Debate Over the Presidential Debates
The Times editorial is right on the mark. The campaign being waged between the candidates of the major parties is insulting and dangerously vague.
Since we agree that the Democratic and Republican parties’ nominees are regrettably poor, why doesn’t The Times report the platforms and values of the nominees of the several “third” parties?
There is no reason why the American people must choose between the lesser of two evils when we can have our choice of the least of half a dozen.
Please don’t say that publicity is the responsibility of the candidate, as your paper provides plenty to Republicans and Democrats perfectly free of charge. Nothing wrong with that, of course, and with these two painfully boring tickets as “the choices,” reviewing the other candidates would provide some refreshing political relief.
I write on behalf of the Libertarian candidate Ron Paul. Let the Communists, Peace & Freedom, Democratic Socialists, American Independent Party, and others speak for themselves.
W.R. WIGGINS
Tujunga
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
