Skip to main content

I didn’t watch the debate last night. And I've done my best to avoid watching any coverage of it either, at least before writing this. All I know right now is the Huffington Post says reporters and political operatives are largely calling it for Romney. And I can guess what that means—Romney managed to get through it without short circuiting.

For someone who has been prone to making statements that are distasteful to many Americans, the bar for Romney was set fairly low, while even Obama's staunchest critics concede that he is a very gifted orator. So as long as he didn’t have any of those awkward or uncomfortable moments, say anything too idiotic, or appear on stage with an orange spray tan, it would be seen as a “win.”

That doesn't mean Obama was the loser here though.

Of course it’s not that hard to avoid saying things that are idiotic when you don’t really have anything to say, and that was pretty much Romney’s strategy. Before the debate, it was reported that Romney was practicing his “zingers,” or quick one line jabs that were intended to grossly oversimplify complex issues, if not mislead audience members that haven’t taken the time to really try and understand them. The talk of zingers clearly demonstrated that Romney was more interested in putting on a show than having a substantive debate, and with good reason: his plans to make changes to the healthcare law, cut government spending, reduce the deficit, etc. have thus far been woefully lacking in specifics. Debating him would be much like debating an empty chair, and that’s a debate that simply cannot be won, as Clint Eastwood managed to prove, no matter how one tries to deconstruct the dog whistles and zingers.
Pundits on both sides are no doubt playing up the positives for their preferred candidate, and pointing out the negatives of the other, but no matter who you think “won” the debate, the loser was clear before the debate even started.

Much like the Republican primary, where a number of well-qualified candidates, such as former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, and former Louisiana Governor and 4-term Congressman Buddy Roemer, who made important policy distinctions between themselves and the other candidates, but were left out of the debates in favor of a guy that owns a pizza chain and someone whose Google search results alone should disqualify him from running for President, this debate left out important candidates as well.

Gary Johnson is now running on the Libertarian ticket, and Jill Stein is the candidate for the Green Party. Regardless of how small their chances might be, they are on the ballot in enough states that they could win enough Electoral College votes, and have been put at an unfair disadvantage by not being included.  Perhaps more importantly though, their presence would have brought a broader range of topics and ideas to the table, and forced both major party candidates to better defend their positions.
So it wasn’t Obama who lost last night, nor was it Romney—it was the American People.  

From 1976 through 1984, the League of Women Voters sponsored presidential debates, setting a precedent that debates should be an integral part of the election process. In 1988 however, their board of trustees unanimously released the following statement:

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.
Since then, former heads of the major parties have been in charge of the Presidential Debate Commission. Having everything from the format of the debates to the criteria for being able to participate controlled by the two major parties is not only fundamentally unfair to any other candidates, it also does a disservice to the American people, who deserve an honest debate free of partisan influence, where the best ideas can carry the day.

I can pretty much guarantee this was not a topic of discussion last night. Not at the debate, nor on any major media outlets. And another thing that almost certainly was not discussed is what I would consider to be the most important domestic policy issue there is—more important than job creation, or deficit reduction, or healthcare, or education, or immigration, or energy policy, because it cuts to the heart of the dysfunction in our government—and that, of course, is our campaign finance system.  Because as long as our elected officials are dependent on a small group of special moneyed interests to fund their campaigns, we will not truly have a democratic government of, by or for the people.

So rather than discussing who won or who lost, let's discuss what we can do to begin having real conversations where all sides are represented instead of perpetuating the most expensive reality TV series in history.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (12+ / 0-)

    The people are the only legitimate fountain of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, under which the several branches of government hold their power, is derived. -James Madison

    by Frank Lee Speaking on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 06:30:24 PM PDT

  •  Lehrer reinforced that using moderator has lost (5+ / 0-)

    it's effectiveness.

  •  Thank You - N/T (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    defluxion10, blueoasis

    "Upward, not Northward" - Flatland, by EA Abbott

    by linkage on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 06:41:02 PM PDT

  •  What's the relevance of the first four paragraphs (0+ / 0-)

    to what follows? Both candidates accepted the rules.

  •  How can we cut out the political consultants and (0+ / 0-)

    the media's price gouging?  I don't think we can get the money out of politics - not through campaign finance regulations.  God knows Russ Feingold and others have tried and it has done little good that I can see (though I do respect their efforts).  So that got me thinking: how can we make it not cost so much to campaign?  How can we make it so that non-millionaires and non-billionaires can run for office on the national level and win?

    I don't know the answers, but I did tip and rec your diary for getting at the basic character of charades that permeates our elections.

    •  you cant cut political consultants directly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      zett

      and there is the equal time rule in the Communications Act, but it doesn't really do much good. personally, i'd like to do away with all political TV and radio ads completely. not that that would happen, but there are plenty of different options. Citizens United may need to be addressed with a constitutional amendment, which is difficult, but not impossible. That ruling undid some of McCain Feingold, but that legislation didn't go far enough either...there's no way most people can afford to donate the $1,000 limit, or $5,000 to a PAC, and there's other loopholes that could allow much bigger donations. Plus the rules for dark money groups (501c4, superPAC) are much too fuzzy. They are supposed to have no coordination, and not advocate for or against a candidate. There ought to be a wait period for campaign staffers to go work for one of these (2 years) and if they're only allowed to do issue advertising, they should not be able to mention candidates in ads period.

      Some other proposals that have been put forth:

      -publicly funded elections where each person that reaches the required signatures and perhaps polling numbers/other criteria is given a set campaign fund

      -$100 limit

      -only individuals may contribute

      -campaign spending limits

      -government matching of campaign funds on the order of 5:1 if other criteria are met

      -campaign donations made in the form of tax vouchers

      I'm sure there are more, and obviously the solution isn't any one thing, but a number of different things. Like term limits could be part of the deal, as could independent non-partisan redistricting commissions, and uniform election rules.

      The people are the only legitimate fountain of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, under which the several branches of government hold their power, is derived. -James Madison

      by Frank Lee Speaking on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 09:37:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site