'Bipartisan Fraud': Debate Rules Shut Out Third-Party Candidates
'After Ds and Rs announced that they formed a commission for maintaining their duopoly of power, one might expect a reaction from TV executives'
The U.S. Commission on Presidential Debates on Monday released the polls it will use to determine which candidates will take to the stage in September for their first presidential debate--and shut out third-party candidates in the process.
The Hill reports:
Candidates will need to hit an average of 15 percent in polls conducted by ABC/Washington Post, CBS/New York Times, CNN/Opinion Research Corporation, Fox News, and NBC/Wall Street Journal. The 15 percent threshold had been announced months ago, but the commission released its polling selections on Monday after consultation with Frank Newport, the editor-in-chief of Gallup.
As of Monday, neither Libertarian Gary Johnson nor the Green Party's Jill Stein had enough support to get a spot onstage alongside Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, which open debate advocates say amounts to a fraud of bipartisanism.
One such advocacy group, RootsAction, launched a petition on Monday calling for the executives at ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox Broadcasting, PBS, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Univision, and Telemundo to present debates including all four candidates, even if the commission--or Trump or Clinton--wants otherwise.
"If Trump or Clinton balk, let them know you're happy to leave their podium empty," the petition states.
RootsAction co-founder Jeff Cohen also wrote a column on Monday that noted:
If ten major TV networks got together and decided to nationally televise a presidential debate restricted to Republican nominee Donald Trump and right-leaning Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson, while barring other candidates including Democrat Hillary Clinton, it would be recognized as an act of media bias or exclusion.
But what if the televised debates this fall are restricted to just Trump and Clinton? That, too, needs to be recognized as an intentional act of media exclusion.
In addition to the importance of highlighting strong third-party candidates, Cohen said, allowing Stein and Johnson to debate would reflect the growing public disillusionment with establishment politics.
"In the political realm, after Ds and Rs unabashedly announced that they formed a commission for the purpose of maintaining their duopoly of power, one might expect a reaction from TV news executives--especially in an election year when the D and R nominees are so widely disliked and mistrusted," he wrote.
Earlier this month, a federal judge rejected a lawsuit by the Green and Libertarian Parties that sought to claim a podium at the debates.
"Plaintiffs in this case have not alleged a non-speculative injury traceable to the Commission," U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer wrote at the time.
Johnson's campaign manager Ron Nielson expressed disappointment in that rationale, stating, "There is clearly an unprecedented desire for alternatives to the Republican and Democratic nominees, and voters deserve an opportunity to see and hear that there are, in fact, other credible, serious choices."
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
The U.S. Commission on Presidential Debates on Monday released the polls it will use to determine which candidates will take to the stage in September for their first presidential debate--and shut out third-party candidates in the process.
The Hill reports:
Candidates will need to hit an average of 15 percent in polls conducted by ABC/Washington Post, CBS/New York Times, CNN/Opinion Research Corporation, Fox News, and NBC/Wall Street Journal. The 15 percent threshold had been announced months ago, but the commission released its polling selections on Monday after consultation with Frank Newport, the editor-in-chief of Gallup.
As of Monday, neither Libertarian Gary Johnson nor the Green Party's Jill Stein had enough support to get a spot onstage alongside Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, which open debate advocates say amounts to a fraud of bipartisanism.
One such advocacy group, RootsAction, launched a petition on Monday calling for the executives at ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox Broadcasting, PBS, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Univision, and Telemundo to present debates including all four candidates, even if the commission--or Trump or Clinton--wants otherwise.
"If Trump or Clinton balk, let them know you're happy to leave their podium empty," the petition states.
RootsAction co-founder Jeff Cohen also wrote a column on Monday that noted:
If ten major TV networks got together and decided to nationally televise a presidential debate restricted to Republican nominee Donald Trump and right-leaning Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson, while barring other candidates including Democrat Hillary Clinton, it would be recognized as an act of media bias or exclusion.
But what if the televised debates this fall are restricted to just Trump and Clinton? That, too, needs to be recognized as an intentional act of media exclusion.
In addition to the importance of highlighting strong third-party candidates, Cohen said, allowing Stein and Johnson to debate would reflect the growing public disillusionment with establishment politics.
"In the political realm, after Ds and Rs unabashedly announced that they formed a commission for the purpose of maintaining their duopoly of power, one might expect a reaction from TV news executives--especially in an election year when the D and R nominees are so widely disliked and mistrusted," he wrote.
Earlier this month, a federal judge rejected a lawsuit by the Green and Libertarian Parties that sought to claim a podium at the debates.
"Plaintiffs in this case have not alleged a non-speculative injury traceable to the Commission," U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer wrote at the time.
Johnson's campaign manager Ron Nielson expressed disappointment in that rationale, stating, "There is clearly an unprecedented desire for alternatives to the Republican and Democratic nominees, and voters deserve an opportunity to see and hear that there are, in fact, other credible, serious choices."
The U.S. Commission on Presidential Debates on Monday released the polls it will use to determine which candidates will take to the stage in September for their first presidential debate--and shut out third-party candidates in the process.
The Hill reports:
Candidates will need to hit an average of 15 percent in polls conducted by ABC/Washington Post, CBS/New York Times, CNN/Opinion Research Corporation, Fox News, and NBC/Wall Street Journal. The 15 percent threshold had been announced months ago, but the commission released its polling selections on Monday after consultation with Frank Newport, the editor-in-chief of Gallup.
As of Monday, neither Libertarian Gary Johnson nor the Green Party's Jill Stein had enough support to get a spot onstage alongside Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, which open debate advocates say amounts to a fraud of bipartisanism.
One such advocacy group, RootsAction, launched a petition on Monday calling for the executives at ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox Broadcasting, PBS, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, Univision, and Telemundo to present debates including all four candidates, even if the commission--or Trump or Clinton--wants otherwise.
"If Trump or Clinton balk, let them know you're happy to leave their podium empty," the petition states.
RootsAction co-founder Jeff Cohen also wrote a column on Monday that noted:
If ten major TV networks got together and decided to nationally televise a presidential debate restricted to Republican nominee Donald Trump and right-leaning Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson, while barring other candidates including Democrat Hillary Clinton, it would be recognized as an act of media bias or exclusion.
But what if the televised debates this fall are restricted to just Trump and Clinton? That, too, needs to be recognized as an intentional act of media exclusion.
In addition to the importance of highlighting strong third-party candidates, Cohen said, allowing Stein and Johnson to debate would reflect the growing public disillusionment with establishment politics.
"In the political realm, after Ds and Rs unabashedly announced that they formed a commission for the purpose of maintaining their duopoly of power, one might expect a reaction from TV news executives--especially in an election year when the D and R nominees are so widely disliked and mistrusted," he wrote.
Earlier this month, a federal judge rejected a lawsuit by the Green and Libertarian Parties that sought to claim a podium at the debates.
"Plaintiffs in this case have not alleged a non-speculative injury traceable to the Commission," U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer wrote at the time.
Johnson's campaign manager Ron Nielson expressed disappointment in that rationale, stating, "There is clearly an unprecedented desire for alternatives to the Republican and Democratic nominees, and voters deserve an opportunity to see and hear that there are, in fact, other credible, serious choices."