Jesse Uncensored: Presidential Debates & The Fight for Third Party Inclusion

On this week’s Off the Grid, I sound off on how third party Presidential candidates should have the right to participate in Presidential debates, especially since 43% of Americans identify as Independents. The Commission on Presidential Debates prevents third party candidates from participating by setting up barriers that make it nearly impossible for anyone outside of the two major parties to be included.

Do you support the fight to change the rule requiring candidates to poll at 15% weeks before the election? If you do, let me know.

a reply to: JesseVentura

I think that there should be a Democrat debate, just between Hillary and her top 4 other opponents.
This should be moderated by a well known conservative Republican to be fair.

I think that there should be a Republican debate, with the top 5 in the polls.
This should be moderated by a known liberal Democrat to be fair.

I also think that all registered third parties should have a debate.
Moderated by one left wing liberal and one right wing conservative.

Then let the people vote (American Idol style)

And the top 2 candidates from each of the three debates should compete in the next debate.
With a known left wing liberal and right wing conservative moderating (taking turns asking questions)

Let the people vote (American Idol Style)

Then the third party winner should be included in the debates with the Dem and Rep nominee
With a freestyle debate.
Each candidate asking the other 2 the same question.
With the moderator not allowed to do anything but keep time and order.
(all final debates should be freestyle)


This will put the most popular third party candidate on equal footing with
both the Dem and Rep choices. The only fair and equitable way for the
debates to proceed.

a reply to: JesseVentura

We need to have more than 2 views represented in every debate. I think we should have no less than 5 parties per debate and no more than 10.

Eventually I would like to see the party system replaced by a system that leaves off labels. Where men are expected to think for themselves and present their ideas, not some arbitrary speak that follows party lines.

a reply to: JesseVentura

I agree with 99% of what you spoke of. However with all repubs and demoracts being puppets, i thin Ron Paul, and Denis Kucinich were and are the exception in 2012. Though Denis did not run, Ron would have been a extreme hiccup as a president in the system as it is today.

In retrospect, our next president will be white, female, and married to a former president, just my guess.

Its not the people that vote who choose the next president, its the people that count the votes who choose, or spend the most money. IMO

A third, 4th, 5th party would be great in the debates, but it just does not fit into the scheme of where this NWO, or what ever you want to call it, is going to happen. We do not have enough educated ppl in the world to challenge the status Quo. and if we did, we do not have the" ability" to challenge that Status Quo.
As a human being, being brought up in the U.S., born in 1980, and sees the world with open eyes, any presidental canidate that differs from the status quo, will lose. PERIOD.

IMO

a reply to: JesseVentura

Third party in the US is a novel idea that will never work as it is now.

A third party will only leave the Dems in control EVERY election. Look at the statistics. Dems OWN the big population centers and they know it. Most of these would vote Dem if Micky Mouse was on the ballet. And this gives them a big advantage. The Rep base is not as big, but is just has die hard. The swing; as normal; is the independent vote. Most independents that vote lean Dem. and only about 10-15 % ARE "truly" independent.

This leaves the Dems with a big advantage, while splitting the "true" independent vote between the Rep and the third party.

If we really want a true third party we should focus on the House and Senate until there is a support base in place that could help. The other way would be to motivate the 40%+ that DON'T vote. From studies most of these would be conservative voters and would be more likly to support a third party. (Because liberals are always looking for a cause to support and tend to be way more active then conservatives in voting. Conservatives tend to just want to be left alone untill you kick over their bee hive.)


Good read. (Even if it is from NPR )

www.npr.org...