Clinton and Trump: Does Anyone Else Deserve To Be Heard?

So, here we are.

The Democratic and Republican parties have both endured primary election cycles that have left many of their members disaffected, from supporters of Bernie Sanders who feel betrayed by his endorsement of Hillary Clinton to Republicans who refuse to endorse Donald Trump (including primary opponent Ted Cruz, who told party members at the Republican National Convention to "vote your conscience."). Meanwhile, the Pew Research Center reports that in 2014, 32 percent of Americans identified as Democrat, 23 percent as Republican - and 39 percent as "Independent."

Now that the primaries, conventions and nominations are done, the distress within both parties seems to be forcing mainstream media to pay at least a little more attention to third-party candidates. But most Americans will remain unaware of those candidates unless they appear in the presidential debates.

Unfortunately, the very structure of presidential debates has excluded third-party candidates from them for more than 20 years - the last candidate to join the Democratic and Republican nominees in a debate was Ross Perot, in 1992. The agency doing the excluding is the Commission on Presidential Debates, a nonprofit formed by the Democratic and Republican parties.

In June, 2015, the two most well-known third parties, Green and Libertarian, joined to sue the Federal Election Commission, contending that the FEC had failed by not compelling the CPD to open up the debates: "...a debate staging organization cannot use a criterion that only the Democratic and Republican candidates can realistically satisfy. But that is precisely what the CPD has done."

In September, they joined forces again to sue the Commission on Presidential Debates (along with the Republican and Democratic National Committees) in an attempt to get their candidates into the debates.

A favorable resolution of either case could result in Libertarian Gary Johnson and/or Green Dr. Jill Stein appearing onstage alongside Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  .

Meanwhile, here are three blog posts that I wrote in October 2012, about how third-party exclusion, which I consider one of the biggest defects in our current system, came to be, and the results that it produces. I hope you find them helpful.

An October glimpse of an American spring? (October 6, 2012)
An October glimpse of an American spring? - Part II (October 16, 2012)
An October glimpse of an American spring? - Postscript (October 25, 2012)

An October glimpse of American spring? - Postscript

I call B.S. on America's mainstream media.

On Tuesday, CNN.com ran a story by Tom Cohen with the headline, "Campaign enters final stretch as Obama takes final debate."

Here's the opening:

"Three debates down. Two weeks of campaigning to go.

President Barack Obama put Republican challenger Mitt Romney on the defensive on foreign policy in the final presidential debate Monday night, with analysts and an immediate poll giving Obama the victory."

That is B.S.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post's coverage of Monday night's Obama-Romney debate included a piece by Dan Balz and David Nakamura, with this headline: "Obama keeps Romney on his heels in last debate."

The Balz/Nakamura story includes this paragraph:

"The final debate concluded a gripping series of encounters between the two candidates that shook up the campaign as dramatically as any recent series of debates. Romney used the first debate to greatest advantage with an aggressive performance that contrasted to a lackluster evening for the president. Obama rebounded in the second debate, which was marked by sharp and testy exchanges between the two candidates, but not so much as to reverse the gains Romney had made."

That, too, is B.S.

The New York Times' Tuesday editorial, headlined "The final debate," opened thusly:

"Mitt Romney has nothing really coherent or substantive to say about domestic policy, but at least he can sound energetic and confident about it. On foreign policy, the subject of Monday night’s final presidential debate, he had little coherent to say and often sounded completely lost. That’s because he has no original ideas of substance on most world issues, including Syria, Iran and Afghanistan."

B.S., B.S., B.S.

These stories are all B.S. for one simple reason: Monday night's debate was not the last debate. It was not the final debate. More explicitly, it was not the final debate between presidential candidates. On Tuesday night, 24 hours after the debate that mainstream media called "last" and "final," there was another presidential debate, moderated by Larry King and featuring, not two, but FOUR presidential candidates: Rocky Anderson (Justice Party), Virgil Goode Jr. (Constitutional Party), Gov. Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party), and Jill Stein (Green Party).

Tuesday night's debate was sponsored by Free and Equal Elections, a nonprofit whose stated mission is "to reform federal, state and local elections, making it easier for candidates to get on ballots and ensure all ballot qualified candidates are included in various forums and debates."

Monday night's debate was sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates, a nonprofit formed by the Republican and Democrat parties.

I won't rehash what I've already written about the history of presidential debates, and the CPD's exclusion of third-party candidates. The point of this post is to note the degree to which the press has cooperated with them in that exclusion, with the result being B.S.

On a purely journalistic level, describing Monday night's meeting between Messrs. Obama and Romney as the last or final presidential debate when there was a presidential debate happening Tuesday night, is inexcusably sloppy.

Now get this: after Tuesday night's debate, Free and Equal Elections asked for a vote on who should participate in a SECOND debate. The top two candidates will square off next Tuesday, October 30, at 9 pm Eastern, in Washington DC.

Don't expect to view that debate, or to learn about it, by way of media who have already said that Monday's debate was the "last" or "final" one. But you can prepare to view it bookmarking Free and Equal.

Meanwhile, here is what you missed Tuesday night. Please notice that not only does this debate feature candidates you may not have heard of - it also includes questions, from everyday people, that journalists seem afraid to ask. (I will spare you a whole essay about questions that are not being asked in the CPD debates.)

Do you think these candidates (whether you agree with them or not) deserve to be heard? Do the questions here deserve to be asked?

An October glimpse of an American spring? - Part II

Title notwithstanding, I did not plan to write this piece.

On October 5, I wrote about how third-party candidates have been squeezed out of the presidential and vice-presidential debates since the League of Women Voters stopped sponsoring them in 1988. The League dropped its sponsorship in protest against an agreement between the George H.W. Bush and Michael Dukakis campaigns that the League felt made the debates a fraud.

I have not yet seen that agreement, so I can't compare it to the current memorandum of understanding between the Obama and Romney campaigns.

With tonight's presidential debate, the pattern of exclusion continues. Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson was denied participation.

But what made me start typing was this: this afternoon, the arrest of Green Party presidential nominees Jill Stein was arrested, along with her running mate Cheri Honkala, as they sought to enter the debate grounds.

Actually, the police refused them entry, then arrested them for blocking traffic when they sat down...




It's an incredibly minor thing - two women sitting in the street and then getting carried off by police - except that...them being carried off means that the American people will not get to hear a presidential candidate tonight who, by the party's count, will appear on 85% of the ballots on election day.

That candidate's name, "Jill Stein," will appear, and the vast majority of Americans will never have heard of her, or of her running mate, "Cheri Honkala" They will have no idea what ideas these women offer, and thus no idea of whether or not they agree with them.

In a better-functioning America, the debates would give candidates who are not able to spend half a billion dollars the opportunity to be heard by the American people.

That's in a better-functioning America. But since we aren't in that America, what's a voter to do?

Well, after all of the hoopla has died down from tonight's debate, and from the one on October 22, this voter is going to head over to the Free & Equal Elections Foundation website on October 23, for a presidential debate between FOUR third-party candidates. The event will stream live beginning at 9 pm EDT.

I plan to do that not just because any candidate who makes it onto the ballot in most of the country deserves to be heard. I'm doing it because I deserve to hear them. I deserve to decide whether I think they're brilliant or nuts. I deserve that choice.

And so do you.