MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Monday, October 20, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 51.0° F  Overcast
Collapse Photo Bar

League slams corporate-debates

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

The League of Women Voters says Eisman is a legit candidate who should be welcomed to the debates. The ATC-AmFam-MGE-WEAC-Chamber debate commission (self-styled "We the People") says no. What do you think?

Eisman belongs in the debate.
18
75%
Keep it a two-party affair.
2
8%
I'm sick of elections. When does the streetfighting start? And will Stu be there?
4
17%
 
Total votes : 24

Postby lukpac » Tue Aug 22, 2006 5:40 pm

Ben Manski wrote:Sorry. Can't agree with almost any of this. Perot was not well-known until after the debate. Ventura did not have a buzz until after the debate. And you must not spend much time around the environmental, labor, family farm, or clean elections movements if you think there's "no buzz" around Eisman.


Come on, Ben, you're smarter than this. Do you honestly think the attention Eisman is getting comes *remotely* close to what Ventura and Perot were getting at the time?

As far as those movments go, I guess I don't spend much time around them. And if I don't, what do you think that means about the general population?

Hell. If there's no buzz, why are we talking about it?

:o


Because we're two people on The Daily Page forum. This isn't indicative of Wisconsin in general, much less *Madison* in general.
lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison

Postby Henry Vilas » Tue Aug 22, 2006 5:46 pm

Must be some name recognition poll results out there. What percentage of likely Wisconsin voters have even heard of Eisman? I'd guess the low end of the single digits.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19981
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Postby Dulouz » Tue Aug 22, 2006 6:04 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:Must be some name recognition poll results out there. What percentage of likely Wisconsin voters have even heard of Eisman? I'd guess the low end of the single digits.


Why does that have anything to do with the debates. Isn't the Wisconsin Idea all about "sifting and winnowing"? As Ben pointed out, the "debate" has been framed by a corporate group known as "We, the people" and not surprisingly the only candidates allowed to participate are the corporate candidates of the two corporate political machines. The debate will be between the "corporate lberalism" and "corporate conservatism".

The '03 Mayoral race was exciting precisely because all the candidates were allowed to debate. It turned out that the dark horses actually made some points and added to the debate.

It would admittedly be embarrasing for Doyle and Green having to link arms to refute Eisman, but that would tell the electorate about where the candidates really stand.
Dulouz
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2919
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 9:01 pm

Postby Henry Vilas » Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:08 pm

Dulouz wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:Must be some name recognition poll results out there. What percentage of likely Wisconsin voters have even heard of Eisman? I'd guess the low end of the single digits.


Why does that have anything to do with the debates.

Nothing, I was just commenting on Manski's over-the-top post concerning Eisman's recognition among the hip crowd. Try to keep up with the discussion.

I have nothing against Eisman's participation in any candidate debates. He might be good for a sound bite, especially on issues the two majors refuse to discussion. Maybe even win him a few votes.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19981
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Postby Stampy » Tue Aug 22, 2006 8:45 pm

gargantua wrote:
Stampy wrote:Ah, the Greens don't have a chance in hell of winning anything so there's no real point in having them included.


It's a vicious circle. They "don't have a chance in hell" partly because they're excluded from the debate and don't have a chance to be heard. Why are the major parties afraid of a level playing field? If they have no chance, where's the harm?


The harm is that they are issue candidates who will just hijack the debates to get free media for their "cause." See: Ben Masel.
And where do you draw the line? There are probably a dozen or more candidates who would like to be included in the debates...must they all be admitted, lest their voices not be heard?
Stampy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:40 pm

Postby Dulouz » Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:18 pm

Stampy wrote:The harm is that they are issue candidates who will just hijack the debates to get free media for their "cause." See: Ben Masel.
And where do you draw the line? There are probably a dozen or more candidates who would like to be included in the debates...must they all be admitted, lest their voices not be heard?


Hmmm, in the gubernatorial race candidates had to have their papers in by July 14, 2005. There are exactly 3 candidates qualified for the ballot.

But to answer your question, "you" don't draw the line. The line is set by the election guidelines. If a qaulified candidate can manage to get enough signatures to get on the ballot (2,000 I believe) then they should be included in any debate. Without an informed and educated electorate, elections are no more democratic here than in the former Soviet Union.
Dulouz
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2919
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 9:01 pm

Postby Ben Manski » Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:38 am

lukpac wrote:
Ben Manski wrote:Sorry. Can't agree with almost any of this. Perot was not well-known until after the debate. Ventura did not have a buzz until after the debate. And you must not spend much time around the environmental, labor, family farm, or clean elections movements if you think there's "no buzz" around Eisman.


Come on, Ben, you're smarter than this. Do you honestly think the attention Eisman is getting comes *remotely* close to what Ventura and Perot were getting at the time?


One word. Yes. Jim Young garnered just under 4% in 2002, and polled higher - 6%. So yes, I'd say if Jim Young was polling 6%, then yes, it's more likely than not that given an option, somewhere between 5-10% of respondents would respond Eisman at this point. By the way, before the debates Ventura was polling 7% (and Perot was at 9-11%).

As far as those movments go, I guess I don't spend much time around them. And if I don't, what do you think that means about the general population?


Nothing. There is no "general population." This society is not a homogenous as you seem to think it is.
Ben Manski
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Madison, Wisconsin

Postby BobArctor » Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:13 pm

Dulouz wrote:
Stampy wrote:The harm is that they are issue candidates who will just hijack the debates to get free media for their "cause." See: Ben Masel.
And where do you draw the line? There are probably a dozen or more candidates who would like to be included in the debates...must they all be admitted, lest their voices not be heard?


Hmmm, in the gubernatorial race candidates had to have their papers in by July 14, 2005. There are exactly 3 candidates qualified for the ballot.

But to answer your question, "you" don't draw the line. The line is set by the election guidelines. If a qaulified candidate can manage to get enough signatures to get on the ballot (2,000 I believe) then they should be included in any debate. Without an informed and educated electorate, elections are no more democratic here than in the former Soviet Union.


Refusing to allow debate access to candidates who have met the requirements is a form of election tampering. This is a way the duopoly parties play keep away to anyone who would interfere with their sweet deal.

I can't vote for Green because he's a fascist. I can't vote for Doyle because he's a total dick. The Greens will get my vote on the governor slot. The contention by Democrats that voters are somehow obligated to support them is outrageous and offensive.

Dismissing Ben Masel as merely the ringleader of a vegetable worship cult is a mistake. He would tear the other candidates up as an expert on civil rights law and wire-tapping alone. If Kohl wins, ( :lol: ) I'll support the Herb and vote for Kohl.
BobArctor
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1231
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 11:04 am
Location: Hypertime

Postby lukpac » Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:03 pm

Ben Manski wrote:One word. Yes. Jim Young garnered just under 4% in 2002, and polled higher - 6%. So yes, I'd say if Jim Young was polling 6%, then yes, it's more likely than not that given an option, somewhere between 5-10% of respondents would respond Eisman at this point. By the way, before the debates Ventura was polling 7% (and Perot was at 9-11%).


Come on, Ben. The fact that Ventura and Perot were polling that low doesn't mean people hadn't heard of them, it meant people didn't think they were going to vote for them. Big difference. They did know about those candidates, unlike with Eisman.

Since June 1st, there have been 2 articles mentioning Eisman in the Cap Times, according to the search engine there (there were actually 5 in the WSJ during that same period). I see 4 hits at the Journal-Sentinel's website. Do you really think he has any type of broad name recognition? There are probably that many articles EACH DAY about Green and Doyle.

Now, as I've said, that doesn't mean I think Eisman shouldn't be included in the debates. I think he should. But I don't see it making a significant difference. He might very well be a great candidate, but he simply isn't well known. A debate or two isn't going to significantly change that.

How about this - if Eisman gets to participate in the debate(s), and ends up with 10% or better in a statewide poll and/or on election day, I'll buy you a Coke.
lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison

Postby BobArctor » Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:10 pm

Eisman isn't getting very good publicity support. Were someone to be motivated to photoshop his head onto Jesse Ventura's body, it would be impossible to find a good photo.
BobArctor
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1231
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 11:04 am
Location: Hypertime

Postby Ben Manski » Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:23 pm

BobArctor wrote:Eisman isn't getting very good publicity support. Were someone to be motivated to photoshop his head onto Jesse Ventura's body, it would be impossible to find a good photo.


These should do the trick:

http://voteeisman.org/photos
Ben Manski
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Madison, Wisconsin

Postby Ben Manski » Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:04 pm

lukpac wrote:
Ben Manski wrote:One word. Yes. Jim Young garnered just under 4% in 2002, and polled higher - 6%. So yes, I'd say if Jim Young was polling 6%, then yes, it's more likely than not that given an option, somewhere between 5-10% of respondents would respond Eisman at this point. By the way, before the debates Ventura was polling 7% (and Perot was at 9-11%).


Come on, Ben. The fact that Ventura and Perot were polling that low doesn't mean people hadn't heard of them, it meant people didn't think they were going to vote for them. Big difference. They did know about those candidates, unlike with Eisman.

Since June 1st, there have been 2 articles mentioning Eisman in the Cap Times, according to the search engine there (there were actually 5 in the WSJ during that same period).


For some reason the Capital Times has not yet written anything on the debates. Nevermind that the MJS, WSJ, WRN, WPR, oh, and our illustrious weekly, all have. So much for Blaska's yarn about TCT being the "PD paper" . . .
Ben Manski
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Madison, Wisconsin

Postby Dodge » Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:24 am

Dodge
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2002 8:15 pm

Postby om » Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:47 pm

I think debates should only include candidates that poll at 51% or higher.
Therefore, we exclude all possible losers.
om
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:19 pm

Postby Ben Manski » Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:59 pm

Ben Manski
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Madison, Wisconsin

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar