a great thing to have plenty of time to assess the candidates.
What I don’t like is the fact that the media has dubbed HRC the winner. I think because they don’t have the energy to follow every candidate for a year. So the media folks pre-decide who they think we the voters will nominate. HRC is the media guys dream girl. She comes with a train load of controversial baggage. An HRC candidacy promises to sell their newspaper as the nomination process rolls out.
IF she does win the nomination, the strong opposition to a female leader will be a huge obstacle. Granted, the opposition I refer to isn’t in your face day in - day out. The same force who turned back the women’s equal rights amendment is out there quietly waiting. A few years back the Methodist Church Leadership decided to allow women to minister to their congregations. I wonder if the HRC team knows how many members the Methodist Church lost because of that decision.
As for me, I believe HRC is the wrong woman at the right time. I won’t be too quiet about it either. I’ll mention my opposition to my friends and family often. I expect to continue calling her a pear shaped triangulating liar when I see her on television. I am not opposed to HRC because she is a woman. It is her political history and controversial baggage that turns me off. I know I’m not alone. A great many folks are opposed to HRC for similar reasons as meself. It is time to look forward with a fresh face guiding our ship.
As for fair debates. The DNC should oppose the current debate format. A debate should allow every candidate equal time to answer the questions. What’s not to love about a format that offers paired candidates every twenty-five minutes? Four sets, twenty-five minutes, plus 6 minutes for sponsor ads and 6 minutes for the moderator’s opening and closing statements.
120 minute clock starts
3 minutes for Sponsor ad
3 minutes for moderator
25 minutes for first pair
2 minutes for 2 candidate ads
25 minutes for second pair
2 minutes for 2 candidate ads
25 minutes for third pair
2 minutes for 2 candidate ads
25 minutes for fourth pair
2 minutes for 2 candidate ads
3 minutes for moderator
3 minutes for Sponsor ad
What do you think we could learn from hearing HRC debate Joe Biden? Or Mike Gravel debating Dennis Kucinich. Gov. Richardson debates John Edwards. Chris Dodd debating Barack Obama. Golly, wouldn’t that be great? I think it would be terrific, and informative. The next debate would see a different pairing. Rule number one, would be the paired debate team is determined by a lottery type draw and NOT poll numbers. If I were a sponsor, this is the type of Presidential debate I’d want my company to be associated with. If I were Howard Dean, I’d insist ALL the candidates be taken seriously and given equal time.
