Do you think Johnson will make the debate stage?

[Mr. Morden]

He won't make the CPD debates, no.  But I still wouldn't rule out Trump ditching the CPD debates, and demanding different debates with different rules, in which case who the heck knows.

Would be hilarious if Trump shows up at the Free & Equal debate:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_%26_Equal_Elections_Foundation#2016

Though, yeah, that's a pretty serious longshot.

[Mr. Morden]

Certainly I think there is a decent chance of Trump going rogue, but for him to want Johnson to join it would have to be clear that if Johnson is hurting Clinton more. Right now it seems Johnson is taking a bit more from Clinton but not a lot and will that be the same after the DNC? Also if Johnson starts being taken more seriously it risks the NeverTrumpers turning to him as their Trump free life raft, and that will hurt Trump for sure.

I'm not sure how strategic Trump would be about it.  He's erratic, so even if the pundit consensus is that including Johnson isn't helpful to him, he still might do it.  He might simply think that he performs better in a multi-candidate free for all than he does in a one on one debate.

He also might simply start making wild demands that he doesn't think Clinton will agree to.  I don't know.

I mean, this remains a longshot.  I don't think it's that likely that Johnson will be in any debates with Clinton or Trump this year.  But Trump is sufficiently unconventional that I wouldn't rule it out.

[Mr. Morden]

(And yes, the way I see it, the two major political parties have way too much control over who gets to attend the debates...).

I mean, it's up to each individual candidate to decide if he or she wants to attend a debate, no?  So I'm not sure what kind of alternative you would propose.  They're not going to do debates with third party candidates unless they think it's in their interest.  How would you force them to show up at debates with more candidates?

[Mr. Morden]

(And yes, the way I see it, the two major political parties have way too much control over who gets to attend the debates...).

I mean, it's up to each individual candidate to decide if he or she wants to attend a debate, no?  So I'm not sure what kind of alternative you would propose.  They're not going to do debates with third party candidates unless they think it's in their interest.  How would you force them to show up at debates with more candidates?

As I've said elsewhere, I think any candidate who can possibly garner the number of EVs needed to be elected president should be invited to be a part of at least one nationally sponsored debate.

What is a "nationally sponsored debate"?  One that gets broadcast on the TV networks?  There are already various outfits that invite all the candidates, including third party candidates, to participate in debates.  Free & Equal is one that invites all the candidates with ballot access in a sufficient number of states.  If the major party candidates would actually show up for those debates, I'm sure the TV networks would be happy to broadcast them.  But the major party candidates *won't* show up at those debates, and I'm not sure how you're going to convince them to do so.

[Mr. Morden]

(And yes, the way I see it, the two major political parties have way too much control over who gets to attend the debates...).

I mean, it's up to each individual candidate to decide if he or she wants to attend a debate, no?  So I'm not sure what kind of alternative you would propose.  They're not going to do debates with third party candidates unless they think it's in their interest.  How would you force them to show up at debates with more candidates?

As I've said elsewhere, I think any candidate who can possibly garner the number of EVs needed to be elected president should be invited to be a part of at least one nationally sponsored debate.

What is a "nationally sponsored debate"?  One that gets broadcast on the TV networks?  There are already various outfits that invite all the candidates, including third party candidates, to participate in debates.  Free & Equal is one that invites all the candidates with ballot access in a sufficient number of states.  If the major party candidates would actually show up for those debates, I'm sure the TV networks would be happy to broadcast them.  But the major party candidates *won't* show up at those debates, and I'm not sure how you're going to convince them to do so.

You're right, that's the problem. I think we need one publicly funded, nationally broadcast debate to which all candidates with sufficient ballot access are automatically included. And that broadcast takes place, no matter if there's one candidate on the stage or a dozen; have it so that each eligible candidate has a place, whether they're in attendance or not.

Problem is, you can't force a TV network to broadcast an event that they're not interested in broadcasting.  And they wouldn't be interested in broadcasting a debate between Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, because not enough of the public cares about them.  You'd need the major party candidates to show up in order for the networks to bother broadcasting such a thing, and there's no way to force them to show up.

[Mr. Morden]

(And yes, the way I see it, the two major political parties have way too much control over who gets to attend the debates...).

I mean, it's up to each individual candidate to decide if he or she wants to attend a debate, no?  So I'm not sure what kind of alternative you would propose.  They're not going to do debates with third party candidates unless they think it's in their interest.  How would you force them to show up at debates with more candidates?

As I've said elsewhere, I think any candidate who can possibly garner the number of EVs needed to be elected president should be invited to be a part of at least one nationally sponsored debate.

What is a "nationally sponsored debate"?  One that gets broadcast on the TV networks?  There are already various outfits that invite all the candidates, including third party candidates, to participate in debates.  Free & Equal is one that invites all the candidates with ballot access in a sufficient number of states.  If the major party candidates would actually show up for those debates, I'm sure the TV networks would be happy to broadcast them.  But the major party candidates *won't* show up at those debates, and I'm not sure how you're going to convince them to do so.

You're right, that's the problem. I think we need one publicly funded, nationally broadcast debate to which all candidates with sufficient ballot access are automatically included. And that broadcast takes place, no matter if there's one candidate on the stage or a dozen; have it so that each eligible candidate has a place, whether they're in attendance or not.

Problem is, you can't force a TV network to broadcast an event that they're not interested in broadcasting.  And they wouldn't be interested in broadcasting a debate between Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, because not enough of the public cares about them.  You'd need the major party candidates to show up in order for the networks to bother broadcasting such a thing, and there's no way to force them to show up.

Not true. If you are willing to pay for air time, a TV network would be happy to broadcast a picture of a potted plant for two hours. Their interest in what you're broadcasting ends where the almighty dollar begins.

Well sure, you could pay them to broadcast it, but who's going to supply the $ for that?  Taxpayers?  That idea wouldn't be terribly popular.