As a frequent traveler who regularly uses Southwest for my business and personal travel, I am disheartened to hear that Southwest is suggesting that I only have the choice to vote for a Republican or a Democrat for president.
In sponsoring the Commission on Presidential Debates, an organization of professional Republican and Democratic functionaries in DC, Southwest is doing just that: preventing me and 200 million other American voters from hearing other qualified candidates for president who will be on the majority of ballots this November.
I strongly disagree with Southwest’s email statement to me that, “The Senior Leadership of Southwest Airlines felt that their core values aligned with the CPD’s mission of providing American citizens the opportunity to make informed decisions” given they are not allowing the American electorate to hear all the options in order to make that informed decision.
If a “core value” of Southwest is to silence the voices of qualified presidential candidates, other than those from the Democratic or Republican parties, I wish to no longer do business with them.
Southwest should stay out of politics and not have a hand in influencing this important election.
Chris Walsh
San Tan Valley
bobunf posted at 11:50 pm on Fri, Oct 5, 2012.
Most Americans only want to hear from people who have even a remote chance of winning an election - at most. It may even be that over 50% of Americans really don't want to hear from any candidate. There is not one chance in a trillion that the winning candidate in this election will be someone other than Obama or Romney, unless both die. Even then....
Sorry debates are not tailored to your exact whim, but not many people want to waste time listening to irrelevant candidates. They are not qualified if they can't win.
Many very successful democracies have existed for over a century with two parties: the UK, Australia, Spain, Malta, and Canada. Except there is a third party in Canada that advocates splitting the country in three, which points up the great advantage of two party systems: they promote centrism, appeals to wide swaths of the electorate, political stability and economic growth.
Adam Smith observed 236 years ago that political stability was one of the chief reasons that some countries are wealthy, while others are poor.
The two party system does not suppress dissent and differing opinions, but battles are usually fought out within parties. We have seen great examples of that over the last eleven months here in Mesa.. Russell Pearce and his ideas did battle with Jerry Lewis and Bob Worsley and their different ideas within the Republican Party.
sockratties posted at 5:35 pm on Fri, Oct 5, 2012.
Chris… I agree with you regarding the CPD, it clearly is a joint effort by the DNC and RNC to limit debates to the Democratic and Republican candidates. It has done so, effectively, since 1988 when the League of Women Voters stopped sponsoring presidential debates do to exclusionary demands by both parties.
You don’t indicate why Southwest’s support of the debates is a reflection of their politics. Are they stakeholders in the results? On-line rants by third party blogs do decry such sponsorships but aren’t able to point fingers at these or other sponsors for improper conduct.
Perhaps Southwest believes they are supporting a legitimate process and are doing so for positive patriotic press. I haven’t been able to uncover nefarious motives by Southwest on-line except for being sponsors of the debates. You also have to stop drinking Bud because Anheuser-Busch is a CPD sponsor. (Budweiser also sponsers Superbowl ads which only has two teams playing out of 32! What’s going on there?)
If your letter is to inform Southwest of their bad choice and to ask them to stop supporting a corrupt system, that’s one thing. If it’s to assign them guilt by association then a bit more supporting detail is needed.
chatmandu002 posted at 4:21 pm on Fri, Oct 5, 2012.
Chris,
Come up with a viable 3rd party candidate or platform and they will be included. In a few more years the debates will include an Hispanic party candidate. Won't that be fun a bi-lingual debate.
Sumway posted at 1:37 pm on Fri, Oct 5, 2012.
I am sure that Southwest Airlines will miss the business that they will lose if they continue to sponsor a corrupt bi-partisan corporation that is trying to deceive the American people. The reason that there has not been a third party candidate is that the commission has designed the process to keep a third party from competing. You need to educate yourself IceCat:
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/10/02/4874024/according-to-open-debates-three.html
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/political_reform_quotes_presidential_debates/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX0EMau8GZY&list=UU1h3bqESVdqkwm123Ce4ZmA&index=1&feature=plcp
IceCat posted at 12:09 pm on Fri, Oct 5, 2012.
I'm sure Southwest Airlines isn't going to miss you. There hasn't been a third candidate on the stage since 1992, which was the last time a third party candidate had a strong following.