Third Party Debate

Today in class we briefly discussed the third part debate that occurred last night.  Being part of the majority of the class that hadn't known it happened, I was stunned to hear how little publicity this kind of debate got.  These are people that are running for president of the United States of America I had never heard of any of them.  They didn't even get a spot on network television.

An article I found from the New York Times brought up some interesting ideas regarding the debates.  One thing that caught my eye in particular came in the last paragraph of the article.

Because of Ralph Nader's role in the 2000 election, possibly taking enough votes from Gore to give Bush the presidency, many people consider these third party candidates to be "spoilers" instead of actual candidates.

In my opinion, in order to keep the integrity of our democracy, it is imperative to have smaller party candidates.  Maybe none of them are going to win any elections in the foreseeable future, but I still think they are important.  I believe that the more opinions are heard, the better a democracy will run.  It's also true that the main political parties of our country have not always been constant.  In order for a main party to change, which I think is a sign of democratic possession  a smaller party has to gain popularity.  Without these smaller parties we would be trapped in the same ideas that we've had for years and would be denying what makes a democracy.  If you disagree please comment.