On February 24, the D.C. circuit heard Level the Playing Field v FEC, the presidential debate case. Here is a link to the oral argument.
On February 24, the D.C. circuit heard Level the Playing Field v FEC, the presidential debate case. Here is a link to the oral argument.
Fascinating discussion, for those of us who don’t normally listen to these things. With regard to the judges’ question in the final minute or two, about whether other organizations (news media, LWV, etc) might host their own competing debates … I seem to recall that the CPD requires participating parties to not participate in any other organization’s debates. Am I wrong about that?
https://www.debates.org/
muck around for CPD requirements.
Sam, you’re right. CPD forces the major party nominees to sign an agreement abstaining from all other general election debates.
Of course, again, I am very interested in this case. And very skeptical of a favorable ruling re: fair and representative elections.
That is the common sense assumption that to be fair and representative, the six significant party nominees should be on a stage together at a debate. Plus significant independents.
The six significant parties that cover the entire political spectrum/bell curve are Green 27%, Constitution 27%, democrat 17%, republican 17%, libertarian 13% (Cato Institute The Libertarian Vote) Reform x/variable %.
Top Ten Plus PLAS is the solution.
Or a favorable Court ordered remedy which would have to be similar to Top Ten Plus PLAS.
Again, I am skeptical. We shall see, shall we not?
Only 2 parties —
MORE/LESS control freak statism in 6,000 plus years.
FATAL ROT in USA due to combination of —
ANTI-Democracy gerrymanders
Partisan exec/judic robot HACKS
Super-fatal violations of separation of powers.
Thus pending/actual Civil WAR II.
Too many regimes to count being destroyed due to internal/external WARS in world history.
Too many polisci MORON profs to count — infecting law skooools.