This editorial from Bloomberg News argues that the first general election presidential debate should include every candidate who is on the ballot in enough states to theoretically win the election. The editorial says that subsequent debates that year should be somewhat more restrictive, with public opinion after the first debate shaping who is invited into the subsequent debates.
In all U.S. history, there has never been a presidential election with more than 7 candidates who could theoretically have won. This is true even for the period before there were government-printed ballots. Before there were government ballots, minor parties can still be evaluated, in retrospect, by how many states in which they printed up private ballots and distributed them to voters.
Years with 7 candidates who would have qualified, under the Bloomberg News standard, are 1976 and 2000. Years in which six would have qualified are 1900, 1904, 1908, 1912, 1932, 1936, 1980, 1996, 2004, and 2008.
A candidate can theoretically be elected with one electoral vote.
How many DEAD bodies in a quite possible Civil WAR II will it take before the EVIL ANTI-Democracy minority rule gerrymander OLIGARCHS get rid of the EVIL ANTI-Democracy minority rule gerrymander Electoral College ???
The Elephant HACKS kept the EVIL E.V. regardless of the about 750,000 DEAD on both sides in Civil WAR I in 1861-1865.
—
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
The political establishment are not even going to allow this for Presidential Debates. They are afraid of the ideas which a 3rd party candidate espouses – not their presence on the ballot. Ideas are power, and when they become popular with the voters, the voters will write-in the name of the candidate.