MOTHER JONES BY E-MAIL

«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»

SC Dems Bar Colbert

The South Carolina Democratic party voted today to keep comedian Stephen Colbert off the state primary ballot, saying they considered him an insufficiently serious candidate. I guess he wasn't such welcome competition after all.

Putting aside the issue of whether or not Colbert makes the grade (though I don't see anyone else asking supporters to donate $100,000 to schools), what does it take to be considered a "serious" candidate? Do you need supporters? Do you have to want the job? The designation of "seriousness"—and, by extension, viability—tends to reflect the conventional wisdom of the media echo chamber far more than the candidate's actual merit. Call it the spoiler effect, wherein third parties and so-called "fringe candidates" are deleted from polls, kept off ballots, and literally forbidden to debate their better-heeled challengers. With such sparse options, it's no wonder that pundits and voters alike spend hours parsing the lead candidates' general statements for nuance and difference.

Bottom line, this country should welcome candidates who stray from the center and take principled, controversial positions, even if they lose in the end. If we broaden our definition of productive debate, we'll broaden our choices too, and maybe alleviate some of our cynicism. You want to be considered a serious candidate? Earn it.

—Casey Miner

Colbert is more "straight forward" than most RepubliCrats.

Vote Colbert 2008

Posted by: Art Garbage on 11/02/07 at 2:46 PM Respond

Normally I'd agree with Eric Bloom about showing contempt, but at this point I'm so desperate for a change in our govt that I'd vote for anyone who stood a chance winning who offends the current powers that be. At the same time, there's no reason to think that any of the current crop of candidates has a chance of doing anything different. I can't help but feel that running for office this time is like fighting for a deck chair on the Titanic. I'm going to try not to "waste" my vote, but I do wish there was a sort of "none of the above" box on the ballot. Is there a Passionate ambivalence party?

Posted by: kt on 11/02/07 at 2:47 PM Respond

Apparently Casey Miner is under the false impression that the Democratic Party is somehow, better than the other corporate-controlled party.

As for me, I don't feel sorry for Colbert. If he wanted to make a statement, he should either form his own party or run as an independent in the general election.

As they say around the watercoolers of sanity nowadays, the only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican, while the only thing worse than a Catholic is a Protestant.

Whatever happened to the idea of "fair and unbalanced" non-money grubbing corporation dependency?

Posted by: Richard Aberdeen on 11/02/07 at 3:12 PM Respond

Nothing to stop voters from writing in Colbert as their choice, though...

Posted by: Dan Mortenson on 11/04/07 at 4:35 PM Respond

I don't think Casey Miner said anything about the Democrats being better than the Republicans. I believe the phrase "this country" is large enough to accommodate both of the parties.

Posted by: dustbot on 11/06/07 at 10:16 PM Respond