ABC News Must Let Kennedy On the Debate Stage

Louis Conte, Headlines Editor, The Kennedy Beacon

Now that Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have committed to debate on ABC, on September 10, America has a choice. What kind of country does it want to be?

Kennedy is the only candidate, of the three major, who has done democracy the hard and true way. His campaign has collected over one million signatures that will soon place him on every state ballot in the nation. He has enough signatures submitted in roughly 45 of 50 states. He is able to reach over 270 electoral college votes and become president.

Kennedy must debate – and Americans must let ABC News know this is what they want.

You will note that I am not using the phrase Kennedy “should be allowed to” be on the debate stage. In my opinion, he does not require permission from other candidates or sponsoring TV networks.

The ABC News Candidate Qualification Requirements for the 2024 Election Presidential Debate are similar to the criteria that CNN used for its June 27 debate, which excluded Kennedy. Like CNN, the ABC criteria discriminate against the heavy task of signature collection that Kennedy or any independent presidential candidate must accomplish to demonstrate electoral strength.   

Kennedy is rapidly approaching signature submissions in 50 states. By September each state will have certified his petition for inclusion. What he has accomplished is historic. No backing from major political parties. No financial support of industries that own those parties, or an elite donor class. Despite the enormous obstacles crafted by the two establishment parties, designed to impede independent candidates, Kennedy is pulling off a political miracle. 

Kennedy can win.

ABC’s debate qualification criteria ignore Kennedy’s one million signatures in favor of flawed telephone-based opinion polls each of a few thousand people. 

Yours truly was contacted by a polling company earlier this week, which referred to Kennedy as “other.” When I stated that I was voting for Kennedy, the pollster stated, “His name is not an option.”

Is this a fair way to assess which candidates will ultimately appear on the debate stage?

Millions of independent and independent-minded voters want to see Kennedy stand for election. They want to hear what Kennedy has to say, what he thinks about our nation’s problems, and his ideas for solving them. They expect him to debate those ideas with his opponents.

Millions of Americans want to see authentic presidential debates – not “by special invitation only,” debate-like political kabuki theater on the networks aligned with the two establishment parties. 

Presidential debates are critical to the functioning of democracy. They should not be network media events filled with commercial breaks to push the products of the network’s sponsors.

According to Forbes, the majority of American voters are independents. The Republican and Democrat Parties are now minority parties. ABC’s qualification criteria are biased against the independent non-party affiliated American majority. Why should the two legacy parties have such excessive influence over presidential debates?

Kennedy is leading with independent voters. Those Americans deserve to have Kennedy take on other legitimate candidates.

Donald Trump won the Republican Party’s nomination through a legitimate primary process. Trump has earned the right to be on the debate stage.

However, Kamala Harris was selected - not elected - to be the Democratic Party nominee by a handful of Democratic Party elites who invalidated the votes of fourteen million Democrats who went to the polls in their party primaries and voted for Joe Biden.

Harris is one of the key Democrats who misled the nation about Biden’s cognitive issues. Without being asked a single question about what she knew and when she knew it, Harris has failed her way into her party’s nomination.

Harris is the “presumed nominee” but has never won a Democrat primary. She has not been vetted by her own party. As of this writing, her website does not provide any details about what her policies are. Glenn Greenwald notes that Harris won the democratic nomination without expressing any views or even campaigning.

Harris’ choice of Governor Tim Walz to be her vice president is quickly turning into yet another Democrat debacle. Walz is not standing up well to conservative media scrutiny.

Given what has gone on with the Democratic Party, why should Kamala Harris automatically be given standing on the debate stage? Has she earned that right as Kennedy has?

It is time to rethink how presidential candidates are chosen. Would Kamala Harris be able to acquire the signatures that Kennedy amassed to get on state ballots?

We all know the answer to that question.

Presidential debates should be the domain of independent, non-partisan political organizations. The League of Women Voters used to do an excellent job. That is the kind of independent organization that we need to do the job now. Having legacy media outlets sponsoring presidential debates should be a thing of the past because, if anything, they only demonstrate the power and intent of corporate control over information and voter choice.. 

We do not need debates emceed by morning talk show hosts who are DNC or RNC party apparatchiks pretending to be serious journalists. Independent journalists like Matt Taibbi, Michael Schellenberger, and others not aligned with the worn-out legacy media would ask challenging, relevant questions.

Presidential debates featuring legitimate candidates serve democracy and the nation’s interests.