Free & Equal Elections: Third Open Presidential Debate Announced for October 24th

Free & Equal Elections Foundation sent out the following press release announcing a third presidential debate scheduled for October 24.  Several candidates have been invited including Libertarian Party presidential nominee Jo Jorgensen who chose not to participate in the second Free & Equal debate last week.

Free and Equal Elections Third Presidential Debate 2020 - List of Sponsors

Candidates to Take Stage in Historic 3rd Open Presidential Debate October 24

Cross-Partisan Debate Takes Root in Wake of Disastrous Two-Party Debates

The Free & Equal Elections Foundation is partnering with the emerging Independent National Union. Together, along with co-host Open the Debates, they will present the third Open Presidential Debate of the 2020 election at Little America Hotel & Resort Grand Ballroom on October 24, 2020 at 6pm MDT in Cheyenne, Wyoming. The debate will take place during the first ever Independent National Convention (INC 2020).

Focused on creating an alternative debate platform that can truly serve the needs of the American electorate, the debate will bring together candidates from across the political spectrum to give U.S. voters a richer view of their actual ballot choices.

Ten presidential candidates have been invited. Criteria for debate inclusion requires the candidate be on the ballot in at least 8 states. The debate will use the cumulative debate format to provide a balanced and informative dialogue among the candidates.

Invited Candidates: 

Brian Carroll, American Solidarity Party

Brock Pierce, Independent

Don Blankenship, Constitution Party

Donald Trump, Republican Party

Gloria La Riva, Party for Socialism & Liberation

Howie Hawkins, Green Party

Jo Jorgensen, Libertarian Party

Joe Biden, Democratic Party

Kanye West, Independent

Rocky De La Fuente, Independent

Stay tuned for confirmed candidate announcements.

Since 2008, the Free & Equal Elections Foundation has set the standard for inclusive political debates that cover a range of neglected issues. In 2012, we hosted the very first globally-televised open presidential debate in US history, moderated by Larry King and Christina Tobin. Free & Equal is also developing a blockchain election app in partnership with Nexus Earth.

The debate will be streamed at You’re invited to attend the debate live by registering for INC 2020 or securing an in-person debate only pass here.

About Free & Equal Elections Foundation

The Free & Equal Elections Foundation is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization with a mission to open the electoral process through education and collaborative action.

About Open the Debates

Open the Debates is a 501(c)3 project of the Mediators Foundation working to open up the political debates of our nation to all ballot-qualified candidates, at every level of government.

About Independent National Union

The Independent National Union is an emerging framework for organizing the independent political sector under a shared banner to build political power outside the two-party duopoly.

For press inquiries, please contact:

Kristan Harris

Free & Equal Media Director


8 thoughts on “Free & Equal Elections: Third Open Presidential Debate Announced for October 24th

  1. Jose C

    I attended the alternative presidential candidates debate held 8, October organized by the Free & Equal Foundation. I attended virtually of course. I blogged (posted comments) on the Free & Equal website which had a link to Facebook that was airing the debate. From what I could see I was one of four Libertarians who were posting messages while watching the debate. It seems one of the posters was from the Jo Jorgensen campaign as her logo showed up when he or she made a post. Other posters represented the other candidates and parties.

    The debate was very well done and the candidates sounded professional and the debate was a stark contrast to the other presidential debate. Social distancing was observed by the candidate and moderator. The questioners attended the debate virtually. I posted my observation that Jo Jorgensen should have participated in the debate. Other commentators representing other candidates asked where Jo was. Two other Libertarians commented Jo should have participated. Obviously the poster representing the campaign disagreed and mentioned she had other campaign events to attend which is why she was not attending the debate.

    As questions were asked I commented as did others from the Libertarian and Jo Jorgensen point of view. Obviously on some issues I and the other Libertarian commentators did not know what Jo’s position is so we gave our positions not Jo’s during those moments. As some commented we could and did respond to their comments. The other commentators gave their candidate and party’s point of view which I did respond to by commenting.

    It seemed to me all the candidates had similar views on military and foreign affairs as it relates to the US military. The candidates want the troops brought back home ASAP. That is also Jo’s view. There was disagreement on plans to improve healthcare, education, and economics. The Constitution Party candidate expressed free market ideas as it relates to healthcare, education, and economics. The other candidates expressed a more government activist point of view. I expressed support for tuition tax credits (I am not sure Jo’s views on this) as a way to improve education.

    I commented on the ERA. I am not sure Jo’s view on the ERA (1980 presidential candidate Ed Clark made support of the ERA a campaign issue) so I made sure it was known support for the ERA is my own and not necessarily Jo’s. Enough states have voted to have the ERA adopted but the Federal Courts are involved deciding whether the ERA is still before the states or has the deadline put in by Congress many years ago preclude the adoption of the ERA. We shall see.

    There was a question asked concerning the ways Indians (Native Americans) have been treated and what could be done. The candidates were in agreement that all treaties conducted with Indians over the years as far as humanly possible should be honored. Obviously, I agree with this view as I am sure Jo does.

    The letter grade I give the debate is a B+. I would grade the debate higher but the questioners when giving questions made speeches. I and others commented it would be better if the questioners just ask the questions instead of making speeches. If comments must be made make them brief and ask the question to the candidates. Who lost this debate? I believe Jo lost by not participating in the debate which she should have. Also, Howie Hawkins of the Green Party wore a mask even though the candidates were social distancing. The mask did not look good and when speaking Howie Hawkins did not sound as good as the other candidates. Independent candidate Brock Pierce seemed to say what he felt the viewers wanted him to say.I and others commented he was saying what he thought we wanted him to say. Don Blankenship of the Constitution Party did a good job answering questions but there was a spark in his demeanor that was missing. He was the opposite of Gloria La Riva in that regard.

    Gloria La Riva of the Party For Socialism & Liberation won the debate. She dressed very professionally, was very articulate when answering questions, and her demeanor was the best of any of the candidates. She answered the questions she was asked and did not go off topic. She interacted with the other candidates, moderator, and questioners in a positive and professional manner. If someone wants to know how to participate in a debate watch her performance and you will see how it should be done.

    I made sure to comment Jo Jorgensen was on the ballot on 50 states, Washington DC, and the territory of Guam. I also mentioned she is our candidate and I was voting for her.

    After watching this debate I had more positive feelings then I did after listening to the debate conducted by the Commission on Presidential Debates. Some of the questions asked you would never hear in the scripted, sound bite debates organized by the Commission on Presidential Debates. Would there ever be a question on Indian affairs? Doubtful. What about a question on improving education? No. Their debate was a sad display which the American people had the misfortune to have witnessed. In the Free & Equal debate the American people heard more views discussed than in the other scripted, sound bites debate. Who are the winners? The American people.

  2. theButterfly

    Well, looks like she has another chance. It would be nice to see JoJo debate once before election season is over.

    This is the first time I’ve supported the LP for president since Badnarik. In many ways, she looks like a great candidate. But I can’t say I’m very impressed with her campaign.

  3. Longtime Reader

    I hope that they at least fix the technical stuff (audio, streaming, visual transitions). The last debate was a disaster for that reason.

  4. Jared

    GD: “Why is Jorgensen boycotting?”

    “Boycotting” might be too strong a word, but your guess is as good as anybody’s.

  5. Starchild

    Thanks Jose for the detailed and thoughtful report. As a Jorgensen supporter I believe that if Jo does not participate this time it would be a big mistake.

    It is not the fault of the other alternative candidates that they aren’t on the ballot in all 50 states — the ballot access restrictions are too onerous. So that shouldn’t be a litmus test for debate participation.

    All the alternative parties and candidates need to stand in solidarity against the duopoly and its exclusionary practices, not allow them to divide and conquer.

  6. Jose C

    There is an article on The Washington Times, The New York Daily News, Market Watch, Global Newswire, Yahoo News, and a story on 2KUTV about the Free & Equal debate being held tomorrow along with comments from the candidates participating in the debate. Obviously none from Jo because she is not participating.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.