Few objective observers would claim that the American political system operated optimally, or that there are numerous flaws in many in our elected officials. There has been numerous tries to "fix" the issue, but like the majority of from the political solutions, they were either ineffective or had huge loopholes inside them, that made them nearly useless. Our campaign finance laws are weak and ineffective at best, ridiculous at worst. This has led some to call for more debates between candidates, but usually the structure, format, moderators and rules of those debates diminish any substantial true debate from occurring.

Debate Thoughts

Recently, the candidates for Governor in the State of recent York participated in a debate, held at Hofstra University in Long Island, and televised only on Cablevision's owned News12. Obviously, televising it exclusively on only one cable service provider's network, even though largest provider within the state, effectively eliminated a person with other systems through the state, including Time Warner, Comcast, DISH, DirectTV, FIOS, etc.

A whole lot worse, however, was that, despite the fact that only two of the main candidates, Democrat Andrew Cuomo, and Republican Carl Paladino, have kind of realistic chance of victory, and many of the other candidates represent what many would refer to as "fringe" beliefs, all candidates, minor and major party, realistic chance of becoming Governor or "no shot," counseled me invited to sign up.

Debate Politics

Although some explained that all were invited because inside a democracy, all voices ought to be heard, because there are so few debates, this obviously diminished any kind of realistic and substantive discussion by either major candidate, either in depth on issues, or regarding certain campaign claims which have been made. What makes this even more unfortunate is that much of the campaign advertising continues to be exploitive plus some would say unsubstantiated and "dirty politics."

When one of the minor party candidates is a man running on the "Rents are extremely damned high" party, and the other was a former (and perhaps still) madam running around the "Anti-Prohibition" party, it is easy to see why this format might provide some entertainment value and great one-liners. However, unfortunately, particularly in these times of economic uncertainty and joblessness, under-employment, and unemployment, and the public's concern and disgust about high taxation with limited perceived value or benefit, would the public not have been better served by a face-to-face in-depth true arguements for and against the 2 major party candidates, one of these will become Governor from the second largest state within our nation.

Debate Religion

Granted, reality shows have, fortunately or unfortunately, for a variety of different reasons, become the most profitable and prevalent type of television entertainment. I suppose the format this debate followed is at line with the supposed public interest in reality shows. Yet, could it be only me, or are others also concerned that voters who might really want to come with an optimum chance of making a decision about voting for the candidate that best meets their views and requires, are being missing out on true information to base this type of decision.

This is not a situation that's occurring solely in one state. Slick, negative advertising has become more the rule than informative debate. This will continue before the public creates an uproar!

Few objective observers would claim that the American political system operated optimally, or that there are numerous flaws in many in our elected officials. There has been numerous attempts to "fix" the problem, but like most from the political solutions, they were either ineffective or had huge loopholes in them, that made them nearly useless. Our campaign finance laws are weak and ineffective at best, ridiculous at worst. It has led some to call for more debates between candidates, but often the structure, format, moderators and rules of these debates diminish any substantial true debate from occurring.

Debate Thoughts

Recently, the candidates for Governor in the State of New York took part in a debate, held at Hofstra University in New york, and televised only on Cablevision's owned News12. Obviously, televising it exclusively on only one cable service provider's network, even though largest provider in the state, effectively eliminated a person with other systems through the state, including Time Warner, Comcast, DISH, DirectTV, FIOS, etc.

Even worse, however, was that, even though only two of the main candidates, Democrat Andrew Cuomo, and Republican Carl Paladino, have any kind of realistic chance of victory, and many from the other candidates represent what many would make reference to as "fringe" beliefs, all candidates, minor and major party, realistic chance of becoming Governor or "no shot," were all invited to sign up.

Debate Politics

Although some explained that were invited because in a democracy, all voices should be heard, because there are very few debates, this obviously diminished any type of realistic and substantive discussion by either major candidate, in both depth on issues, or regarding certain campaign claims which have been made. Why is this much more unfortunate is that a lot of the campaign advertising continues to be exploitive plus some would say unsubstantiated and "dirty politics."

When among the minor party candidates is a man running on the "Rents are too damned high" party, and the other was a former (and perhaps still) madam running on the "Anti-Prohibition" party, you can easily understand why this format might provide some entertainment value and great one-liners. However, unfortunately, especially in this period of economic uncertainty and high joblessness, under-employment, and unemployment, and the public's concern and disgust about high taxation with limited perceived value or benefit, would the general public not have been better served by a face-to-face in-depth true arguements for and against the two major party candidates, one of which will end up Governor from the second largest state in our nation.

Debate Religion

Granted, reality shows have, fortunately or unfortunately, for any variety of different reasons, become the most profitable and prevalent type of television entertainment. I guess the format that this debate followed is at line using the supposed public interest in reality shows. Yet, is it only me, or are others also concerned that voters who might really want to come with an optimum chance of making the decision about voting for the candidate that best meets their views and requires, are being missing out on true information to base this type of decision.

This isn't a scenario that's occurring solely in one state. Slick, negative advertising has become more the rule than informative debate. This can continue before the public creates an uproar!

Few objective observers would claim that the American political system operated optimally, or that there are numerous flaws in many of our elected officials. There has been numerous attempts to "fix" the issue, but like the majority of of the political solutions, these were either ineffective or had huge loopholes inside them, that built them into nearly useless. Our campaign finance laws are weak and ineffective at best, ridiculous at worst. This has led some to call for more debates between candidates, but usually the structure, format, moderators and rules of these debates diminish any substantial true debate from occurring.

Debate Thoughts

Recently, the candidates for Governor from the State of recent York participated in a debate, held at Hofstra University in New york, and televised only on Cablevision's owned News12. Obviously, televising it exclusively on only one cable service provider's network, although the largest provider in the state, effectively eliminated anyone with others throughout the state, including Time Warner, Comcast, DISH, DirectTV, FIOS, etc.

A whole lot worse, however, was that, even though only a couple of the major candidates, Democrat Andrew Cuomo, and Republican Carl Paladino, have any kind of realistic possibility of victory, and many of the other candidates represent what many would refer to as "fringe" beliefs, all candidates, major and minor party, realistic chance of becoming Governor or "no shot," were all invited to sign up.

Debate Politics

Although some explained that were invited because inside a democracy, all voices should be heard, because there are so few debates, this obviously diminished any type of realistic and substantive discussion by either major candidate, either in depth on issues, or regarding certain campaign claims that have been made. Why is this even more unfortunate is the fact that much of the campaign advertising has been exploitive and some would say unsubstantiated and "dirty politics."

When one of the minor party candidates is a man running on the "Rents are too damned high" party, and the other was a former (and perhaps still) madam running on the "Anti-Prohibition" party, you can easily see why this format might provide some entertainment value and great one-liners. However, unfortunately, particularly in this period of economic uncertainty and high joblessness, under-employment, and unemployment, and also the public's concern and disgust about high taxation with limited perceived value or benefit, would the public not have access to been better with a face-to-face in-depth true debate between the two major party candidates, one of which will become Governor of the second largest state in our nation.

Debate Religion

Granted, reality shows have, fortunately or unfortunately, for any variety of different reasons, get to be the most profitable and prevalent type of television entertainment. I guess the format this debate followed was in line with the supposed public interest in reality shows. Yet, could it be only me, or are others also concerned that voters who might actually want to have an optimum chance of making the decision about voting for that candidate that best meets their views and needs, are now being deprived of true information to base this type of decision.

This isn't a situation that's occurring solely in a single state. Slick, negative advertising has become more the rule than informative debate. This can continue until the public creates an uproar!