Presidential Race 2016 - Debates
By Faye
@FayeHazel (40230)
United States
September 27, 2016 4:05pm CST
I was actually going to detail how I feel about each of the major parties candidates - but I think I will suffice to say - I don't like either of them.
I wish that they would open the debates to everyone who has their name printed on the ballot. I also wish they would give everyone (third parties too) equal air time and an equal budget for advertising, campaigning etc. I think that would be more fair and would prevent those with the most money from affording more publicity.
Otherwise - I wonder why there even are more than 2 allowed on our ballots.
//Photo mine
7 people like this
9 responses
@teamfreak16 (43567)
• Denver, Colorado
28 Sep 16
As far as I'm concerned, a vote for a third party is a vote for Trump. He makes me sick every time I hear his name.
4 people like this
@snowy22315 (208746)
• United States
28 Sep 16
I think he is one of, if not the biggest frauds we have ever had running personally.
1 person likes this
@5thHouse (1678)
• Sheffield, England
28 Sep 16
It must seem like choosing the lesser of two evils. It seems to me sad that there isn't anyone who truly represents the people. I wouldn't want to be poor in America. I find it quite disturbing that someone like Trump can be in contention, that he has been allowed to get this far. Heaven help the world if he gets in.
3 people like this
@snowy22315 (208746)
• United States
27 Sep 16
All I can say is you are not alone.
2 people like this
@irishidid (8687)
• United States
27 Sep 16
I think they should have let both Johnson and Stein debate. What would it hurt? But to be honest, I consider them a waste of time so I don't watch. You're always going to side with the one you're most likely to vote for regardless as we hear what we want to hear.
2 people like this
@snowy22315 (208746)
• United States
28 Sep 16
Well, most people know they will not be elected....so having them there would likely be a distratction
@FayeHazel (40230)
• United States
27 Sep 16
I agree with you. On all accounts actually. I didn't like either Trump or Clinton going into this thing - and I still don't like either of them, but would love to know what the Johnson or Stein have to say.
1 person likes this
@Hate2Iron (15724)
• Canada
27 Sep 16
I think that a lot of people are thinking just like you!!
2 people like this
@moffittjc (128824)
• Gainesville, Florida
28 Sep 16
I think it just verifies how rigged our system really is. They talk a good talk about how any candidate from any party can get on the ballot and aspire to be president, but in reality if you are not a Dem or Rep you have zero chance of being taken seriously, and will find yourself shut out of debates and other opportunities that favor the two-party system. Dems and Reps may act like they hate each other, but in reality they are firmly in bed with each other. That's why at the end of the day, they can look each other in the eye, smile, shake hands, and hand over the power to our country every 4 or 8 years. Because they are in it together.
2 people like this
@snowy22315 (208746)
• United States
28 Sep 16
OK I think you need to be careful about using the term "rigged"...They makes it sound like fraud like something done in a dictatorship. As far as I know the candidates are the will of the people. The only way it might be rigged..is that he or she who spends the most money usually wins. Some third party candidates have gotten a significant amount of votes in previous elections.
1 person likes this
@moffittjc (128824)
• Gainesville, Florida
29 Sep 16
@FayeHazel I think they should all be given equal treatment, equal air time, and equal press time. Then let the voters decide in a true fair and balanced election.
@FayeHazel (40230)
• United States
28 Sep 16
I am with you there, I wish they would either do away with all the third parties (why act like they have a chance, when they likely don't, though judging by the amount of people who dislike both major party candidates - maybe this year the tird party candidates do have a shot,lol!) -- or make it more equal -- equal time in the media and at the debates.
1 person likes this
@JamesHxstatic (29410)
• Eugene, Oregon
28 Sep 16
It is about the polls and the percentage required to be included in the debates. The US is, for better or worse, a two party system. Personally, I would not want some totally inexperienced President with all the challenges we face in the world. Trump is a dangerous, unstable man whom we cannot afford to to run the country.
1 person likes this
@nanette64 (20363)
• Fairfield, Texas
28 Sep 16
It's all about who has the most money @FayeHazel . Not only that but the media is a lot at fault. I say 'each' candidate from 'all' parties has $1 million dollars to do whatever. That's it. And 'all' candidates have the same amount of time on the debate stage. No arguing or bickering is to be allowed.
1 person likes this
@snowy22315 (208746)
• United States
28 Sep 16
I think we should do what the UK does and just have two weeks for campagining and commercials...these elections that never end are absurd! They are so negative as well...Say what you will do for the people don't spend all yoru time running the other candidate down!
1 person likes this
@FayeHazel (40230)
• United States
28 Sep 16
I am so with you there. And agree - any arguing at the debate should be penalized with less time for the person starting it.
1 person likes this
@teresatrotter (4073)
• Jacksonville, Florida
27 Sep 16
Even though we don't have the best candidates running. I know one thing for sure...I will move heaven and earth to make sure Hillary does not get elected!!!
1 person likes this
@FayeHazel (40230)
• United States
27 Sep 16
A lot of people seem to dislike either of the 2 major party candidates - even people who support either party. I wonder if a "tie" is actually a possibility.
@teresatrotter (4073)
• Jacksonville, Florida
27 Sep 16
@FayeHazel - It is possible, but not plausible. I doubt highly they would let two people, on opposite sides run our country. That would be a big mess. No... I think when ties occur, there are other factors that they use to determine a winner.
@snowy22315 (208746)
• United States
28 Sep 16
@FayeHazel Jeesh, it would be awful if we had a repeat of Bush v Gore in 2000. That was unnerving. Al Gore actually got more of the popular vote, and if he had won...things would be a lot better in terms of the national debt in my opinion.
