onelection day they will have the opportunity to rectify it” (Xinhua,_). Government has made a ruling on this situation, but are not the debates for the people. So what do the peoplehave to say about this? The Los Angeles Times conducted a poll of their readers asking if they thought Perotshould be included in the debates. By a 3-to-1 ratio they supported including Perot in the debates (Pool,2B). Someof the comments in favor of Perot include, “I feel that all candidates should be included in the debate or else its nota debate, not a true democracy.” and “ The two party system is afraid of the topics he is going to bring up, not ofhim personally, but of the topics he is going to bring up” (Pool,2B). Of course the opinions of those who did notthink he should be included were also there. Is it up to the people to decide who they hear debate or is it better to have a commission weed out those who’schance of being elected is dim? Thus we the people can focus on the two primary candidates without having tokeep track of comments from a candidate bound to failure. Or would a third party candidate allow us to decipher,compare and contrast what the two major party candidates have to say about the issues? I guess we will never knowuntil those third party candidates are permitted without restriction to debate the big guns. ...
