Gravel excluded from Presidential debate
Long-shot candidate Senator Mike Gravel loses chance to debate at Drexel.
Stephanie Takach
Issue date: 10/26/07 Section: News
- Page 1 of 1
|
The criteria to participate are set by NBC news and include sufficient and polling requirements, as well as an actively documented campaign.
"There was no record that Gravel made more than five separate appearances in New Hampshire [and] Iowa, where the first caucuses will be held," NBC News Political Director Chuck Todd said. Gravel's campaign committee claims that he has made more appearances, but that his schedules were not released. Gravel's staff was unavailable for comment.
The Democratic National Campaign supports the criteria of NBC News and MSNBC, according to a DNC spokeswoman.
The former Alaska Senator has not registered for the last poll, and has received less than one percent of voter support in his last documented poll. Gravel has raised about $287,000 overall and had $17,000 on hand at the end of the quarter that ended Sept.30, according to The Washington Post, compared to opponent Hillary Clinton's $35 million dedicated to the primary season.
Although Gravel does not have the same financial circumstances as Clinton and Obama, he did begin his campaign in the same condition as Republican presidential candidates Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee.
"Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee were able to develop traction using the debates despite their financial circumstances," Todd said.
With Election Day coming up, the debates are becoming a strong resource for candidates to get their issues through to the public. With one less candidate attending the debate, it creates more time for the more serious candidates to answer questions.
"It's unfortunate that more people can't be meaningfully involved in the debates, but the fact is that the more people in a debate, the less meaningful it is for each of them," said John Lloyd, vice president of Drexel Democrats. "Gravel was usually the more confrontational of the candidates, but as time is running out until the first primaries, all the other candidates will probably become more confrontational anyway, and so in that sense, Gravel's role is unnecessary."
Gravel's inactive campaign, lack of funds and poll numbers all contribute to his inability to participation in the debate. However, focusing on the more serious candidates will give voters as much opportunity to understand the differences between their positions as the elections draw nearer, according to Todd.
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 22
Ben
posted 10/27/07 @ 5:25 PM EST
Help Let Gravel Debate, and email NBC, MSNBC, the DNC, or GE today letting them know.
Eric
posted 10/27/07 @ 8:28 PM EST
First of all, John Lloyd is wrong. Is it Gravel's anointed "role" to criticize the other candidates while it is Hillary Clinton's role to provide "meaningful" discussion of issues? Or does this simply follow from the fact that Gravel is given less than 25% of the time of the "mainline" candidates in a debate? Why does the author of this article claim that Gravel is less serious than the "more serious" candidates? Could it be that the mainstream media has dubbed certain candidates as viable and others as not? Why is the amount of money raised the number one issue in deciding how "serious" a candidate is? What is the role of special interest money in all of this? I would hope the author would reply to these issues which he so conveniently overlooked. (Continued…)
Awol
posted 10/27/07 @ 9:25 PM EST
"it creates more time for the more serious candidates to answer questions."
What the other candidates are "more serious" than Gravel please! This man from the beginning has be honest in every issue that he comes across and you don't believe him to be serious cause he lack money. (Continued…)
Reid
posted 10/27/07 @ 9:38 PM EST
I guess I would classify myself as an undecided independent, but Sen. Gravel resonates with me a lot. To say he is not a serious candidate is ridiculous. (Continued…)
Elizabeth Cable
posted 10/27/07 @ 9:59 PM EST
This article is completely biased: it is obviously in favor of Senator Gravel's exclusion from the debate. Can't we at least try to be objective and display both sides of the story? The only person (besides yourself) who you give the point of view of in this story is Chuck Todd, one of the people who are responsible for Gravel's exclusion. (Continued…)
gretsky
posted 10/27/07 @ 10:00 PM EST
The idea that a former, multi-term Senator, needs to meet a certain monetary threshold (what is the minimum anyway?) and have a certain number of appearances in each state (what is the minimum anyway?)to participate in the PRIMARY debates and before an offical vote (note: this means not a poll) is cast is preposterous. (Continued…)
Lori
posted 10/27/07 @ 10:16 PM EST
So, Stephanie, have you actually ever read anything about Gravel?? What "polls" are you speaking of? Sen. Gravel has been right up there with Dodd and Biden and Kucinich. (Continued…)
RST
posted 10/27/07 @ 10:19 PM EST
Please, let Mike Gravel debate! We can't stand for this!!! Spread the word and let's make it happen for this true American hero and Patriot....
Jon
posted 10/27/07 @ 10:57 PM EST
Gravel has been repeatedly marginalized in the debates, given a fraction of the speaking time that candidates like Clinton & Obama receive. He (and Dennis Kucinich) are not listed as an option in many polls, so he has little if any opportunity to gain traction in the polls. (Continued…)
Mike M
posted 10/27/07 @ 11:18 PM EST
In case John Lloyd hasn't noticed, the involvement of the media-designated "top-tier" candidates has been meaningless. The more they say the more they repeat their tired platitudes. (Continued…)
Post a Comment