The Exclusion Of Ross Perot From The Debates

Many AllPolitics readers think the decision to exclude Ross Perot and the other third-party candidates from this year's presidential debates stinks. Our e-mail is running overwhelmingly against the decision. Here's a sample, and if you have something to add, send your e-mail to editor@AllPolitics.com

"Scared Of The Man"

I think this is wrong. If the United States is a democracy then Mr. Perot should be allowed to debate Clinton and Dole. I think that both Clinton and Dole are scared of the man. Why? Because he makes sense. The Democrats and Republicans are both responsible for the mess this country is in and it is about time that some new, fresh ideas were brought into the picture. As far as I'm concerned Mr. Perot should be the next president. The other two are worthless.

-- Jude Americk, Bayonne, N.J., Sept. 17

"I Am Appalled"

I am appalled at the CPD exclusion of Messrs. Perot and Choate from the '96 Presidential and Vice Presidential Debates. As an American I am outraged.

This stifling of issues and democracy is analogous to book burning.

This decision convinces me, a lifelong registered Republican who voted for Clinton, and was planning to do so again, now to vote for Perot/Choate.

-- Robert M. Alverson, Los Angeles, Calif., Sept. 17

"Bravo To The Commission"

Bravo to the commission for having the courage to stick with a non-partisan, yet "politically incorrect" decision.

Ross Perot has no chance of winning this election, and if people want to hear his ideas and views, they can watch his infomercials, or better yet, he can campaign around the country like the other serious candidates are doing.

If Americans want to hear Ross Perot speak, they will have an abundance of opportunities. There will, however, be precious little time for Bob Dole and Bill Clinton to debate the issues head-to-head before the election. The commission is giving America the chance to make a clear, uncluttered decision between the top two candidates, and I for one appreciate that opportunity.

Ask Perot and the other candidates for president to debate with one another in a supplementary debate, and find out whether Ross is really interested in debating the issues or whether he is just looking for a chance to pick up votes by sniping against the way government is currently run.

Whatever the forum, if Perot's ideas hold water, the American people will see that. But the presidential debates are the Super Bowl of the election season; only the candidates who succeeded to this point should be allowed in. To date, Perot has not succeeded in making more than a ripple in Campaign '96.

-- Todd Giles, Palo Alto, Calif., Sept. 17, 1996

"A Very Narrow Range Of Political Views"

I am outraged over the debates commission decision to ban third-party participation in the debates. Dole and Clinton agree with each other on so many issues that they represent a very narrow range of political views. They will be debating issues like how many billions to spend on the drug war, or how long we should be in Bosnia or Kuwait, or should we lower income taxes by 10 percent or 15 percent, or should we balance the budget in seven years or 10 years.

It is time for the American people to hear from someone who has major disagreements over Dole's and Clinton's policies. This candidate is Harry Browne. Can you imagine when Harry Browne says, "I want to eliminate the income tax right now" and Bob Dole says "I want a 15 percent income tax reduction." Or how about when Harry Browne says, "I want to pull the American military out of countries like Bosnia and Saudi Arabia and end American imperialism," and Bill Clinton says "If Iraq persists in violating U.N. resolutions, then we are going to go to war again." Or how about when Harry Browne says, "I want to balance the budget and eliminate the deficit," and both Clinton and Dole say that they also want to balance the budget somewhere down the road when they are no longer in office. Neither Clinton nor Dole discusses eliminating the debt. If the debates commission will not let third parties in, then I would like to see the third parties debate each other. And maybe they will even be kind enough to invite Dole and Clinton.

-- Boyd Stitt, Canton, Mich., Sept. 17

"A Novel Idea"

I've got a novel idea. I propose that the members of the commission pool their personal money to reimburse the taxpayers of the United States of America. Thirty million dollars, payable to the United States Treasury, for the express purpose of reducing the national debt.

If they want to run the country, with no realistic chance of being elected themselves, they should pay for it too.

I'm not a Perot supporter. Just getting damned tired of people that we don't know a thing about running the country.

-- Roger Thompson, Springfield, Ill., Sept. 17

"Washington Insiders"

The exclusion of Ross Perot from these debates, and the reasons given, clearly demonstrate partisanship and the need by Washington insiders to protect their own self-interests by also protecting the "two party"-only system. Thumbs down to all involved in this type of decision making!

Sincerely,

-- David Williams, Moscow, Idaho, Sept. 17

"ALL The Alternative Candidates"

On "Inside Politics," the CPD (Commission on Presidential Debates) co-chairs stated that they would be watching ALL the alternative candidates before each debate to see if they had met the criteria to be included. That means that you have a responsibility to keep Harry Browne, the Libertarian Party candidate, in all of your CNN/USA Today/GALLUP polls, so that they can have the all the information to decide.

-- Hunter Schaeffer, Atlanta, Ga., Sept. 17

"Shocked, Dismayed And Angered"

I was shocked, dismayed, and angered at the Commission on Presidential Debate's decision to exclude Perot from any and all presidential debates. I feel that they are depriving the American public of one of the most important facets of our democracy: the freedom to an open and intelligent debate. By excluding Perot, the commission is condemning the American public to hearing only what the Democrats and Republicans would like us to hear. In light of the fact that Perot may not be elected this fall, I feel he would have the courage and foresight to discuss topics the other candidates may not want to discuss. Is there any way to contact the commission directly so that I may let them know how I feel?

-- Jeremy Smith, Laguna Hills, Calif., Sept. 17

"Why Bother Having An Election At All?"

The decision by the debates commission to exclude Harry Browne and Ross Perot is a travesty. The commission, which is co-chaired by a Republican and a Democrat, have cheated then American people out of their right to choose. Why bother having an election at all? Let's just let the commission pick our next president. In fact, aren't they already doing that anyway?

-- Doug Heminger, Arlington, Texas, Sept. 17

"I'm Interested In What He Has To Say"

Why should Clinton with a strong lead debate Dole for more than two times? In the past, presidential debates have only been twice.

Two debates are more than enough, and inclusion of Ross will be appropriate because he has received my tax dollars. I'm interested on what he has to say. I'll vote for whomever represents my pocket book

-- Chuck, Indianapolis, Ind., Sept. 17

"I Don't Think It Is Right"

I don't think it is right that Ross Perot not be invited to the debates. It is said that anyone can run for the office of the president. If that is the case, I as a citizen of the United States of America can run for President even though I wouldn't stand a snowball chance in hell to be elected. I feel that I should be able to debate the other candidates, to put my views out to the citizens of this country. If Perot cannot debate, that just shows partiality towards Clinton and Dole.

I think Clinton is afraid that Perot will challenge him on his draft-dodging early days...To me he (Clinton) is a draft- dodging, womanizing dopehead. Even if he didn't inhale (HA-HA.)

As for Dole, he is just too old to be President. There is a minimum age for the presidency, so there should be a maximum age also. I think Dole is just trying to make a bigger name for himself.

I am not for Perot, but I think he should be able to debate the others, if not for just fairness...

Thanks for listening.

-- Ron, Chesapeake, Va., Sept. 17

Voter's Voice Archives

• Democracy In America (9/16)
• Campaign Coverage (9/11)
• Election Season Heats Up (9/4)
• "Smoke-Screen Controversy" (8/29)
• Write Bill Clinton's Acceptance Speech (8/28)
• Robert Dole's Acceptance Speech And Final Impressions (8/20)
• Robert Dole's Tax Plan (8/5)
• "Even The Slightest Scrutiny" (7/2)
• "It Is High Time" (6/17)
• "Why Punish The Good Kids?" (6/6)
• "Clinton's True Nature" (5/31)
• "A Great President" (5/24)
• "He's History" (5/16)
• GOP Congress Not Omniscient (5/15)
• Strategy For Dole (5/3)
• New Hampshire Voters (3/20)

Copyright © 1997 AllPolitics All Rights Reserved
Terms under which this information is provided to you