Will this be the first Presidential Election without a debate?

I am unaware of whether or not there has ever been a Presidential race previously that has not had a debate between it's contestants before but since it seems that Bush is such a coward that he is staying far away from a real debate with Kerry, will this be the only Presidential race in history without one?

Rp

If the debate does happen, the media will call it for Bush and play only the best sound bites...

sadly, we have a winner ....

Supporters on both side will demand it.

...there are those Bush supporters who think their guy will do well. The movers and shakers in the Repub party will insist on at least one debate.

Remember that Gore desired a weekly debate during the interim between the conventions and the elections. Kerry's been demanding monthly debates for over a month now and nothing has happpened. * will put it off to the eleventh hour, rest assured.

Member. . .he's not good on his feet under all the pressure. . .

Will Bush demand that Nader be in the debate?

If so Kerry should demand that the Libertarian and Constitution Party candidates be in the debate as well.

:P

First presidential debate:
Thursday, September 30
University of Miami
Coral Gables, FL

Vice presidential debate:
Tuesday, October 5
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland, OH

Second presidential debate:
Friday, October 8
Washington University
St. Louis, MO

Third presidential debate:
Wednesday, October 13
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ

source: The Commission on Presidential Debates (http://www.debates.org/)

Historical Note: There were no presidential debates between 1960 and 1976.

Edit: Added note

Is it only scheduled to be Bush and Kerry?

I'd like Kerry to ask Bush if he supports putting women in a jail cell if she has an abortion (like Tweety asked Toomey the other day).

:)

The Commission has a set of criteria that must be met to be in the debate.
Here's the link: http://www.debates.org/pages/candsel2004.html

And here's the relevant part:

<snip>
B. 2004 Nonpartisan Selection Criteria

The CPD's nonpartisan criteria for selecting candidates to participate in its 2004 general election presidential debates are:

1. Evidence of Constitutional Eligibility
The CPD's first criterion requires satisfaction of the eligibility requirements of Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution. The requirements are satisfied if the candidate:
a. is at least 35 years of age;
b. is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States and a resident of the United States for fourteen years; and
c. is otherwise eligible under the Constitution.

2. Evidence of Ballot Access
The CPD's second criterion requires that the candidate qualify to have his/her name appear on enough state ballots to have at least a mathematical chance of securing an Electoral College majority in the 2004 general election. Under the Constitution, the candidate who receives a majority of votes in the Electoral College, at least 270 votes, is elected President regardless of the popular vote.

3. Indicators of Electoral Support
The CPD's third criterion requires that the candidate have a level of support of at least 15% (fifteen percent) of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations' most recent publicly reported results at the time of the determination.
</snip>

Commentary: It appears that #2 and #3 would be the limiting criteria for Nader.

I would have a hard time watching it because I couldn't stand to be exposed to bush for that long even if he was getting his lunch fed to him.

Also, I know who I'm going to vote for and he is a pretty good speaker.

No matter how pathetic and obvious Bush's lies will be, few of his supporters are capable of rethinking their positions. It's not as if Fox will do any fact-checking. I'll enjoy the squirming Chimp's pain but the real fun will be the Cheney/Edwards slamfest! Ole Dickie better charge up the defibrillator!