Should third party candidates appear at the Presidential Debates?

[MrSanity]

1. Should third party candidates appear at the Presidential Debates?
2. Would it help break the Two Party system?

I honestly think they should have their fair share of time on the floor. For those of you who saw the California Recall Election Debates, you would be glad that Tom McClintock was representing you a lot better than Arnold, Huffington, Bustamonte, and that guy from the Green Party.

[dPrasse]

Yes ... public debate will either help them get into the mainstream or it will silence them ...

[Rhino]

Yes.

[Federal Farmer]

Keeping 3rd party candidates out of debates is one good measure to take if you want a monopoly in the political sphere, considering the "great" differences between the two major parties.

[libertyman]

ABSOLUTELY!

But the candidates of the 2 major parties will refuse to debate them...so what do you do? The Republocratic Party sets the barrier so high against 3rd Parties that they can't qualify for the Presidential Debates.

[MrSanity]

ABSOLUTELY!

But the candidates of the 2 major parties will refuse to debate them...so what do you do? The Republocratic Party sets the barrier so high against 3rd Parties that they can't qualify for the Presidential Debates.That seemed to be the case with the 1992 Presidential/Vice Presidential Debates with Ross Perot.

[Rhino]

That seemed to be the case with the 1992 Presidential/Vice Presidential Debates with Ross Perot.Probably better for Perot that it was.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Should third party candidates appear at the Presidential Debates?

Yes, most definitely. I would also suggest we have MORE debates, where one topic at a time is addressed. Maybe take the top 5 issues and have a debate regarding each one. Make these yahoos SPELL OUT their plans, no gobbledy-gook, no mumbo-jumbo, no slight-of-tongue or obfuscation allowed. We need a REAL moderator, not some wimpy dude from the McNeil-Lehrer Report. In additions, the questions should come from either the audience, or have an internet set up so questions can be sent in to one location, say for 3 hours, then sort through and pick the questions most asked for them to answer.

No more allowing freebies on Leno, Letterman, The Daily Show, MTV, etc. either!

[Kathy30]

Absolutely yes. People are sick and disgusted with the democrats and republicans, the time is ripe for a third party candidate.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Before any minor party candidate is included in a presidential debate, that candidate must meet some minimum criteria, e.g., proof of broad based support among potential voters. Otherwise, anyone could claim to be a "third party" candidate in order to get some free publicity for his or her cause, no matter how extreme.

A possible minimum requirement might be to meet the requirements to be placed on the ballots of, say, two-thirds of the states.

[DesertFox]

Well, I think there should be some threshhold that the 3d Party represents, before he/she/it gets that kinda cred. I mean, luss say the largest 3d Party polls 0.01% of the vote. It would be ludicrous to let him in. On the other end of possibilities, Ross Perot ended up with 19 million votes, which is plenty respectable.

Luss hear ideas about the threshhold.

[Lubbock]

Perot gave us Clinton.

'Nuff said.

[UnkHiram]

It would depend on whether or not the Canidate is question was a viable canidate.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Way back in 1962, I was a charter member of the New York Conservative Party. New York has a rule that a party must get a certain number of certified signatures on a petition to get on the ballot and must get something like 10% of the gubernatorial vote in order to stay on the ballot for the next election. In the Conservative Party's first year (1962), not only did it get enough votes to stay on the ballot, but it also outpolled the long-established NY Liberal Party.

It seems to me that something like that could be the criteria for minor party participation in the presidential debates.

FYI, in 1970, James Buckley (Wm. F. Buckley's brother) was elected to the Senate as the nominee of the New York Conservative Party in a 3-way race with the Republican candidate and the Democrat candidate who was also the Liberal Party nominee. He served until he was defeated by Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

[Venus de Smilo]

1. Should third party candidates appear at the Presidential Debates?
2. Would it help break the Two Party system?

I honestly think they should have their fair share of time on the floor. For those of you who saw the California Recall Election Debates, you would be glad that Tom McClintock was representing you a lot better than Arnold, Huffington, Bustamonte, and that guy from the Green Party.

I absolutely think they should be heard.

[Venus de Smilo]

Keeping 3rd party candidates out of debates is one good measure to take if you want a monopoly in the political sphere, considering the "great" differences between the two major parties.

Incumbents have such an edge up already, silencing the competition is just downright un-American.

[Eagle1]

it doesnt matter if they are in the debates or not
our system naturally results in 2 parties
http://www.answers.com/topic/duverger-s-law

[Lazarus]

The Dems and Pubs wont allow them on the debate unless there is a nation-wide uproar about it... They have a lock on the political stage and there is no advantage to them allowing 3rd parties in the competition... They dont want competition...

The debates are orchestrated media events anyway - They are meant for nothing more than entertainment value - American Idol goes to Washington...:rolleyes:

[Peachdiane]

They should. The Pub party doesn't offer me much. I'm open to listening to third party candidates....