(no subject)

[madscience.livejournal.com]

So, whattya say, America? Think we can hit 40 straight years of neocons in the White House?

Comments

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

If people stopped listening to what the media tells them about which candidates are viable, alternative view candidates would actually be viable.

Think about what you're asking. In your view, our commercially-funded media should cover candidates that don't buy campaign advertising or are supported by interests other than those who do buy advertising. Exactly why should publishers/broadcasters allow their hired help to do that, especially when the message of the alternative candidates focuses on reforming the politics of corruption that has entrenched the publishers and broadcasters in their current cushy positions?

The only thing that can actually prevent us from electing alternative candidates. . . .

. . . is actually several things, starting with allowing us to consider only the candidates covered by the commercial media and therefore vetted by the monied interests. Fraud comes only waaaay down on the list.

We're so far passed time to spill blood it isn't in any way funny any more.

[madscience.livejournal.com]

"especially when the message of the alternative candidates focuses on reforming the politics of corruption"

That's exactly why they should... and, of course, why they don't. IMO, candidates who lack big media endorsement haven't fully exploited the potential of media like YouTube to talk directly the people. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein had a shitty webcast that broke down halfway through, and that's about it.