Bloomberg Editors: Break Up CPD Debate Duopoly!

Table Room

“THERE’S ROOM AT THAT TABLE. PHOTOGRAPHER: JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/GETTY IMAGES”

In an editorial titled “Presidential Debates 2016: Bigger, Broader, Better,” published earlier today, the Bloomberg editorial staff respond to the Change The Rule/Level the Playing Field proposal to include only ONE additional candidate in the CPD debates.  They propose the following alternative:

“[T]he first debate might include all candidates who have qualified for the ballot in a majority of states, with the potential to win 270 electoral votes. The second debate could include only those candidates who receive at least 5 or 7 percent in polls. In the third debate, the polling threshold could be raised to 10 or 12 percent.”

The editorial makes no mention of the Our America Initiative proposal and/or CPD lawsuit.

The full editorial can be read HERE.

The senior editor responsible for Bloomberg View’s editorials is David Shipley,  davidshipley@bloomberg.net.

4 thoughts on “Bloomberg Editors: Break Up CPD Debate Duopoly!

  1. Matt Cholko

    Seems like a reasonable proposal, though I would prefer something more like 2 debates with just the 270 EV requirement, and the third with a low polling threshold.

  2. Jed Ziggler

    My proposal would be all 3 debates plus VP debate feature all candidates who meet 270 threshold, but I’d be okay with the Bloomburg idea. I’m glad to see some momentum on the side of inclusive debates.

  3. Matt Cholko

    I think I should be more clear. I’d really prefer that all 270 EV candidates be in all debates. But, short of that, I’d like to see as many 270 candidates in as many debates as possible.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *