Not debateable [Hillary's anti-war opponent is barred from televised debate by Time Warner]

Newsday ^ | August 9, 2006 | Editorial Board

[summer]

It's too bad NY1 refuses to change its rules for allowing candidates to appear on televised debates. The qualifications - which include raising more money than many insurgents can manage - mean that Sen. Hillary Clinton can duck a debate with anti-war activist Jon Tasini. He amassed thousands of signatures to get on the ballot, no easy task. Clinton and NY1 should lighten up and let the voters get a look at both candidates - together.

[summer]

As an independent voter, I really don't like it when candidates, of whatever party, including 3rd parties, are excluded from debates. Here we have the only real candidate to run against Hillary Clinton, and he is a big anti-war candidate being barred from a television debate because he did not raise half a million, the amount of campaign funds arbitrarily demanded by Time Warner's NY1, the sponsor of the debate. If he does not debate her, who will?

[summer]

The candidate is asking people to contact NY1 to allow him into the debate.

[summer]

And here is the candidate's statement re: him being excluded from the debate.

[summer]

I hope he is eventually allowed into the debate. HIllary Clinton gets enough free media attention.

Not allowing him into the debates makes the Dem Party leadership look like they are against free speech.

[summer]

Or, maybe they "look" that way because: they are against free speech.

[summer]

FYI.

[Fresh Wind]

Hillary fears an open debate like a vampire fears sunlight.

[summer]

I think you are correct. And, that doesn't say much for her. I would like to see her debate this guy. I would watch this debate.

[ditto h]

You never see Hillary questioned by anyone. She skates by the drive by media without a single challenge. When she is debated, she plays the victim because someone hands her a piece of paper. Is this the person we want as President in this time of war??

[traditional1]

Sounds like "dis-enfranchisement" to me...

This should be broadcast all over as the "you have to buy your way into debates due to Democrats' finagling"...if you don't have enough MONEY, you can't talk...

[xzins]

A candidate should pass some threshhold before they are considered serious.

That threshhold is at their own fingertips....they must amass the PRESENCE that forces themselves to be a participant.

I don't think ANY candidate is owed airtime. And if their following, power, financing, etc. is insufficient to force the issue, then they have a failed candidacy.

In short, let the marketplace of ideas decide. Otherwise, every yahoo who says he's running for office is owed airtime. I hate those staged events where 13 candidates all get one soundbite to respond to a question.

I don't know what you call that, but it certainly isn't a debate. Something similar to it was show-and-tell time in grade school.

[Fresh Wind]

I saw that debate. Lazio cleaned her proverbial clock.

[TNCMAXQ]

Why isnt the far left throwing as many resources into this race as they did for Lamont?? Hmm, gee I wonder....

[summer]

I don't think ANY candidate is owed airtime

NYS law required him to collect 15,000 signature to be on the ballot in the primary, and he collected over 40,000. Also, his standing in the polls is where Lamont was before Lamont beat Lieberman. I think the media needs to let the voters decide.

[summer]

I don't think ANY candidate is owed airtime

NYS law required him to collect 15,000 signatures to be on the ballot in the primary, and he collected over 40,000. Also, his standing in the polls is where Lamont was before Lamont beat Lieberman. I think the media needs to let the voters decide.

[summer]

Good question.

[summer]

This should be broadcast all over as the "you have to buy your way into debates due to Democrats' finagling"...if you don't have enough MONEY, you can't talk...

I agree. The Dem Party leadership always tries to paint the GOP as the party of money, but over and over again, the Dem Party elite says you need money if you think you have the right to speak.

[summer]

Is this the person [Hillary] we want as President in this time of war??

Another good question. And, for that reason, she (and any presidential candidate) should be willing to debate opponents.

[xzins]

I actually don't think it matters if he has all his neighborhood, his mom & pop, and his high school teachers in support of him.

If he can't get his name recognized enough to be taken seriously, then that's on him.

My sense is that his supporters who signed up under his name should send him cash, should go door-to-door, etc. His political party should buy airtime. His campaign chest should fund TV/Radio Ads.

Once he matters, then he'll be included.

But, being included in a debate is owed to no one. (Aside: those things aren't debates.)

[summer]

But, being included in a debate is owed to no one

I disagree. I think it was good that Ross Perot was included in a debate, and I think allowing people to hear a candidate is in fact owed to voters. The media should not seek to shelter a candidate like Hillary Clinton from questions.