[MistyCA]

Third debate questionable ??? Ping

[Just mythoughts]

Toooooooo funny, bet old MZ. HeinzKerry picks up the tab.

[wizr]

This is the looongest, ugliest campaign I think I've ever seen.

Damn tired of attorneys, and some judges, too.

[alwaysconservative]

Thanks for the ping!

[redrock]

While I am voting for President Bush this election...it would be fun and extremely interesting to have a debate that included the Libertarians and even Ralph Nader.

Having those two at the debate would not in any way harm President Bush's run at a 2nd term.

But, and this may be the most important part of it, it would totally piss off those who have an automatic reaction against Libertarians.

That alone is reason enough.....

redrock

[Brownie74]

The debate will probably go on without the Libertarians. I am ALMOST in favor of including all parties in the debates but the existing rules do serve a purpose by keeping all of the clutter off the radar screen.

I am suprised that there are so many undecided voters in this election. They must be the ones watching the MSM.

.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!!!

[TheSpottedOwl]

Thanks for pinging me. A person on another website is promoting Badnarik. I checked out his website, and while I agree with some of his positions, I most definitely disagree with his stance on Iraq.

Maybe he'll be viable in 2008. As for the debates, I feel that anyone running for the same office should be allowed to debate the other candidates.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[AuntB]

I hope this doesn't hold up the debate, however, the Libertarians and any one qualifying on the ballot should be in the debate. It would do us ALL good. A "two party" system such as we have degenerated into is only one party away from one party rule. It wasn't supposed to be this way, with only 2 parties eligible for any voice.

Remember little, berated parties brought us things like the right for women to vote.