The problem is that the rules (not just the Debate Commission, but Election law in general) are such that they preclude any chance of anyone ever breaking the two party system in this country and it is the two parties that conspire to keep it that way.
Look what The Democrats are doing to Nader in the courts all over the country.
That means they are operating a cartel and the people are being denied choice.
This thread seems to be assuming that the rules of the debate are prejudicial against this particular candidate. If so, what are the rules and how is it prejudicial?
I think Badnarik's argument is that if you are going to hold a debate between only two of several candidates in a public election then it is not a public event and the candidates in question should provide their own facilities and resources to do that. You and I cannot get free use of a university campus and national airwaves to broadcast a private discussion, so why should Bush and Kerry?
Looks like the CPD is a LEFTIST organisation. NAACP. AARP. Rock the Vote. Slate. La Raza...
Wonderful bunch of folks to have deciding who gets to debate in public. Fascism anyone? Kinda makes you wonder who is on their 2004 "Voter Indoctrination Education Team".
Again, what are the specifics? If the debate eligibility rules were that you must be on the ballot in at least 2/3rds of the State and be over 5% average in the polls would that be invalid? If you want to contest the rules, you have to state them and why you believe they are invalid.
Look what The Democrats are doing to Nader in the courts all over the country.
This has to do with the courts and not the Debate Commission. When the legislative laws of elections are overturned by corrupt judges, this is indeed a problem and the remedy - impeachment - is long overdue, but it has nothing to do with the Debate Commission. That means they are operating a cartel and the people are being denied choice.
Just saying something does not make is so. The implications are that the Debate Commission is operating as a 'cartel' for the Republican and Democratic parties to the exclusion of others.
To persuade me, I need the facts and why your argument is correct. The press currently operates via innuendo and slander and we need the essential facts now more than ever.