• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Gary Johnson sues the Commission on Presidential Debates

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
http://www.examiner.com/article/gary-johnson-sues-the-commission-on-presidential-debates
On Friday, the Libertarian presidential ticket of former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson and former California Superior Court judge Jim Gray filed an anti-trust lawsuit in U.S. District court to ask the court to force the Commission on Presidential Debates to include all presidential candidates who have enough ballot access to have a mathematical chance of winning the presidential election to have a spot on the debate stage.

The lawsuit accuses the Democratic Party, Republican Party, and Commission on Presidential Debates of violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890, which prohibits certain business activities that reduce competition, and requires the federal government to investigate and pursue trusts, companies, and organizations suspected of being in violation. The relevant part of the law is Section 2, which reads:

“Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.”

If the lawsuit is successful, this year's CPD-sponsored debates will either expand to include the Libertarian candidates as well as the Green Party ticket of Massachusetts physician Jill Stein and Pennsylvania anti-poverty advocate Cheri Honkala, or be canceled.
I hope they win this. The horse and pony show needs to end. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson would destroy either Obama or Romney in an actual debate.
 

Smoblikat

Diamond Member
Nov 19, 2011
5,185
107
106
wewt, why do people think libertarians are crazy. We just want equality and fairness.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,439
1
81
This needs to happen. I don't think it will make an iota of difference for this election cycle, but we need valid alternatives to the two party system we're mired in now. The Democrats and Republicans are both awful, awful parties, and we're never going to see a viable alternative if they get shut out of the major debates.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com
I hope they win this. The horse and pony show needs to end. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson would destroy either Obama or Romney in an actual debate.
That's pretty much a good enough reason for me to finally decide not to support him. The mentality that there is a right to govern or be included in debates is what's destroying society. The LP is going to be no different than the Republican and Democrat Parties if they keep this shit up. I mean, we can't work within the system. We have to get out of it. We have to abandon it by not voting. If they try to force us to vote, then that will cause the revolution that needs to take place. Jefferson wasn't thinking correctly about the state and especially democracy and voting... he should've known a lot better.
wewt, why do people think libertarians are crazy. We just want equality and fairness.
I'm not crazy and I don't always want equality. I want what I think is fair though... who doesn't want what is fair to them?
 
Last edited:

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
Anarchist, why hasn't your revolution started yet then? Why are you allowing yourself to be subjugated and enslaved by your own definition? Why are you by your own definition working within the system, as your own revolution hasn't started yet? Stop being a hypocrite and now you've given me a good enough reason to not follow you.

One must first expose injustice in order to fight against it. That's what this is doing. I agree things need to drastically change, but until it's exposed no one knows and you'll just be "fighting windmills" like so many have said about Ron Paul.

Also, I think you're fucking retarded for your statement on equality. Liberty and Equality go together like Yin and Yang.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com
Also, I think you're fucking retarded for your statement on equality. Liberty and Equality go together like Yin and Yang.
I know I'm retarded, but not for those reasons.:) 100% liberty is equality before the law while legislation must inherently take away equality before the law. Law and legislation are different and the post-Enlightenment state was simply sold on false premises.
 

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,310
175
106
Our two party political system is a failure. Life is not as simple as two options and neither should the decision on who should lead our country.
 

Saint Nick

Lifer
Jan 21, 2005
17,718
3
0
Good, I hope they win this. The presidential election is just a dog and pony show at this point. This will at the very least help to expose a third party and make the debates more interesting and maybe even honest.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
0
This needs to happen. I don't think it will make an iota of difference for this election cycle, but we need valid alternatives to the two party system we're mired in now. The Democrats and Republicans are both awful, awful parties, and we're never going to see a viable alternative if they get shut out of the major debates.
I think increased visibility for Johnson would solidify Obama's lead and put the election out of reach for Romney.
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,392
31
91
Doubt this will go anywhere. The Democratic and Republican parties are not corporations producing Presidents through debate -- there's no commerce there. It could be called a conspiracy to share relevancy to maintain donations, but those are free donations and not the purchase of a commercial product. Gary Johnson does not have some right to the appearance of relevancy to increase the "demand" for |donations|.

It's up to Gary Johnson to sell himself for the job of President. That the People's laziness has stacked the cards against him does not make this the commercial purchase of a product and due balancing between producers.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
I think increased visibility for Johnson would solidify Obama's lead and put the election out of reach for Romney.
I fail to see the problem.

And we need some real debate, not the scripted bullshit that we currently see out of the previously chosen losers that most people feel forced to choose between. Maybe asking tough questions and forcing real answers out of Puppet A and Puppet B would do something about voter apathy.

Think what you want about Jesse Ventura as a politician. He was a buffoon in a lot of ways. But he changed the debate in this state and energized the voters.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
0
I fail to see the problem.

And we need some real debate, not the scripted bullshit that we currently see out of the previously chosen losers that most people feel forced to choose between. Maybe asking tough questions and forcing real answers out of Puppet A and Puppet B would do something about voter apathy.

Think what you want about Jesse Ventura as a politician. He was a buffoon in a lot of ways. But he changed the debate in this state and energized the voters.
I'm not opposed to it at all. All I said was that it would increase the probability of Obama winning the election.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
I'm not opposed to it at all. All I said was that it would increase the probability of Obama winning the election.
The actual small government faction of the Republican party (not the neocons or the religious whackjobs) would welcome defeat if it meant bringing the party back to earth.
 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,650
0
0
This needs to happen. I don't think it will make an iota of difference for this election cycle, but we need valid alternatives to the two party system we're mired in now. The Democrats and Republicans are both awful, awful parties, and we're never going to see a viable alternative if they get shut out of the major debates.
I'm not sure if I've ever agreed with a single post on this board as much as I do this one.
 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,650
0
0
Doubt this will go anywhere. The Democratic and Republican parties are not corporations producing Presidents through debate -- there's no commerce there. It could be called a conspiracy to share relevancy to maintain donations, but those are free donations and not the purchase of a commercial product. Gary Johnson does not have some right to the appearance of relevancy to increase the "demand" for |donations|.

It's up to Gary Johnson to sell himself for the job of President. That the People's laziness has stacked the cards against him does not make this the commercial purchase of a product and due balancing between producers.
You missed the word "organizations" in the OP.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
I think it's a good suit and I hope they win. Maybe next presidential election we can see debates with Libertarian,Green Party, Peace and Freedom and an Occupy Party. Cool stuff.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com
Gary Johnson does not have some right to the appearance of relevancy to increase the "demand" for |donations|.

It's up to Gary Johnson to sell himself for the job of President. That the People's laziness has stacked the cards against him does not make this the commercial purchase of a product and due balancing between producers.
I agree with you for the most part, because all it takes is the internet and a realization of what statists do. It also takes critical thinking. If people can't or won't think critically, then it doesn't do any good for Johnson to be in the debates. Also, the msm will just come up with new tricks or lie about him to make him look bad and a lot of people don't notice it... like when they do audio and camera tricks like cutting people out or how people say Dr. Paul denies evolution. Although others raised their own hands, he didn't raise his hand when the question was asked. When he said it was a theory, he was correct and that doesn't mean that he believes it's likely or that he definitely does not believe in it... when the MSM does shit like that, it fools most people and pisses off people like me.

Johnson can have his own debate, like you said even though we agree for different reasons. There is no right to be on the ballot, to vote, or to be a debate, especially one hosted by private companies no matter how regulated they are.

Hell, most people don't even pay attn to the debates, because most people say that Al Gore definitely wouldn't have invaded Iraq yet Bush was determined to do so from the beginning. News flash to those people... Bill Clinton worked his ass off to remove Sadaam Hussein and he ran out of time.

I bet that the vast majority (like 70%, maybe more) most Americans don't even know who Al Gore's running mate was... that also indicates that the debates don't mean anything, especially since my entire 8th grade class was required to report on them and those collectively counted as much as the test average.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com
I'm not opposed to it at all. All I said was that it would increase the probability of Obama winning the election.
Why wouldn't he take nearly as many votes away from Obama? He truly is a "social liberal" and many liberals are very unhappy with Obama since they didn't see it in 08. Also, Romney and Obama are the same to libertarians on stuff like the deficit and taxes... they both want to maximize revenue and increase spending and Romney always has and always will 100% support repeal of Pelosicare. Johnson could also cause Romney to win CO and maybe even CA (but that's really stretching it) because of the Marijuana issue, which is his pet issue like Dr. Paul's is the Fed and legal tender. Repeal of the Fed and replacement with nothing would probably put the state's growth to a halt because the Fed is the lifeblood of the state and the state is the lifeblood of wallstreet's continued growth.
 
Last edited:

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
Anarchist, you don't know a whole lot about Johnson. Marijuana isn't his "pet cause". It's just the most open way of talking about the Drug War. His pet cause is getting elected as far as I can tell.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,267
3
76
It's up to Gary Johnson to sell himself for the job of President. That the People's laziness has stacked the cards against him does not make this the commercial purchase of a product and due balancing between producers.
Except when you are excluded from the debates it's hard to "sell yourself", and that's the point.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY