The Democratic nominee must insist the League of Women Voters host the Presidential debates

[IndianaGreen]

When it really comes down to it, we got no one to blame but ourselves for letting things get as bad as they have. It is time the people take control over the process, not to mention the Republic.

"League of Women Voters Yanks Support of Debate: 'Manipulations' by Campaigns Blamed"

Washington Post, Oct. 4, 1988; A15; By Lloyd Grove

Sponsors of 1976, 1980, and 1984 presidential debates, the League of Women Voters, in 1988 the League of Women Voters decided not to sponsor the second presidential debate. The LWV considered itself to be an objective third party in the negotiating of debate formats. According to the article, "the League's board of trustees voted during the weekend to pull out of the Los Angeles debate because the Bush and Dukakis camp refused to renegotiate the terms of their agreement - the result of weeks of arduous talks - with League representatives." The LWV's withdrawal opened the door for the Commission on Presidential Debates, which has sponsored the presidential debates ever since.

http://www.museum.tv/debateweb/html/history/1988/headlines.htm

The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates ... because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Women_Voters

[Adelante]

1. How I wish nt

[anonymous171]

2. Anyone but the MSM

Seriously, ANYONE.

[Coexist]

3. kick

[SoonerPride]

4. I agree.

The KOS questions were good too.

[samdogmom]

5. Absolutely. And after last night's debacle--a strong case can be made!

Maybe the candidates should insist that the debate sponsor is "non-partisan" before they agree to participate.

[intheflow]

6. Absolutely.

The League of Women Voters aren't beholden to ratings or shareholders. Considering both Clinton and Obama supporters have felt that certain debates were skewed towards one candidate over another, I think that strongly points to the need for an entity outside the media moderate these debates.

[depakid]

7. That would be an improvement

Put honest adults back in charge, put debates on public television and send the tabloid pundits (whoever they might support) back to their self-important and increasingly inane commercial venues.

[IndianaGreen]

8. LWW was prophetic in saying that the debates would become "charades devoid of substance."

I am still BITTER about the question to Dukakis as to what he would do if his wife was raped and murdered on a CNN debate.