Yes... about 4 years ago to be precise, but as you can tell, not very many people watched it.  Al Gore and Jack Kemp's '96 debate is still the least watched pretty much since the inception of television... I can't even imagine what that snore-fest was like.

Next week's debate should be interesting... it's usually the second debate that proves to be the most defining of the three... by the time the third rolls around pretty much everyone's made up their mind.  I think instead of another debate that's strictly McCain/Obama, they should mix it up a little and have all four candidates be involved and be able to cross-debate one another.  A Sarah Palin/Barack Obama matchup would be ratings gold, as would be watchingold-timers McCain and Biden spar together.  That would never happen though as it could hurt Obama... pitting the Democrats' #1 against the Republicans' #2 is definitely not what the media wants to see, it would be far too unpredictable.

drudgereport is a hodgepodge of conservative-tinted articles and celebrity gossip. It is most certainly biased and I think that the people who read it reflect that. Nearly every other poll I've seen shows Biden winning.. and its not as if online polls can't be easily manipulated.

Here were the pre-election polls for 2004:

The debates were already scheduled before the vp picks happened though. Not some media conspiracy for this. The debate comission already had stuff planned. And if they keep her this sequestered already the McCain camp is sure as hell not gonna pit her up vs Obama.

No kidding, it's been that way for decades... 3 presidential debated and 1 vp debate.  I was merely opining that for the final debate in the future, both candidates on each ticket should be able to face off against one another so the American people can see the total packages spar against one another.  It would certainly make for a much more interesting debate.  Or if that doesn't happen then at least feature a town-hall style forum perhaps with questions from actual voters a la the YouTube debates during the primaries.  All I'm asking is for a little "change"... surely you guys can all agree with me on that! 

And you don't think that the McCain camp wouldn't be happy to put her up against Obama and have her unload on him from everything from Fannie Mae to Tony Rezko, William Ayers, Reverend Wright, etc?  Just today she criticized his statements he made about the military air raiding villages and bombing civilians in Afghanistan... and this the same guy who said he would send troops into Pakistan to kill or capture Bin Laden without Pakistans permission or co-operation if necessary, thus invading a sovereign nation... which is exactly what he accuses the Bush administration of doing in Iraq.  So I guess its ok for him to do it but not Bush?  Pakistan didn't attack us on 9/11... what gives?

And what about Biden's comments on Darfur? Will an Obama/Biden administration send troops there too?  They haven't even taken office yet and already they've talking about sending troops into as many nations as Bush and Cheney have done in 8 years!  Now there's some change we can believe in!

Forget about including the VP nominees. The CPD should include a third party candidate to make things more interesting.

Aw you missed out then.

It was much better in video.

Sarah Palin winked at the camera 4 or 5 times.  At the camera!

She was totally flirting with the entire world, and the only time she corrected Biden without lying was after Biden said "Drill drill drill, drill we must," and she said "No the chant is drill baby drill."

Man I can't wait for the Hustler porno with a Palin lookalike boning the tanning bed repairman.  I hear she reads a vast variety of news sources in it.

Hey I'm all for that too.. provided of course that said 3rd party candidate can manage to garner more than 1% of the vote for a change (hey there's that word again... whaddayakno!)

Last time a 3rd party candidate was featured on the debates was in '92 when Ross Perot helped swing the election for the Democrats.  That's really all third parties are good for... Nader did it to Gore in 2000 as well.  I'd love to meet someone who voted for Perot though, just to ask them what the fuck were they thinking.

Unfortunately, there really is no room for any of the third parties on the ballot this election, because all the would-be Nader/Kucinich/far left voters have flocked to Obama's camp so they have nothing, and Bob Barr and that other right wing dude who's name escapes me at the moment have pretty much been marginalized due to the Republican/conservative base being energized by Sarah Palin.  Then of course there's Ron Paul, who had a cult following of his own that made the O-bots look tame in comparison.  I'd also love to meet someone who writes in Ron Paul this election, just to ask them what the fuck they were thinking.

No, I don't. You know why? Because she had many opportunities to do this waaay before the vp debate and the McCain camp basically made her invisible. Not only that, I will bet you that she does not come out into the media and will not be seen other than short fox interviews and stump speeches from now on. Lastly, Obama beat McCain in the first debate, who is good debater, far superior to sarah palin (im going by all the snap polls and later polls, including the fox one). Obama would eat Sarah Palin for breakfast. Especially in the atmosphere we are in atm, where people are looking for substance.

Plus, if she wanted to play hardball with Ayers, Wright etc, whom he has already deflected, do not think he would softball her. He could bring out the video where she prayed against witches, he could show how they were part of an Alaska secession group, he could bring up troopergate, he could bring up how she said iraq was a holy war for the us, how God's will was to go get oil, etc. She has skeletons in her closet that are at least as damaging as his, if not more so.

Perot did not cost Bush the election. There may be some truth, however, to the assertion that Nader cost Gore the election. Anyways, that is neither here nor there. I wish they would include one or two of the candidates from the major third parties. It would breath some fresh air into our stale election process. I fear, however, that the two ruling parties have such a stranglehold on power that they will never acquiesce to such a proposition. I sometimes wish Perot won in 92 simply to change the system.