A recent Cavalier Daily news article (“Third parties compete for votes,” Sept. 23) missed the opportunity to give readers a better view of what third parties and independent candidates are all about and, heaven forbid, a probing assessment of the barriers and challenges these candidates face to get on the ballot, in the debates and on the news.
Rather, it noted that these candidates exist, gave a bland synopsis of what they stood for and then rehashed the typical responses that one reads in the media about the prospects for these candidates during a general election.
A more thoroughly researched article would have actually told readers how many ballots the candidates are on rather than rely on Center for Politics staff member Dan Keyserling to tell us that, “In a lot of states they are not even on the ballot.” Ralph Nader is on 45 ballots, including Virginia, according to his Web site, and is a write-in candidate for the remainder. Does 45 qualify as “a lot?”
The article could have considered why each state has different requirements for candidates to get on the ballot. As a sideline, it might have mentioned that Obama and McCain missed the official filing deadline to get on the ballot in Texas and that Bobb Barr (Libertarian Candidate) is suing to prevent them from appearing on that ballot. Readers, if they missed the official filing deadline, is it fair to still let them on the ballot?
The article might have considered the make-up of our esteemed Commission on Presidential Debates (hint: no third party or independent representation), and whether a private company created by the two parties should have control over such events. Or, it might have talked about why the non-partisan League of Women Voters (LWV) declined to sponsor the Presidential debates after 1988 (another hint: something about not wanting to “perpetrate a fraud on the American voter”).
The “straight talk” is that The Cavalier Daily squandered a chance to publish a thorough, interesting piece about the current crop of third party and independent Presidential candidates.
The “change we need” is better coverage of the issues that the mainstream press ignores, like inconsistent ballot access laws, the fairness of the debates and the substantive contribution that third parties and independent candidates have made to help shape our country.
Bryan Campbell
Staff, Highway Research Council
Read More
LETTER: Your U.Va. Health System coverage lacks important context
September 9, 2024I understand this event could be seen as “breaking news,” but your reporting left out relevant, easy-to-find, publicly available data to give it proper context.
LETTER: U.Va.'s relationship with the University Guides
By Stephen Farmer | August 30, 2024We are grateful to the leaders of the Guide Service for being open to working with us to improve the reliability and consistency of their tours.
LETTER: It is critical to hold individual hazers accountable
By Todd Shelton | May 10, 2024But while education is absolutely integral to hazing prevention, we must also hold individuals accountable for their hazing behavior.
