Even though a debate featuring third-party presidential candidates was supposed to highlight the breadth of ideological diversity in American politics, Larry King, the moderator, had to remind the four nominees that they had to actually disagree about something to issue a rebuttal.
Tuesday night's meeting of long shots, held in Chicago, was intended as a rebuttal to the debates held between the nominees for the Democratic and Republican Parties. Not only have the candidates from the Green, Libertarian, Constitution and Justice Parties been excluded from the showdowns sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates, so have the issues they care about most: civil liberties after Sept. 11, the role of corporate money in politics and a political class more concerned about keeping power than answering to the people.
Sometimes, those issues can contribute to a sideshow stereotype, as when drug legalization became a major topic - and source of consensus - at the Chicago debate, which was sponsored by Free and Equal, a nonprofit group that promotes open elections.
The call by the liberals, Jill Stein of the Green Party and Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party, for an end to the war on drugs was amplified by Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate. Mr. Johnson offered bona fides on the question: “I have drank alcohol, I have smoked marijuana†- though not anymore, he said. Even Virgil Goode of the conservative Constitution Party, who opposes legalization, said he would cut financing for federal drug enforcement in the name of closing the deficit.
But their passion and refusal to compromise on the principles that reflect their ideas of American democracy marked each person on stage. In an illustration of the circular nature of the political spectrum, the staunch liberals and small-government conservatives all firmly opposed the practice of indefinite detention without trial and said that the Pentagon's budget should be cut as the United States takes a less aggressive posture.
“We cannot be the policemen of the world,†Mr. Goode said, followed shortly by Ms. Stein's similar sentiment: “A foreign policy based on militarism and brute military force is making us less secure, not more secure.â€
The particular set questions, submitted by social media and the event's organizers, disproportionately addressed issues where the candidates' views are alike. It took a question about the cost of college to reveal strong differences. Ms. Stein, a physician, and Mr. Anderson, a former Democrat and mayor of Salt Lake City, both said the government should provide free higher education. The right-leaning candidates both said they would cut Pell grants, Mr. Johnson reasoning that guaranteed government loans make universities “immune from pricing.â€
And even Mr. Johnson and Mr. Goode had differences. The latter said he would cut off immigration until the unemployment rate dropped to 5 percent, while Mr. Johnson, a former New Mexico governor who unsuccessfully ran in the G.O.P. primary, wants to make it easier for immigrants to get work visas.
Both men have been seen as possible spoilers for Mitt Romney, and Mr. Goode seemed to particularly relish that potential. A former Virginia congressman, he overcame Republicans' efforts to keep him off the ballot in that state, and he frequently contrasted his plans to cut the budget with the slower approach of the Republican ticket.
While the six questions at the Free and Equal debate touched on topics neglected in the official face-offs, the candidates were not asked to delve into the issues that have dominated the conventional discussion, including jobs, health care, and taxes.
Because the debate focused on ideas and principles - rather than the candidates' records and qualifications - the tone of the debate was genuinely warm, without any of the direct engagement or interruptions that have marked the Obama-Romney and Biden-Ryan debates. In fact, the only person on the defensive at any point was the red-suspendered Mr. King.
After the first question was asked and answered (pretty much everyone thought the “top 2″ primary system like that adopted in California this cycle is a bad idea), one of the candidates pointed out that they had skipped opening statements. Mr. King was quick to deflect responsibility.
“It was not in my notes,†the veteran interviewer said. “I'm a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, so I do what I'm told.â€
Free and Equal announced it would hold a second debate on Oct. 30 in Washington with just two candidates, to be chosen by viewers in an online vote.
