Political Debates

who decides which parties get to debate? oh, let me guess. republicans and democrats. those in power kind of have a vested interest in making sure only they and their nearly identical sister party are the only ones that get much exposure.

It is an entrenched canerous mentality as well as a good ol boy system. Candidates with out a "d" or an "r" next to them don't exist,aren't relevant, "can't win", people "aren't interested in them"....or so the two parties and the media they trade pocket luvin' with. They want you to beileve these candiates aren't "viable" or "can't win." You don't even often see too many thirders and indies even being interviewed on any of the big 3. How often do you see MSNBC give time to the socialist party or the Green party? even Fox is guilty, for a network oportunisticly jumping on the freedom wagon you don't see an awefull lot of libertian candiates being given time. All they push is that bogus commercialized republican hijacked "Tea Party" and their favorite "constitutionaly conciencious" candidates like Michell Bachman, Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich (Really? Gingrich???). Obama's campaign alone by the way spent a good deal of money trying to keep candidates off the ballot in the past election by the way....so did McCain's campaign...it'sanother sickening aspect of the entrenched problem Bottom line it's an entrenched system that everyone seems to be brainwashed in to accepting. Alternative candidates "can't win" or "aren't valid" because we allow it to be so. We do not demand enough coverage of them, or that the media and political cohorts who do their best to invalidate the others, stop doing so. Start boycots of the networks' sponsors until they begin changing this. Work in your own states to get election laws reformed and demand legislation in your states that makes it easier for candidates to get on the ballot. right now, many states have ballot laws that are pretty much desinged so that only a huge national party can afford to and jump through the hoops to get on it. Is yours one of these states folks? If it is do something about it. And finally and most importantly...if you support these guys,then for farque's sake -support, campaign and VOTE FOR THEM.

Tonight on the local PBS station AETN the Boozman vs Lincoln for senate debate is also going to feature the Green party candidate John Gary and Independent candidate Trevor Drown. Typically if the debate is air and therefor moderated by AETN they will allow all the candidate who have ballot statues. Earlier there was a debate between the two of them air on the local Fox station which only featured only the two of them. I would like it to be that everyone who has ballot statues be able to be apart of the debate. If I have the ability to vote for them I should be able to hear what they have to say about the issues. Maybe they can make a better case than the two big party candidates.

This is a very interesting issue. AS others have already said, it's the sponsor of a debate that gets to make the rules, including choosing which candidates are "allowed" to participate. Most of the time it seems it's just the Democratic and Republican candidates, although there are exceptions now and then. The interesting thing is the excuse usually given for excluding third party candidates is that they don't poll well enough; in fact, some organizations only invite candidates who poll at a certain percentage. The problem is, how can someone poll well when most people have never heard of them? How can people become familiar with them if the media doesn't give them any exposure and they're not allowed to participate in debates? For all that I'm constantly accused of being totally loyal to the Democratic Party, I've long wished for there to be more successful third party and independent candidates. However, I've got to be honest here, I'm VERY reluctant to vote for a third party candidate if it means I'll be helping one of the major parties' candidates get elected, especially if the person I'd be helping is someone I don't support at all! I know I'll get some criticism for saying that but it is what it is. That's why I'd like for these candidates to get more exposure and to be allowed to debate because I think that would make a world of difference. Annie

Now if she really did try to use fake tickets, I can't support that, but good for her on trying to get in. I remember a while back, 2000 if I remember correctly, Alan Keyes was arrested for trying to force his way into a debate in Atlanta, GA when he wasn't invited. The mayor actually bailed him out and apologized. I think that if someone meets the criteria for being on the ballot, they should be included in the debates. The media is responsible for a lot of these debates and they are 100% in the tank of the 2 party system. During the entire 2008 campaign they just pretended the other candidates didn't exist. I saw Nader only ONCE on TV during that time when he was on Fox News. The other candidates got nothing. When McCain "suspended" his campaign Bob Barr wanted to debate Obama in his place. Of course that never made the news and the people running the debate turned him down saying they would just allow Obama to treat it like a town hall with the attendees rather than debate a candidate besides McCain. You can see that when made visible, 3rd parties get a solid support from voters as Perot did back in 92. The only reason he was in those debates was because Bush demanded he be included. That move cost him the election, but it was still the right thing to do. In 96 Dole didn't feel the same way and allowed Perot to be excluded from all the debates. As a result Perot got about half as many votes.

AARP sponsored the California gubernatorial debate so it was the AARP who refused to invite the Green Party candidate. I think that the democratic process is best served in principle when all candidates on the ballot are allowed to debate. These debates often exclude candidates with no chance of winning, the irrelevant outliers on any poll or graph, but in order for third party candidates to ever have a chance to get their positions known, we have to include them. They may never gain support or win, but the people have a right to know in order to choose rightly.