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--1988 statement by the League of Women Voters
As Gore Vidal reminded us, the biggest booboo in American politics is to give away the game. By that he meant the revelation, by accident or design, that the private priorities of politicians were at least 47 percent different than their public ones.
It was the constant fear of such a screw-up, of some excited candidate unintentionally telling a truth, that led the Reps and Dems to team up in 1988 to try to muscle the good ladies of the LWV into making the presidential debates as phony as the rest of the campaign.
The League got properly ticked. They bailed, making the above statement. Ever since, the ‘debate’ has been thoroughly corporatized and meticulously managed by both parties working as one. In other words, it’s just another hustle.
To call this event a 'debate' is equivalent to calling a Pez dispenser a restaurant. We know from documents revealed after past ‘debates’ that prior agreement between the Dems and Reps on what can and cannot be said guarantees that voters will be served watery gruel. In the gab fests after the event, the talking heads will then assure us that it was really pepperoni pizza.
The huge audience for tonight’s first encounter will sink with the second one. By the third debate, polls will show that viewers preferred watching a stopped clock. Of course, there’s the gaffe caveat. Willard Romney, might inadvertently say something reminding us for the umpteenth time that he’s an empty bespoke suit. Or, as the Reps pray, Obama might blurt out “Insha'Allah” at some point in the proceedings.
Meanwhile, Venezuela is having a presidential election Sunday. Here’s what our former president Jimmy Carter has to say about it: “As a matter of fact, of the 92 elections that we’ve monitored, I would say the election process in Venezuela is the best in the world,” Mr. Carter said, noting the Carter Center’s extensive work monitoring elections around the globe.
On the other hand, said Carter, “We have one of the worst election processes in the world, and it’s almost entirely because of the excessive influx of money.”