NationStates Jolt Archive

A thread dedicated to find out by topic. Which political Ideology is the last word in Nationstates. Everyone Invited, whether you are Democrat, Republican, Green, Libertarian, Communist, etc. Doesn't matter.

Rules: No profanity, Must stay on topic. Discussion on relative issues. No declarations of war on another nation for stating its beliefs. Other than that the rest is up to you.

This thread represents a cyber townhall where anyone can participate

First Topic
Publically funded political debates.
During the last debate there was some controversy when both third party candidates where excluded from the Presidential Debates at Georgetown University. The reason cited by the organizers was that the exclusion was in the interest of fairness, as the University did not have the facilities to host every independant candidate in the race. During the California debates only the front runners were allowed coverage.

"Is it right that not all candidates be allowed to attend a publically funded debate?"

Mods Please move this to General (since I read this as U.S. political debates and NOT your nations...)

((OOC: AH, you're back? Sweet, all my old allies are coming back! :mrgreen: ))

Any canidate for the presidency that qualifies for the ballot in enough states that it is possible for them to attain a majority of electoral college votes sufficient to be elected must be allowed to attend and participate in any nationally broadcast or federally supported debate.

Ditto goes for Congressional runners in their respective states.

If that means 200 canidates must be allowed to participate, then so be it. I suggest they update the format of the debate to take this into consideration. Perhaps televise the questions nationally and allow all the canidates to post a recording online giving their response. All responses would be hosted by the Feds and sorted by alphabetizing under party affiliation. Any responses not recieved within, say, an hour after the questions are televised would not be hosted. The questions should not be available ahead of time to any canidate.

Whoops double post. :P

Mods Please move this to General (since I read this as U.S. political debates and NOT your nations...)

A thread dedicated to find out by topic. Which political Ideology is the last word in Nationstates.

You must have missed this part in your "reading." You got something to contribute or just griefing?

Anyway, since the response is based on the nations Ideology, it should be posted along with the reply.

Example:

The Republic of SilveryMinnow,
Libertarian

It would seem that since the money for the debates are taken from the general funds that it should not be allowed for major party types to use said monies as a personal piggy bank.

The reader decides who makes the most sense, and perhaps decides the Regional Ideology is closer to their own. I can understand why some regions are afraid to differentiate.

First Topic
Publically funded political debates.
During the last debate there was some controversy when both third party candidates where excluded from the Presidential Debates at Georgetown University. The reason cited by the organizers was that the exclusion was in the interest of fairness, as the University did not have the facilities to host every independant candidate in the race. During the California debates only the front runners were allowed coverage.

"Is it right that not all candidates be allowed to attend a publically funded debate?"


Although I understand why it was an invite only thing, I really think that all candidates running should be free to come. I think that one of teh reasons that all 3rd parties find it so hard to gain prominence is because of the lack of air-time. I bet that if all candidates were allowed to come, then the 3rd parties would grow, and everyone would be in the political party in which they belonged.

First Topic
Publically funded political debates.
During the last debate there was some controversy when both third party candidates where excluded from the Presidential Debates at Georgetown University. The reason cited by the organizers was that the exclusion was in the interest of fairness, as the University did not have the facilities to host every independant candidate in the race. During the California debates only the front runners were allowed coverage.

"Is it right that not all candidates be allowed to attend a publically funded debate?"


Although I understand why it was an invite only thing, I really think that all candidates running should be free to come. I think that one of the reasons that all 3rd parties find it so hard to gain prominence is because of the lack of air-time. I bet that if all candidates were allowed to come, then the 3rd parties would grow, and everyone would be in the political party in which they belonged.