Rec this OP if you want third parties to be part of the presidential debates

[mdmc]

This is what democracy looks like!
I would like to see some real mavericks up there. Anyone else?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7002858&mesg_id=7002858

[AllentownJake]

1. Nope

This is a contest between two people in reality. Adding those people on stage turns it into a circus like the Primaries.

[mdmc]

4. please don't blame Nader if we lose

He has a right to run.

[AllentownJake]

7. Having the right

and exercising your right which causes people you diagree with 100% to win vs. 50% is idiotic and insane. Ralph Nader is a narcistic chump and he can go to hell.

[mdmc]

16. imho

Nader is progressive. Mckinney is progressive. Obama and Biden are progressive.

I like the idea of having multiple choices (Barr, Nader, McKinney, whoever the Constitutional Party candidate is) in the election.

I also think that having them in the race will help us pull in swing voters. For every vote we lose to the left, we gain 10 in the middle.

Al From from the rat worm DLC agrees with me, by the way.

[AllentownJake]

23. If we had a runoff system

I would agree with you. We don't. Winner takes all even if the winner gets 43% of the vote in a 3 way race.

[mdmc]

27. imho for every vote we lose to the left, we gain many more in the middle

Nader can get to voters that the mainstream can't get to. Some of these votes will agree with your 2 party analysis and will vote for the lesser of two evils. Nader pulls them in, Obama seals the deal.

Then there are those that think that Obama is some leftist wacko. Nader is a leftist wacko. Nader makes Obama look more electable.

For every vote we lose to the left, we gain many more from the middle.

Rat worm DLC'er Al From agrees with this (I actually stole the idea from him).

[Sonicmedusa]

2. Yes, and I would like to see them on the ballot too.

A choice of two candidates is no choice.

[Swede]

3. Post this on IndependantUnderground.

It doesn't belong here.

[mdmc]

5. I think it would help Obama, and hurt McCain

Just like Perot did in 92.

[Hugabear]

6. I absolutely think the Libertarians should be up there

They're going to draw much more from the rethugs than us.

[GreenPartyVoter]

8. The Greens, Socialists, Libertarians, Constitution Party, Nader... Just imagine

the variety of answers we might hear per question.

[Perky]

9. Sure... include Bob Barr

[Maven]

10. No. Not this time I don't.

Sorry.

[Zenmaster]

11. Someday soon, but not this election

I think Obama can slice up McCain easier one on one.

I do think our country is overdue for allowing 3rd parties more relevency in the political process, and in the future, I'd like to see it.

[Better Believe It]

22. Huh?????

"I think Obama can slice up McCain easier one on one."

Any chance he might begin doing that anytime soon .... this week .....next month .... before the election?

[WinkyDink]

12. No, Ralph. Go away.

[barack the house]

13. As long as it's just Bob Barr cool idea. =)

[WeDidIt]

14. Only if they're tracking at 15% or above in the polls

Sorry, no need for wannabe disaster assholes on the stage hogging the limelight.

There's too much at stake and if you allow Barr, Nader, and McKinney, you've got to allow all the other dead end nimrod assholes, too. That means putting LaRouche up there, too.

[grantcart]

17. agreed also you don't want to keep renegotiating the ground rules during

the campaign.

If you want to make changes it has to be for the next debate.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

19. The only problem with that is...

which polls do you trust?

[Better Believe It]

20. You Prefer McCain and Palin?

So you prefer having McCain and Palin hogging the limelight?

[blondeatlast]

21. Are we going to allow any declared candidate? On how many state ballots does their name

need to appear?

Can I declare and get a seat? I can cook up a great party name and a website in an afternoon.

[Better Believe It]

25. Who Has Suggested That? The Answer To Your Question Is ....

if a candidates name ppears on the ballot in enough states to win a majority of electoral votes that would qualify them for the debates.

That's seems like a reasonable criteria. You don't agree?

Now stop that silly nonsense about cooking up a website and great party name. Your procedure wouldn't even qualify you for ballot status in a single state much less participation in the presidential debates.

You are trying to be funny .... right?

[blondeatlast]

31. On the first part, no, on the second part yes. But it was a sinmple question posted several times

by myself and others and this is the first reply anyone has gotten to it.

[blondeatlast]

15. You want every party on the ballot? Is there NO criteria? State ballots? Poll numbers?

The question isn't at all simple--and knowing your history, I question your motives. Sorry--just simple truth.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

18. I think every party that can receive a certain number of signatures on a petition

should be able to participate.

[cynatnite]

24. You want these other 14 nutjobs on the stage, too?

Gene Amondson
Chuck Baldwin
Bob Barr
Róger Calero
Charles Jay
Alan Keyes
Gloria La Riva
Frank McEnulty
Cynthia McKinney
Brian Moore
Ralph Nader
Ron Paul
Tom Stevens
Ted Weill

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Presidential_Candidates

[Better Believe It]

26. So You Think Every Candidate Is A Nutjob Except McCain And Palin!

You didn't put them on your list!

Was that accidental?

[cynatnite]

28. I kinda figured that eveyone knew McCain/Palin was running...

and didn't see the need to add them.

Would it make you feel better if I did?

[blondeatlast]

33. You assume that everyone on DU gets the glaringly obvious; how dare you?

:rofl:

[Better Believe It]

34. Perhaps You Could Explain Your "Nutjob" List

Run down each of the candidates you listed as a nutjob and explain why you think that candidate is a nutjob.

If you can't defend and explain your reasoning with some factual information, why should we assume each of those candidates is nuts?

I'm listening!

[blondeatlast]

35. Yes, the poster certainly shouldn't be allowed to offer an opinion on a Democratic message

board about candidates from other parties.

The poster doesn't need to defend his/herself here. "Democrats and other progressives..." and all that messy boilerplate stuff.

[Better Believe It]

36. Why Not? The Poster Is Absolutely Entitled To Offer Their Opinion

Not only that, but I hope she/he presents their opinion in more detail.

And you think he/she should shut-up?

[blondeatlast]

38. Lack of humor and irony are the signs of a dull mind.

I laugh at DU a lot, whether the posters want me to or not (most do).

[Better Believe It]

39. I Guess You Just Lost Me Since I Didn't Get The Joke

But, I have a good sense of humor so don't give up!

[BlooInBloo]

29. Damn non-Democratic advocates.

[Better Believe It]

30. Who Should Be Allowed In The Debates? A Simple Solution And Formula

If a candidates name appears on the ballot in enough states to win a majority of electoral votes that would qualify them for the debates.

What do people think?

[blondeatlast]

32. How many states? My own answer would be at least 33.

That's two thirds and I think it's reasonable.

[GreenPartyVoter]

37. Trouble is, other parties work damn hard to screw up the chances of their opponents by

blocking petition signatures from being counted and so forth. So if they screw things up in enough states they can continue to keep other candidates out of the debates and prevent democracy from actually happening.

[abburdlen]

40. If someone is on the ballot

in all 50 states, then I think they should be included in the debates.

Philosophically it's better to have more voices in the debate - that's sort of the point of democracy isn't it?
Pragmatically it helps Obama. Obama might lose a few votes to a third party candidate, but McCain has a lot more to lose. Many backing the GOP right now are more voting against Obama than for McCain - and if we split that vote up, we win in a landslide.

[stillcool]

41. I'd like to see it..

a little truthiness would freak everybody right the fuck out.