Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: CPD Collusion 3

In my column column a week ago, I offered one of my quadrennial rants about the CPD, and noted, "The two major political parties are in collusion with each other to exclude third-party candidates from public exposure."

Aaron Swartz alerted me to Open Debates, which four days earlier had a press release saying: "Today, Open Debates filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). The complaint contains previously unreleased, secret documents that reveal how the major party candidates collude with the CPD to dictate the terms of the presidential debates and exclude third-party and independent challengers."


This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CPD Collusion

Comments Filter:
  • It's a shame more people don't complain about this. But the FEC won't bother (hint: who runs the FEC?)

    FEC regulations require presidential debate sponsors that accept corporate contributions to be `nonpartisan' and to employ `pre-established objective' candidate selection criteria.

    The FEC will say that the CPD is nonpartisan (even though it is more accurately 'bipartisan'). They will look at the absurd requirements to get on the stage and say that they are both objective and pre-established. Just becau
    • Of course the FEC won't do anything, at first. But the louder people get, the greater the chances of change. And don't bother writing to your elected officials about it: write to journalists! Ask them to ask Kerry why he will only debate under terms that would have excluded him from debating in Iowa. Ask them to ask both candidates if they see a conflict of interest in only debating under the authority of an organization run by the two parties. Raise a stink.
      • Not that I'm disagreeing with your proposition (enough angry people can get just about anything done) but don't the journalists seem to be in on it?

        There's zero interest in third party candidates. They are viewed as having no newsworthiness or political credibility by the corporate news media. There has been minimal interest in the situation electronic voting with no audit trail presents us. The campaign advertisement money is good and the people at the helm of our fourth estate are absolutely not will

"The eleventh commandment was `Thou Shalt Compute' or `Thou Shalt Not Compute' -- I forget which." -- Epigrams in Programming, ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982