to the editor: dear presidential candidates: your second debate is on sunday night, and i<u+2019>d like to make a request of both of you. please do not talk about your opponent<u+2019>s past or what you think he or she can and cannot do. this is just wasted airtime, and you are doing the american people a disservice by not talking about what is important. we are smart and can figure out whether or not your accomplishments are worthy of being the commander in chief. please address with details (and not just sound bites) what you are going to do to fix the problems we have today and how you<u+2019>d do it fairly. we need leadership, and right now. every conversation i have had regarding the presidential race comes down to this: we will vote for the least worst candidate. this is a sorry statement. please show us that you can lead, that you have detailed plans and that you can unite the american people. paul bjorndahl chester, n.h. to the editor: re <u+201c> mike pence<u+2019>s fantasy running mate <u+201d> (editorial, oct. 5): i respectfully disagree that the discussion of abortion during tuesday<u+2019>s vice-presidential debate evidenced <u+201c>deeply felt and carefully considered<u+201d> positions on the issue held by both gov. mike pence and senator tim kaine. <u+201c>deeply felt,<u+201d> i agree, but <u+201c>carefully considered<u+201d>? mr. pence<u+2019>s positions on abortion, reflected in his long crusade to criminalize the safe and common procedure nationwide, hardly fit that description. to so generously characterize them, even in passing as part of an otherwise worthy debate analysis, risks normalizing positions that are brazenly unconstitutional and profoundly damaging to the lives of women. personally, i see no sign that mr. pence or his running mate for the white house, donald trump, have seriously weighed that damage. dorothy samuels new york the writer, a former member of the new york times<u+2019>s editorial board, is a senior fellow at the brennan center for justice at new york university school of law. to the editor: re <u+201c> with pence and kaine, faith is back in the mix <u+201d> (front page, oct. 4): both mike pence and tim kaine state that their deep religious faith is central to their politics. however, there is a stark difference between the two. mr. pence says he is <u+201c>a christian, a conservative and a republican <u+2014> in that order.<u+201d> his actions as a congressman and governor demonstrate that christianity dictates his political beliefs. mr. pence uses his christianity to demonize hillary clinton and her supporters and to undermine the separation of church and state. mr. kaine<u+2019>s religious beliefs have led him to embrace a theology centered on social justice. his faith motivates, but does not dictate, his politics. mr. kaine envisions democracy infused with morality, whereas mr. pence seems to be advocating a conservative christian theocracy ruling america. donald spector montclair, n.j. a version of this letter appears in print on october 7, 2016, on page a26 of the new york edition with the headline: debates past, and debates future. today's paper | subscribe
debates past, and debates future
noauthor