[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re:Re:Re: Gubernatorial lawsuit

---------- Dan Billings <billingsdan@yahoo.com> writes:

From: Dan Billings <billingsdan@yahoo.com>

>What percentage of the vote did Howell get when she
>ran against Kennedy?  

According to her letter to the FCC Howell recieved 1% less votes than the GOP challenger to Kennedy.

>Don't news outlets have the
>right to make the editorial judgment that
>Liberatarians don't stand any kind of chance of
>getting elected?  

No, to do so would be to do exactly what Howell is accusing them of 
Bi-partisan partisanship, not NON-partisan. This is true especially since the news organizations themselves are sponsoring the debate.  One portion of the letter to the FCC addressed this clearly, it says (paraphrasing) that the De Facto effort of the TV stations to keep her out of the debate and the non-coverage she's been getting (or not getting) substantially will suppress the voter turnout she can expect and will likely change the outcome of the November 5th election for Governor.

>How are they any different than Gus
>Hall running year after year on the Communist ticket?

Ideology aside we are not talking presidential politics here, we are talking about a debate in a single state.  IIRC there were 7 Democrats running for President at one time (remember the 7 dwarves?) all 7 were invited to the debate even though some were not given a snowballs chance of winning.

>By the way: the percentage of the vote in past
>election standard doesn't work with Indepedent
>(non-party) candidates. 

Actually in Massachusetts Independent IS a political party.  If you are not a member of a political party in Massachusetts you are UN-enrolled, not Independent.

>Let the media decide: if
>they get enough complaints, they'll change their

Gee, then I guess we don't really need all that fuss and bother not to mention expense of an election now do we?