Is it time to change the rules of the presidential debates?

As Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton travel the country, trying to persuade voters to love them, or at least hate them less, the New York Times had a snazzy chart explaining why our democratic process produced a choice no one seems to like.

It shows that only 9 percent of the American population chose these two.

That’s because once you eliminate the people who are too young to vote, or are here illegally, or just don’t vote, you’re left with just 60 million participants, half of whom voted for candidates who weren’t Trump or Clinton.

Related: The debates will be like watching Godzilla fight Mothra

So when you think of it that way, how could you not end up with two people most of us can’t stand?

A distraught listener asked me — given how unpopular the two major candidates are — why not at least include the Libertarian and Green Party candidates in the final debates since no one seems to hate them anywhere near as much? It’s not a bad idea.

The Debate Commission has set 15 percent popular support as the standard for getting in — which only Trump and Clinton can meet — so unless more of you guys start saying you support the Libertarians or the Greens next time a pollster calls, they’re not getting in.

But there’s nothing magic about 15 percent. In fact, the only thing the law says is that there must be “pre-established, objective” criteria for choosing who gets to be in the debate.

And so looking ahead, maybe the commission ought to consider a rule change. Like, for example, in the event the only candidates who qualify for the debate are disliked by more than half the American people, we open the debates to everybody on the national ballot.

Follow @http://www.twitter.com/thedaveross