In the opinion of Ballot Access News, the only realistic hope to expand presidential general election debates in 2008, is for people to pester the leading Democratic and Republican candidates for president, and get them to say that if they are nominated, they will agree to participate in at least one debate in the general election campaign that includes the leading minor party and independent candidates.
The only general election presidential debate in U.S. history that included the Republican nominee, the Democratic nominee, and anyone else, was in 1992. Ross Perot was included because both major party nominees wanted him included. The opinion of the debate sponsor, the Commission on Presidential Debates, didn’t really matter.
Democrats and Republicans who want to be president will be spending lots of time in New Hampshire and Iowa, during the next year. If, every time they speak to a group of voters, someone asks them to agree to at least one inclusive general election debate, perhaps eventually some of them will make this commitment. A Republican or Democrat who makes such a commitment would gain certain degree of popularity, since polls consistently show that the public likes debates with more than just two participants.
I had an idea for a ballot initiative to get “minor” candidates into debates with Democrats or Republicans.
One possibility would be to simply require the participation of so called “minor” candidates in any debates with Democrats and Republicans.
Another possibility is to shame the Democrat and Republican if they refuse to debate so called “minor” candidates by printing in bold print on election ballots next to their names “REFUSED TO DEBATE ALL OF THE CANDIDATES FOR THIS OFFICE.” On that same election ballot next to the “minor” candidates who were willing to debate but got shut out of debating the so called “major” candidates the following could be printed in bold print next to their name “WAS WILLING TO DEBATE ALL CANDIDATES FOR THIS OFFICE.” To further humiliate Democrats and Republican who refuse to debate all of the candidates a chicken could also be printed next to their names on the ballot.
Is anyone out their interested in trying to get ballot initiatives like this on the ballot?
Make the sponsors of the debate play the campaign finance rules.
Well, I think if the people filing lawsuits went about it with the right strategy they would win. See the Max Linn-Florida case for an example of how to do it.
Unfortunately it’ll never happen. Neither major party wants any debate to be anything more than a dog and pony show- an opportunity to repeat the talking points and slogans of their campaign. Under no circumstances do they want anything which might be a surprise- and that especially includes third-party candidates with nothing to lose.
Lawsuits won’t work. The Max Linn federal court victory was based on fighting over whether the debate sponsor’s own criteria had or had not been met (the debate criteria was 7%, but the debate sponsor was ignoring a poll that said Max Linn had 7%). And with respect to Kris, that is the kind of pessimism that perpetuates itself. It is popular for the major party figures to say they are reasonable about this. If just one prominent major party member seeking a nomination responds affirmatively, that will put pressures on his or her competitors. To say “It’ll never happen” is self-defeating. It will only happen if people try to make it happen.
I’ll agree to ask anyone who visits NH if they will pledge to debate. If possible, I’ll get their agreement on tape.
I don’t know if it will happen, but another good chance that minor party candidates will enter the next presidential debate is becasue of the Greens. So far, most of the people running for thier endorsement are female. I seriously doubt Hillary will get the Deocratic nod from her party. She polarizes the Democratic Party the same way Bush polarizes the nation. So if the Greens nominated a female, I think a lot of females would get behind her as the first female running for the Presidency and would want to see her in a debate. Further, since many Greens tend to be liberal, the Democratic Party would naturally fear a loss of votes. (Although I contend that people who vote Green wouldn’t vote Democrat no matter what. They would rather write somebody’s name in or not vote at all.) So, that would mean the Democrats would want to counter and would want a conservative party in the debate to hopefully take some votes away from the Republicans. That would mean the Libertarians or Constitution Party. We may finally see a debate where every party that is in enough states to theoretically win enough electoral votes to win the Presidency would be included. At most, that would be five. The Dems, Reps, Greens, Libertarians and Constitution Parties. Like I said, while it could happen, the odds are against it. But if it does, you heard it here first!
“So if the Greens nominated a female, I think a lot of females would get behind her as the first female running for the Presidency and would want to see her in a debate.”
There has already been a female Presidential candidate. Leona Fulani was the Presidential candidate for the New Alliance Party in the late ’80s and/or early ’90s.
I stand corrected. However, in my defense, I have to say that that was in the last century. 😉 These are modern times! Besides, the Greens are more well known across the country than the Aliiance Party ever was. Therefore, it seems she would attract more attention and be less of a “fringe” candidate than Fulani.
What I think is sad is that fact that presidential debates are just the opposite. It seems to me that every presidential debate is about reiterating what has been said before during the campain, and that presidential debates are not debates at all. A valid, and to me appropriate, definition of debate is: To engage in a formal discussion or argument. This definition is clearly what we do not have in the US, and I think that true presidential debates should be required of ALL candidates with all other candidates present. The sad thing is that I do not think that it will ever come to pass as long as we have a 2-party system (or a any number-party system).