U.S. Supreme Court Won’t Hear Johnson v Commission on Presidential Debates; Level the Playing Field v Federal Elections Commission Still Pending in U.S. District Court


Ballot Access News:

On February 20, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Johnson v Commission on Presidential Debates, 17-916. The other presidential debates case, Level the Playing Field v Federal Elections Commission, is still pending in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. A decision on that case could come at any time.

10 thoughts on “U.S. Supreme Court Won’t Hear Johnson v Commission on Presidential Debates; Level the Playing Field v Federal Elections Commission Still Pending in U.S. District Court

  1. Andrew

    Hey, instead of blowing hundreds of thousands on lawsuits, why not support an organization who’s trying to start their own debates instead…. Voters United… http://www.votersunited.ngo. The executive director (aka me) has tons of video, IT, and business/marketing experience…

    Note: Please forgive the layout, I’m going to be getting to fixing it in the next few months.

  2. Andrew

    Chuck Moulton.. disagree entirely. They’ll watch it if it’s marketed well enough. They don’t watch existing debates (outside of the current pres debates) because the media never talks about them. I remember years ago there was a debate for Florida governor on CNN, that actually quite a few people watched, but that’s because CNN advertised it.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fW2yRsu89e8

    The only other thing people want to see, other than knowing that it’s even happening, is decent production value. A $1 million marketing budget to spent on FaceBook, Twitter, and YouTube will more than attract plenty of views.

  3. steve m

    I was in New Zealand just before the last presidential election and the question I kept running into was….

    are these two really the best two you have to offer?

    Might I propose a series of debates based upon “We do Have better Choices” and making use of social media to push the debates

  4. Don Wills

    Andrew wrote “They’ll watch it if it’s marketed well enough.”

    You got $10,000,000 to do the “marketed well” thing?

    Besides the FPTP winner take all presidential election is the worst place for independents and 3rd parties to waste their money, either on lawyers or campaigns. The system must be changed for any substantial change in the status quo/power structure. But that’s a Catch-22. So why waste your time? FWIW, I plan to spend the rest of my days enjoying my popcorn watching our very own rerun of the downfall of the Roman Empire.

  5. paulie Post author

    Step 1: “an organization who’s trying to start their own debates instead…The executive director (aka me) has tons of video, IT, and business/marketing experience…

    Note: Please forgive the layout, I’m going to be getting to fixing it in the next few months.”

    (Wow dude. You are a genius. No one has thought of doing their own debates before and none of the ones who have done their own debates had “tons of” video/IT/business/marketing experience).

    “The only other thing people want to see, other than knowing that it’s even happening, is decent production value.”

    Well that and little things like deciding who the best person to “lead the country” will be and how well they perform against each other. If the candidates who are not seen as likely to win aren’t there, it doesn’t matter if you have a trillion dollar marketing budget, a lot of the prospective audience will not take the time.

    And a marketing budget of a million dollars? Large organizations, with plenty of money to hire lots and lots of people with – dare I say it – lots of video, IT, business and marketing experience, whole teams of them in fact, who never have to say embarrassing things like “Note: Please forgive the layout, I’m going to be getting to fixing it in the next few months.” Because that’s handled before a public rollout….spend more money than that on a single superbowl ad spot. That’s just airtime, not including production costs.

    The major presidential debates get many, many millions of dollars or their equivalent in attention and promotion. They have billions in built-in brand recognition carried over from past elections. And guess what? Yeah, all those companies employ social media experts too. But maybe you are just that smart, you will outwit all of them.

    My guess, however, is that even that one million budget is a pipe dream and that this “organization” is you and just you.

    Good luck tho.

  6. Andrew

    And these defeatist attitudes are way nothing ever changes in this country. Good luck when shit hits the fan in 2030 – 2035 when social security collapses and we have rampant inflation, mass unemployment, and mass poverty.

    KEY DATES FOR THE TRUST FUNDS OASI DI OASDI HI
    First year cost exceeds income excluding interest 2010 2022 2010 2021
    First year cost exceeds total income 2022 2019 2022 2023
    Year trust funds are depleted 2035 2028 2034 2029

    Source: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html (Towards the bottom).

    And BTW, the organization is a recognized 501c3; we wouldn’t have a .ngo domain name if we weren’t. …. but whatever. You’ve already given up, you just don’t realize it yet.

  7. dL

    And these defeatist attitudes are way nothing ever changes in this country. Good luck when shit hits the fan in 2030 – 2035 when social security collapses

    what does SS solvency have to do with the presidential debate commission?

  8. Andrew

    dL… It’s casual of a defeatist attitude. Thanks for not using any logical reasoning skills whatsoever.

    Without inclusion of third-parties in any widely viewed debates (which is what I’m offering to provide, if people were willing to help instead of pursuing the pipe dream of chasing down an organization that is immune from all legal avenues for forced inclusion), the social security system will ultimately collapse, which will cause the fundamental collapse of the economy and the monetary system. Which in turn will be the complete collapse of the entire society.

    Did I really need to provide the explicit link of cause -> effect -> cause -> effect?

    Why is it that literally everybody I have a discussion has the IQ of a retarded chimp? I haven’t had an intellectual conversation in about 12 years. The planet is just fucking sad with the amount of inability to thoroughly reason through any situation.

    To put it simply, a defeatist attitude when it comes to helping me, and others willing to compete against the system, will ultimately lead to the collapse of the society (maybe good if you’re an anarchist? – At least after the guaranteed civil war that occurs). You can’t work within an authoritarian, borderline totalitarian, system. You have to go around it (while we still can).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *