Pollsters Criticize Use of Polling Minimums to Exclude Candidates from Debates

[BarryDonegan]

http://truthinmedia.com/pollsters-criticize-polling-minimums-exclude-candidates/

Top pollsters say that public opinion polls are an ineffective and imprecise way to determine who should be allowed to present their ideas to voters in televised political debates, raising questions about the method currently being used to exclude certain candidates from the 2016 election season's presidential primary and general election debates.

 

[satchelmcqueen]

this is good, but all i can think is, what angle are they going to use now to suppress rands forward movement? lol

 

[givemeliberty2010]

I have yet to hear an alternative (other than what The Union Leader did with a candidate pool larger than 10) that keeps the number of candidates to a reasonable level.

 

[Todd]

I have yet to hear an alternative (other than what The Union Leader did with a candidate pool larger than 10) that keeps the number of candidates to a reasonable level.

How about more debates? How about not having just the media and the parties in control? How about less Nooz shows and more Candidate debate forums with questions and answers?

What would be wrong with having dozens of groups host debates? Each primary state could hold one. Candidates could do townhall debates 2-3 times a month. You could literally do these multiple times. Candidates who want to get their message out are free to attend and others who don't want to are free to not show up.

I know the game is rigged and this isn't going to happen but you are saying there is no solution and I think you are basing it on the framework the elite have established. People need a huge paradigm shift on just what a "debate" is and how candidates should go about getting their message out to the public at large.

 

[juvanya]

Nobody is going to want to show up to 50 debates. I remember the Obama-Hillary saga. That was excessive.