Unchallenged opinions dilute ballot

I am concerned about Naperville Mayor George Pradel’s statement that he sees nothing wrong with the “forum” settings. Although the “forum setting” allows the candidates to present their opinions in 60-second sound bites, there is no opposition comments to counter it. In fact, a “forum” focuses on one point of view. A “debate setting” allows the candidates to not only express their opinions, but also compare and contrast their ideas — allowing the audience to make the choice.

Debates represent one of the most important aspects of American democracy, going back to the Stephen Douglas-Abraham Lincoln debates of 1858. What good could come from a debate versus a forum? In 1858, debates not only tested the candidates but also led to the monumental Freeport Doctrine by Stephen Douglas. Without these debates, the two candidates would have lost the ability to challenge each other and create the Freeport Doctrine, and the public would have lost the opportunity to be better informed of both candidates’ positions.

That was 153 years ago, but today is no different. Naperville, much like America then, teeters at the point of progress or stagnation. If any candidate is allowed to easily sway the public’s opinions by eliminating opposition responses and to make unchallenged or discussed positions, the unchallenged candidate wins, the voter loses, and our system crumbles.

There is no replacement for the truest expression of democracy, the debate. Our freedom to vote for our representatives exists when the positions of the candidates are clearly presented. If “forums” replace debates, then unchallenged opinions dilute the ballot.

Tori Barbino

Naperville