"Holy BARF Batman" (Ok, I'm dating myself) at the Commission being intimidated into letting that nagging stain on the word "journalism" and Maple MAGA mouthpiece flood the zone with its sh!t post debate.
The debate commission should have rejected the Green Party from the debate as soon as the official candidate list was released. Had they done that, the rejection would have been reasonable because intention to nominate doesn't matter; what matters is how many people are actually nominated so that there is a reason for the party to participate in the debate so people can decide whether or not to choose their candidate after hearing the debate. The reason why candidates were pulled from the official nomination doesn't matter to the rationale for including a party in the debate. If they propose 500 candidates but end up dropping 499 of them in the actual nomination, regardless of the reason, they are not representative enough to be on the debate.
"Holy BARF Batman" (Ok, I'm dating myself) at the Commission being intimidated into letting that nagging stain on the word "journalism" and Maple MAGA mouthpiece flood the zone with its sh!t post debate.
The debate commission should have rejected the Green Party from the debate as soon as the official candidate list was released. Had they done that, the rejection would have been reasonable because intention to nominate doesn't matter; what matters is how many people are actually nominated so that there is a reason for the party to participate in the debate so people can decide whether or not to choose their candidate after hearing the debate. The reason why candidates were pulled from the official nomination doesn't matter to the rationale for including a party in the debate. If they propose 500 candidates but end up dropping 499 of them in the actual nomination, regardless of the reason, they are not representative enough to be on the debate.
Thank you Rachel.