[aristeides]

-He should immediately demand a debate, and require that the Green party candidate be allowed (since the Dems' legal brief stressed electoral choice, why silence the greens?)

That tactic would be more likely to work if he also requires including the Libertarian and Conservative candidates. They're more likely to take Republican votes -- so it would look fairer -- but the Greens are likely to take considerably more votes in total from the Dems than the Libertarians and Conservatives take from the Republicans, so it would be a smart tactic.

[ER_in_OC,CA]

Well, the Dems would *NEVER* allow a R/D/Grn only debate. But it will put the Dems and Lausenberg against "choice" so, it's bad PR.

Forrester's position would be "the top three candidates by poll numbers should be allowed to debate..." It would clearly be a ploy.

But seriously, Forrester should demand a debate to take place THIS FRIDAY. Lauseberg would decline, of course...and the goal is to keep Lauseberg on the defensive.

(note: The LAUSEberg misspelling is intentional)