|
I have seen some insightful comments in here and that was what I was hoping for.
I read that some of you feel that if we allowed everyone on the ballots, we would definitely get a lot of kooks. True. Very true. And therefore we should limit the methods that one can get onto the debate platforms. Like being on all 50 states ballots officially. I think I believe in this in some form or another but on the other hand, my true ideal Libertarian self says, let all of those who want to speak, speak.
My reasons are as follows. Let those who want to be heard be heard. Obviously we say that in the CA elections. But we saw after a while that those who were total freaks have less and less coverage because most sane people decided not to listen anymore, thus giving the choice to the people. Besides, what if (hypothetically) the two major parties have been keeping down "the so-called kooks" (by no means and I a "kook" supporter LOL) because they really do have a message that would appeal to the people and therefore hurt the major parties?) Now I know this to be untrue, but what if it were? We are a democracy, meaning choice of the people. But I do also feel that in order to actually get debate time, we should have some sort of officiality to it. Like let everyone speak and then as some of you have suggested, let those people who have a backing by the people get on all 50 states ballots.
__________________
That is my 2 cents.
|