Americans want an open discourse in the debates

FACEBOOK FACEBOOK. COM/ USATODAYOPINION

Presidential elections set the political agenda by bringing forward new issues to the political dialogue.

The U. S. has been plagued by two big- business parties for most of its existence. Some transformative changes have come from third parties. In order to make the changes we need, those voices need to be heard. Kevin Zeese

Perhaps having a threshold is correct so you don’t have another Republican primary situation with so many candidates they can’t all fit on stage. But having three or four up there who are all on enough state ballots to win, would be good for democracy. Especially in the first debate! People forget there are three debates. Let people battle it out in the first one and see how the voters end up feeling about the candidates through polling. If Gary Johnson’s polling average went from 10% to 4% after participating in the first debate, maybe there would be a rationale to not include him. But right now anyone who advocates for not including people like him is just plain old antidemocracy and pro- duopoly. Melissa Machado

TWITTER @ USATOPINION

We asked our followers whether having the Libertarian and Green party candidates in the presidential debate enriches or distracts from it. With third- party candidates at debates, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump will be distracted from their personal attacks by real issues.

@JonBachert If they’re coming with educated ideas and views, it could only enrich the debates. Make the major party candidates do their homework. @lakorbel44 Distract. Look at what happened with Trump at the GOP debates. @anthonynacc Enrich for sure. Our democracy can’t evolve by having such limited political options. @Letti4U Enrich! Why let funding and private interests monopolize our choices? It’s our democratic right to hear from all parties. @ atkinson_ caryn Distract. Neither third- party candidates is a viable option. @Wake2See For more, follow @USATOpinion or #tellusatoday.