Journalist 1: “Did you see those protesters outside? There were some really wild signs they were waving around.”
Journalist 2: “Apparently the people want to hear how the candidates would substantially cut military spending.”
Journalist 3: “No—that is a non starter—they both want to increase military spending.”
Journalist 1: “Yes—and there are some people that want them to debate how to break up the too big to fail bank.”
Journalist 3: “Again- smell the coffee people. No difference between them there.”
Journalist 2: “What about breaking up the big media companies?”
Journalist 1: “Are you crazy? That is how we got this gig.”
Journalist 3: “Exactly.”
Journalist 2: “Should we ask them to debate the restrictions on liberty and the invasions of personal privacy?”
Journalist 1: “Well isn’t trampling on the Constitution justified by the war on terror?”
Journalist 3: “It’s doesn’t matter—they both agree on it.”
Journalist 2: “Should we have them talk about the outsourcing of jobs and tax avoidance by multinational corporations?”
Journalist 1: “Who do you think is sponsoring this debate?
Journalist 3: “And candidates? And our networks?”
Journalist 2: “I guess we should get the appearance of a different point of view in here.”
Journalist 1: “With leaders of the two parties co-chairing the debates? That is never going to happen.”
Journalist 3: “It clearly seems to be two parties with one owner.”
Journalist 2: “Well my concern, from the perspective of television ratings, is how do we make this interesting when there really isn’t much difference between them?”
Journalist 3: “Stick with the social distraction topics. We’ve been talking about that for 30 years. Sex and sexuality—and that is always a good with viewers for ratings.”
Journalist 1: “Exactly: gay marriage, abortion,, pedophilia, birth control”
Journalist 2: “and don’t forget legitimate rape.”
Journalist 3: “Oh, good one, we can spend at least 15 minutes on legitimate rate alone.”
The Man With The Crown: “If you want to change the direction and future of this country then we need a different point of view. The two candidates are not going to be talking about the real issues: exploding debt, unfair taxation, two standards of justice, and corporate control of what used to be our democracy. If you want to see these and other issues fixed : Occupy the debates.”
Our most important fundraising appeal of the year
December is the most critical time of year for Truthout, because our nonprofit news is funded almost entirely by individual donations from readers like you. So before you navigate away, we ask that you take just a second to support Truthout with a tax-deductible donation.
This year is a little different. We are up against a far-reaching, wide-scale attack on press freedom coming from the Trump administration. 2025 was a year of frightening censorship, news industry corporate consolidation, and worsening financial conditions for progressive nonprofits across the board.
We can only resist Trump’s agenda by cultivating a strong base of support. The right-wing mediasphere is funded comfortably by billionaire owners and venture capitalist philanthropists. At Truthout, we have you.
We’ve set an ambitious target for our year-end campaign — a goal of $180,000 to keep up our fight against authoritarianism in 2026. Please take a meaningful action in this fight: make a one-time or monthly donation to Truthout before December 31. If you have the means, please dig deep.