Why have our Presidential debates become shiny, fluffy, empty commercials?

[woo me with science]

They are ads. A series of rehearsed sound bites of one minute max, shorter than most commercials for laundry detergents. Then "rebuttals" of thirty seconds.

There is no substance here.

Why? Because they are run by the two corporate parties. We have seen the restructuring of the campaign finance process by the political elites over the past 30 years. They have also seized control of the debate process in which they participate.

From the '70's until 1988, the League of Women Voters managed the Presidential debates. During this time, there was at least some effort to provide a format that included some genuine substantive questions, time for responses, and follow-up questioning.

That all changed when Ross Perot ran for President and scared the hell out of the two corporate parties. The two parties took quick action together to seize control of the debate process, including the entrance rules and the format and substance of the debates. The League of Women voters withdrew in disgust and issued a strongly worded press release (see bolded below). Their warning was absolutely on target:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_debates

Control of the presidential debates has been a ground of struggle for more than two decades. The role was filled by the nonpartisan League of Women Voters (LWV) civic organization in 1976, 1980 and 1984. In 1987, the LWV withdrew from debate sponsorship, in protest of the major party candidates attempting to dictate nearly every aspect of how the debates were conducted. On October 2, 1988, the LWV's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a dramatic press release:

"The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."

The same year the two major political parties assumed control of organizing presidential debates through the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). The commission has been headed since its inception by former chairs of the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee.

Some have criticized the exclusion of third party and independent candidates as well as the parallel interview format as a minimum of getting 15% in opinion polls is required to be invited. In 2004, the Citizens' Debate Commission (CDC) was formed with the stated mission of returning control of the debates to an independent nonpartisan body rather than a bipartisan body. Nevertheless, the CPD retained control of the debates that year and in 2008.



We need to reform the entire damned system. We need to get the money out of politics and the corporations out of the parties.

[KamaAina]

1. Because the incumbent is a Dem, and the debates feature repukes?

:P

[SomethingFishy]

2. K&R This whole damn country is a

fluffy empty commercial. Everything is a sales pitch and everything has to be said in 30 seconds or less. It's embarrassing.

[woo me with science]

9. I remember watching the French debates in 1997

What a difference. They sat at a round table and had an in-depth discussion about the issues.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x875895

Our system is broken, and we have been bought and paid for. Our elections are a patronizing exercise in Madison Avenue gloss, without any substance at all.

You are right. It is an embarrassment.

[Madam Mossfern]

3. Hmmm...League of Women Voters

I was looking for something new to get involved with.
I always respected the women who were involved in our local chapter.
They were always very well informed...and cynical. The debates they ran locally were the best.

Thanks.
I'll make a call tomorrow.

[Eddie Haskell]

4. Thanks, I didn't see this.

I agree.

[dkf]

5. Nah it's reality TV.

[shanti]

6. i can't understand for the life of me

who would watch that shit anymore. :shrug: it's meaningless.

[Javaman]

8. +1

what is really insulting is, they make it sound as if the people of this nation are involved. I laugh long and hard at that one.

[Eddie Haskell]

7. K&R

[newspeak]

10. the repug debates in nevada

were truly telling. Well, they all agreed that they need to bring this country down even more by repealing any regulatory bill to keep the wolves at bay. After the enron debacle and the thousands they hurt, they want to repeal the serbains-oxley bill and after WS basically screwed the whole world they want to repeal the dodd-frank tepid bill.

Yep, they want their greedy, immoral friends to finally do in the populace by poisoning or bankrupting us all. Those who are left can be slaves.

Also, they want to out religious each other. However, I don't see a bit of jaysus in any of them.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. Unfortunately, the people who could get the money out politics (politicians) are on the payroll.

Kinda like asking the MIC to become pacifists.

[kenny blankenship]

12. If they told you what they really were going to do, you would never vote for them.