Skip to main content

Cape Gazette: UD/Delaware First Media exclude Libertarians, others, from major debate

From the Cape Gazette today:

Libertarians say UD debates exclude third parties
October debates sponsored by the University of Delaware and Delaware First Media are a major opportunity for candidates for statewide office to let the public know where they stand on certain issues.
But Libertarians say the media event excludes third party candidates.
UD Distinguished Journalist in Residence Ralph Begleiter and Delaware First Media President Michelle Boudreau recently informed ballot-qualified candidates of inclusion criteria for the debate. Begleiter and Boudreau say the qualifications insure participants are serious and have significant public support.
In an Aug. 5 press release, Scott Gesty, Libertarian candidate for Congress said, “To be invited, I’d have to raise $125,500 from 2,511 different donors, have already received 40,000 votes in a previous election or pay thousands for a poll proving at least 10 percent of Delaware voters already support me.”
New Castle County Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Delaware Steve Newton said, “These restrictions will keep other important candidates out of the debate.”
Newton asked, “Why have UD and Delaware First Media determined to exclude citizen candidates while providing another forum for career politicians like Tom Carper and John Carney?”

Comments

Anonymous said…
“I think it’s a huge, huge moment for the state of Delaware,” Boudreau said.

Her major selling point of public radio is that it’ll educate Delawareans about their communities, government and the “history of this shared place.” she said.

Guess not so much huh? http://www.doverpost.com/entertainment/arts/x1783279776/WDDE-FM-91-1-Dover-to-hit-airwaves-this-summer?zc_p=0

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...