After ONE debate, we shouldn't be ignoring all but 4 candidates...

[Hortensis]

14. :) Agree, agree, agree. I WISH debates would still be put on

by groups like the League of Women Voters.

But the parties and major candidates themselves killed that in favor of working with business organizations that share their interest in putting on a good, nonrisky show. Imo, putting frontrunners in the middle badly corrupts the purported purpose. But even the most ethical candidates who genuinely believe in themselves couldn't ethically just throw away an advantage that the very size of their following gave them.

I envy you knowing Sen. Brown. None of the few genuinely remarkable people I've known have run for national office, but just interacting with them, even when briefly, enriched my life. I suspect a number of our candidates are actually such people, and whatever is in those observers who are unable to imagine exceptionalism and thus look for the qualities that go into it is terribly unfortunate. Charisma and ability to speak with a show of great conviction are hardly substitutes.