The first Democratic debate will be taking place in 24 hours and I need your help! But first, we have some catching up to do… Two weeks ago I mailed a letter to Jon Stewart via his manager on all of our behalves. It began: “Dear Mr. Stewart, There are well over three hundred thousand people and counting who really want you to moderate a 2016 presidential debate, and I would like to apologize for my part in giving them that (not so) crazy idea. I hope you see the petition to the Commission on Presidential Debates as a gesture of gratitude for the many years you provided us with both reason and laughter within our absurd political landscape. I know I speak for many when I say that the last sixteen years would have been far sadder without you. From the depths of my heart, thank you for becoming what our era called for. Still, it was impolite of me to attach your name to a petition without your consent, and for that I apologize. But with all due respect, Mr. Stewart, this petition is larger than you. I read the comments left by petition signers daily and I have deeply considered what the overwhelmingly positive response to this idea means, and it is not idol worship or cult of personality. You, Mr. Stewart, like it or not, are our strongest voice.” From there I outlined an argument for why Mr. Stewart would be an excellent choice for presidential debate moderator, supported by both your petition comments and formal research conducted by Pew Research Center, Reuters Polling, and Annenberg Public Policy Center (more on that below). I also informed Mr. Stewart of my plans to continue on with this democratic experiment by drafting this “Call to Action” while conceding that he had the power to stop us in our tracks by rejecting the premise of the petition and this burgeoning movement. And the good news is…we haven’t been told to piss off! So from this point forward let us proceed as if Jon is watching and wants to see what we’ve got. Here’s the plan: STEP ONE: Educate ourselves and others on the evidence that supports our argument that Stewart is not only a reasonable choice, but an exceptional choice, for moderating a 2016 presidential debate (sources below). STEP TWO: Create a conversation on social media before, during, and after Democratic and Republican primary debates about what is lacking in the debates and why we see Stewart as our greatest chance to fill that void. Using #WeWantJon will help unite our conversation. Some things to consider about creating a conversation online: 1) Don’t hate, educate! There is already so much vitriol in politics and on the Internet, so as a movement let’s try not to add to it. Kindness and basic manners are turning into revolutionary acts and we want to maintain a moral high ground. To do this… 2) Kill ‘em with kindness and data. Remember, don’t make things personal and don’t take things personally. If you encounter someone who personally attacks you for your educated position, drown them in resources and/or move on. Chances are people who are conducting themselves in such a negative manner do not have a well thought out, researched position, but are rather acting out of emotion or are trying to garner an emotional response from you. If you maintain your cool and professionalism, you may be able to… 3) Find common ground. There is a lot of dissatisfaction in this country, regardless of political affiliation, concerning our political system and media. Although people may disagree on how to move forward they can generally agree on some broader patterns: the media is failing the People and our representative democracy, career politicians are failing to act on the interests of the People, etc. Finding common ground is essential to attracting others to this movement that may not initially agree with or know about our stance. And while you’re attempting to influence hearts and minds, don’t forget to… 4) Learn from people you don’t agree with. Nobody has all the answers and we’re all trapped within our personal experiences. Just because we don’t agree with someone doesn’t mean we have nothing to learn from them. Learning from differences allows us to better communicate with others and helps us avoid “preaching to the choir.” Getting a bunch of Jon Stewart fans to sign a petition is easy. Persuading people who do not yet know or believe that Stewart will speak on their behalf to consider and support our position, that’s the challenge. Here is the argument that I see emerging from the comment section that we can support with research and evidence: 1) Jon Stewart is qualified, experienced, and meets the Commission on Presidential Debate’s criteria to moderate a debate. Much of this is covered in the language of the petition, so I won’t go into more detail here. I do suggest, however, that you familiarize yourself with the entity known as the Commission on Presidential Debates, which was founded in 1987 and is accused of enforcing a “duopoly” in our political system. Sources: A) An overview of the CPD: http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=overview B) “Libertarians, Greens ready lawsuit against Commission on Presidential Debates”: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/24/libertarians-and-greens-ready-lawsuit-against-commission-on-presidential-debates/ 2) Jon Stewart calls bullsh*t when he sees it, regardless of the political party. It can be challenging to convince those who consume their news primarily through one source, FOX News, or have moved further right or left on the political spectrum than they realize, that this is the case. Still, there is research to support this claim that many loyal Daily Show viewers have made. In 2004, Annenberg Public Policy Center researched presidential election knowledge among late-night comedy viewers. Viewers of the Daily Show outranked those who read newspapers 4 or more days a week and tied with those who watched 4 or more days of cable news in political knowledge. This is good to know, but what is super interesting is what happened when Annenberg analyzed the jokes. “Of the 83 political jokes made by Stewart, only 9 specifically targeted Bush. That was 11 percent of his political jokes. The same number targeted Kerry.” This may be of great surprise to some that Stewart cracked jokes about Bush, the Republican incumbent, and Kerry, the Democrat challenger, at an equal rate leading up to the 2004 election. It is also worth noting this is one of the years that Stewart won a Peabody for his election coverage. Source: C) “Daily Show Viewers Knowledgeable About Presidential Campaign, National Annenberg Election Survey Shows”: http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/Downloads/Political_Communication/NAES/2004_03_late-night-knowledge-2_9-21_pr.pdf It’s also worth noting that neoconservative pundits who have been interviewed by Stewart, such as Bill Kristol, have spoke of his professionalism and even-handedness. You can read more about that here: D) “Why Neoconservative Pundits Love Jon Stewart”: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2009/08/why_conservative_pundits_love.html 3) Jon Stewart will attract and engage a younger demographic in the selection of our next president and that is important. According to Pew Research, Stewart’s audience is younger than consumers of all other traditional news sources, with 39% being 18-29 and 36% being 30-49. In 2012, just 41.2% of eligible voters between the ages of 18-24 voted, while 71.9% of those 65 and older voted. Millennials and Gen X must live with the consequences of elections much longer than those who are 65 and older, so encouraging their participation in crucial. Also, when you consider that this year Millennials will surpass the Baby Boomers as the largest living generation and that they currently make up 25.5% of the age-eligible electorate (36.5% by 2020), it is clear that getting this generation to the polls is both important and powerful. #WeWantJon to moderate a debate because those 18-35 deserve to have their voice heard. Sources: E) “Demographics and Political Views of News Audiences”: http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/section-4-demographics-and-political-views-of-news-audiences/ F) “Six take-aways from the Census Bureau’s voting report”: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/08/six-take-aways-from-the-census-bureaus-voting-report/ G) “This year, Millennials will overtake Baby Boomers”: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/01/16/this-year-millennials-will-overtake-baby-boomers/ 4) Jon Stewart is a media outsider who speaks for the People and isn’t beholden to corporate media interests. From Trump to Sanders, the 2016 presidential election is proving to favor those perceived as political outsiders, so it should be of no surprise that the People desire a media outsider to provide them voice in a system that customarily provides them lip service. What some may consider a weakness, Stewart not being a card-carrying journalist from a major media establishment, many more see as an asset. Stewart is trusted as an anti-establishment voice who reflects the views of the People, a voice not embedded in or bought by the politico-corporate-media complex. A 2009 poll conducted by Time Magazine found that after the death of Walter Cronkite, Stewart became the “most trusted” newscaster in the United States. And as the petition states, Reuters found that up to 52.1% of people agree that Mr. Stewart "generally shares [their] view of the world" on "some or most issues". When the data is controlled by political party, about 40% of Republicans say Stewart shares their worldview, at least some of the time. Stewart is trusted by and reflects the worldview of a majority of the People and for this reason is an exceptional choice for debate moderator. Sources: H) “Jon Stewart, the Fake Newsman Who Made a Real Difference”: http://time.com/3704321/jon-stewart-daily-show-fake-news/ I) ”Who speaks for you?”: http://polling.reuters.com/#!search/speaks%20for%20you J) “Fake newscaster, real credibility: Jon Stewart stands at the peak of American punditry poll”: http://blogs.reuters.com/american-insights/2015/05/07/fake-newscaster-real-credibility-jon-stewart-stands-at-the-peak-of-american-punditry-poll/ Are you still with me? Thank you for making it this far! What I have written here is certainly not the whole of the argument or the research and data that is out there, but I’m hoping it’s a good start. Please, if anyone has any constructive insight or knows of any other research that would be good for the cause, create that conversation in the comment section of this petition update. There is a lot of political talk regarding “entitlements” and the harm they are causing this country, and I would argue the most damaging entitlement is in the arrogance of proclaiming, “I’m entitled to my opinion” in the absence of research and/or facts. Let’s not be that. I hope to see you on social media tomorrow during the debate, and all other primary debates, helping to create an intelligent conversation about why #WeWantJon Stewart to moderate a 2016 presidential debate! Let's also point out what we do and do not see and hear in the debate that is offensive to us as voters who want the best for our country and future. And remember, Jon may be watching. Go team! Mariel Twitter: @WeWantJon2016 Facebook: WeWantJonStewartToModerateA2016PresidentialDebate