Why Do the Media Ignore Those “Other” Parties?
Where does it say in the United States Constitution that only two political parties may vie for control of the country? Why are the Republicans and Democrats the only parties that get significant press coverage?
Surely, this approach to politics abridges my right as a citizen to choose candidates who best reflect my views.
Why don’t I know what the Green Party’s platform is, or who will be their presidential nominee? I thought that Ralph Nader was their candidate. But I have found out he is running as an Independent.
What about the Constitutional Party?
Or the Prohibition Party?
Or the Socialist Party?
Or the Libertarian Party?
I would not even have known that the Libertarians are holding their national convention this weekend in Denver if I had not stumbled upon their presidential candidates’ debate on C-Span last night.
Apart from the briefest of mentions of former Republican Congressman Bob Barr and the often-comical debate performances by former Democratic Senator Mike Gravel , I had not previously heard a peep from any of the Libertarian candidates. They were effectively gagged by the media.
And I am pretty sure Ron Paul is still in the running for the Republican nomination. Hillary Clinton doesn’t have much more chance of being nominated than Ron Paul does, but she hogs the airwaves and the newspaper columns while he is totally ignored.
Were it not for the media, who would have heard of Barack Obama or the Clintons? Who would know of John McCain’s “sacrifice for his country” (referenced ad nauseam). Without a doubt, the media are the king makers. But who elects the media?
I invite you to check out the Wikipedia site that lists the candidates in the 2008 presidential elections. You will be surprised at how many there are. And you might take the time to see what the parties stand for. Who knows? You might not vote for the Democrats or Republicans after all.