Brought to You by An Idealist!
columnist: Spencer Jayden

Topic: Presidential Campaign 2008
Open for Debates (10/25/08 - NOW IRRELEVANT!)

---

"Debate is the death of conversation." - Kitty O'Neill Collins. And indeed, every four years, the CPD throws us just that: a news conference. Do we, as libertarians, stand a chance to liven it up this year?

---

by Spencer Jayden
(Libertarian)
Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Though everything but tensions were in short supply, delegates endured bitter conflict on the floor of the Adam's Mark Sheraton Hotel in Denver, May 25^th, 2008 to make former Congressman of Georgia, Bob Barr- the libertarian nominee for President of the United States. It did not sit well with many purists, and I will not cover the breadth of the internal war that has been spanned across 3 decades in the LP for control of the party. The facts are not unlike biting the bullet: the LP is taking a risk this year. No kicking and screaming on either side is going to change the nomine.

But the question looming ahead is how much of this opportunity are Libertarians ready to seize? Some of you, I'm sure, will want no part in this party from now on. Fine, that is your choice.

For the rest of us, however, this is a time when maximizing the presence of the LP is of the utmost significance. And that is why, for better or for worse, I would like to turn focus to constructing a plan for getting Barr and Root into the presidential debates.

Now, for those not familiar with the history of the CPD, the organization responsible for sponsoring the debates, they are possibly one of the greatest (and most vulnerable) affronts to freedom of speech and democracy in this country.

From their website:

"The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) was established in 1987 to ensure that debates, as a permanent part of every general election, provide the best possible information to viewers and listeners. Its primary purpose is to sponsor and produce debates for the United States presidential and vice presidential candidates and to undertake research and educational activities relating to the debates. The organization, which is a nonprofit, nonpartisan corporation, sponsored all the presidential debates in 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004.

The simple truth is that the CPD is NOT nonprofit and, shock, BIPARTISAN. There are *many excellent sites which cover the true history of the CPD, which wrestled control from the League of Women Voters and turned the debates into 90-minute news conferences. In each of the debates since 1988, there has been what is called a Memorandum of Understanding between the nominees of the two major parties which typically include all of the following:

• A provision that the candidates will only attend these debates.

• The nominees refuse to debate anyone else who might be considered viable from the *Appleseed criteria. This includes third party candidates.

• Staging positions, moderators, and network coverage, etc. All the minor details.

1992. There is always an exception to the rule. When Perot re-entered the race in the late fall, he grabbed 8% in the polls instantly. Based on reports Bush had at the time that determined Perot could serve as a spoiler for Clinton, he negotiated to have Perot in the debates. Long story short: Perot cost him the popular vote, swiping 19%, the highest ever for a third party candidate since Teddy Roosevelt ran on the Bullmoose ticket in 1912. There's a reason they don't let them in the debates. ;)

 I don't think I need to further explain what I'm getting at here, but let me go over some areas where the field has changed. 1) 2008 is already a historic election year simply by the fact that no incumbent VP is running. 2) It's not a re-election year. 3) The Democrats are favored to win from the get-go due to several unpopular policies on part of the neocon Bushites holding office.

Some of you may have noticed that Barr is already pulling almost exactly what Perot had when he re-entered the race in 1992. Now,obviously, no two situations are identical. But consider for a moment the possibilities. It looks right now as if Barack Obama is indeed poised to get the nomination, and McCain is just short of being crowned at the RNC. So in a sense, we are just waiting for the heavy heat to pick up in September. There's much that can be done NOW, however.

Consider the following scenarios, far from perfect, I admit:

1. Barack Obama gets the nomination as everyone suspected he would. The media has even told us so, and we know they're never wrong, right? According to Rock the Debates, a 527 group lobbying the CPD to allow third parties to participate, Obama has been asked if he would support 3^rd party candidates in the debate. RTD interpreted his answer as no, but to me, it seemed as if he gave his standard, neutral, stand-offish answer that he always gives to sound eloquent to his audiences. But consider this angle: Obama actually has a better chance at getting Barr into the debate than anyone else. Why? Because Barr and Obama agree a lot on foreign policy areas, somewhere Obama knows he needs to outspeak McCain in, and it appears going into this, he won't be able to on his own. Secondly, I'm sure his campaign has seen the polling data as well and knows that Barr hurts McCain more than him, as well as diminishes the chance Nader might reprise his 2000 role. Let's assume that campaign is successful. Then, because McCain doesn't want to alienate voters further, and certainly not his base, he reluctantly accepts.

2. The Democratic nomination battle soldiers onto the Convention, as I believe it can, after Hillary gets half or all of the delegates in Florida and Michigan seated. This situation would lead to less voter interest because the fight will have lasted well over a year. If Obama gets the nomination through this, we're still in good shape, as we all know he isn't the usual CFR rookie and tends to "liven it up". Prospects dimmer however, if Hillary wins the nomination through a brokered convention, as many people fearfully suspect she will (myself included). Is this our best situation? No. Again, RTD's video of Hillary leaves us puzzled. It's safe to say though, that one of the leaders of her husband's impeachment trial is not welcomed. Then again, we have been shocked time and time again by her opportunism. Barr would probably grab an extra 2-4% in the race instantly, which then puts Hillary at an almost equal risk of losing votes as McCain. However, if attendance is down this season, she will need all the help she can get splitting the party faithful from voting for McCain.

If we fail in convincing them, we could always try McCain himself. Unfortunately, there are some drawbacks. We don't know where he stands on the matter. And obviously, he's the least likely to accept Barr on stage unless we could form a convincing counter-argument of why Barr would hurt the Democratic nominee over him. After all, these are people (Democrats) who want to see the war end and emphasizing this point could siphon votes from either nominee. There are other ways McCain could differentiate himself from Barr and win back some support; I know, it sounds like I'm being counter-productive, but you have to go out on a limb here to get some exposure, even if that means appealing to your enemies.

What can be done now is aggressively petitioning the CPD to agree to the Appleseed criteria. They are not on very popular terms now with much of the media, after several recent scandals and controversies have been brought to light, including where the debates for 2008 would be hosted, who could attend, and obviously, the infamous decision in 1996 to exclude Perot.

Many of you may be thinking now, well, why would they even cave to us? The CPD is nothing but a CFR mouthpiece for the two-party duopoly. How true that is...but in the end, we know their ideal strategy is to get a Democrat in the White House and capitalize off of it. To do this, they've been anything but linear in their planning, with what some consider to in fact be a wildly-scripted stage drama playing out right before our eyes.

But no matter what you believe the outcome will be, the point is clear- the CPD is very much integral to the duopoly's plans and they will only accept a third-party candidacy when it benefits them. When looking at their existing requirements now, you'd think that they'd only want celebrities to run independent or third-party. Well, now the LP has one, and whether or not he intends to subvert the LP for his own means, that doesn't mean we can't avoid it while using him for OUR intents. That is what the LP is for, right? Besides, once a third party is added to the mix, all bets are off. You might even ask Ventura in 2012.

• *1: Open Debates and Debate This
• *2: Appleseed Task Force Criteria as suggested by Citizens Debate Commission would allow candidates who: 1)are on enough states to win an electoral majority, 2) garner 5% in national polls, 3) gain 50% approval to participate in national polls.

Did you like this article?
If you did, Thumb It!
4 thumbs so far

©2008 Spencer Jayden, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Last modified: Sunday, October 26, 2008

The views expressed in this article are those of Spencer Jayden only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Spencer Jayden is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.

Report violation by Spencer Jayden of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.