From an Our America Initiative email blast:
Our America Initiative today announced the formation of the “Coalition for Fair Debates”, comprised of political parties, media outlets and advocacy groups who oppose the exclusion of qualified candidates from nationally-televised presidential debates.
Fair Debates (https://www.fairdebates.com), is a project of the Our America Initiative (https://www.ouramericainitiative.com), a national advocacy organization, which has long supported opening the general election presidential debates to all candidates who are constitutionally eligible to serve and who appear on enough states’ ballots to potentially achieve a majority in the Electoral College. In 2012, those criteria would have allowed participation by the Libertarian and Green Party nominees in addition to the Republican and Democrat candidates.
The private Commission on Presidential Debates, created by the Republican and Democratic Parties in 1987, uses polling criteria that effectively limit participation in the nationally-televised debates to only the Republican and Democrat nominees.
Joining in the Coalition for Fair Debates are the Libertarian and Green parties, as well as organizations ranging from the Liberty Roundtable to Downsize DC. Independent media outlets joining the coalition include Truth in Media, the 1787 Radio Network, Ballot Access News and others.
The complete list of coalition members, along with background information regarding the presidential debates, can be found at https://www.fairdebates.com/the-coalition.html
Announcing the coalition, Ron Nielson Senior Advisor said, “For more than 20 years, the Commission on Presidential Debates — a private organization created by the Republican and Democratic national parties — has monopolized the nationally-televised general election presidential debates. They have intentionally excluded other qualified candidates from participating by applying arbitrary polling criteria that are virtually impossible to meet by independent or ‘third party’ candidates.
“Today, a majority of Americans do not believe the Republican or Democrat parties represent their views, and are more ready than ever to consider alternatives to the status quo. They deserve the opportunity to see and hear from all the viable candidates — not just the Republican and the Democrat. The Our America Initiative is fighting for fair, open debates, and we are proud to have such a diverse group of organizations, political parties and others joining that fight.”
In addition to a major grassroots effort to achieve reform of the presidential debates, the Our America Initiative is leading a legal challenge to the “monopoly” on televised debates exercised by the Commission on Presidential Debates.
Holly cow, sorry about that. Did a little research. Here we go. New poll with every single LP Presidential candidate and 2 extras.
http://makeapoll.net/ttOKwm
“paulie
September 8, 2015 at 10:05 am
LOL, why does Herd list Wayne Root as a LP candidate when Wayne went back to the Republicans in 2012 and now has a title with the RLC?”
Maybe he does not know that Wayne Root quit the Libertarian Party and went back to the Republican Party over 3 years ago.
I don’t think that Root even wants to run for the Libertarian Party’s nomination for President, and even if he did, I don’t think that he’d stand much of a chance at getting it, being that he quit the Libertarian Party back in 2012 and endorsed Mitt Romney for President.
LOL, why does Herd list Wayne Root as a LP candidate when Wayne went back to the Republicans in 2012 and now has a title with the RLC?
Let the Libertarians decide who they want. Maybe they don’t want Johnson or his punitive flat tax policies (not flat and not fair at all). Let’s find out shall we? Let the poll begin! http://makeapoll.net/IF6HK1
Don’t forget the California Libertarian Senate and Presidential Candidate forum Sept. 16th, at 7p.m. @ http://www.facebook.com/groups/libertarianswin
Here is a good list of questions I have come up with for rating potential candidates for President (or lower level offices too for that matter, but of course the standard should be lower for lower offices):
1) Where do they stand on the issues? How libertarian are they?
2) How knowledgeable are they about the issues?
3) Do they have a record of keeping their word?
4) What is their record of libertarian activism?
5) How good are they at doing outreach to the public, and do they reach out to the entire political spectrum? Have they demonstrated an ability to bring in new Libertarians?
a) How good of a public speaker are they?
b) How good of a writer are they?
c) How good are they at doing interviews?
6) What is their campaign strategy to bring in more votes? What is their strategy to build the libertarian movement and change the direction that the country is headed?
7) Are they well known? If so, how well known are they, and is their name recognition positive or negative among the people whom the Libertarian Party needs to reach?
8) Are they wealthy, and if so, how much of their own money are they willing to throw into the race? If they are not wealthy, or if they are not willing to throw a lot of their own money into a race, have they demonstrated an ability to raise money, and if so, how much have they and/or their campaign staff raised?
9) How active is their campaign? Does their campaign reach out to the public at large, or does their campaign just “preach to the choir” at Libertarian meetings?
10) What do their campaign materials looks like (as in their website, pamphlets, videos, etc…)? Do their campaign materials look good, or do they look like garbage?
11) What kind of campaign staff have they assembled? Is their campaign staff made up of actual Libertarian activists, or do they have unphilosophical mercenaries or other non-libertarians on their campaign staff? Are they making efficient use of campaign funds?
12) What kind of media attention are they getting, if any?
13) Do they have any things in their past, including “skeletons” in their closet, that would make them a bad candidate?
I could probably come up with some more questions, but I think that these are some good ones.
“Caryn Ann Harlos
September 7, 2015 at 8:20 pm
Johnson will get the nomination if he wants us. That doesn’t mean I have to be thrilled about it.”
Same here.
Andy Craig said: “The others are also right, it’s vanishingly unlikely that he would be defeated for the nomination if he seeks it.”
Gary Johnson will win easily unless some better candidates for the nomination emerge.
I’m certainly willing to be convinced by any of the other candidates. But none of those currently running or who are rumored to maybe run seem very to make that case. Some of them are acceptable second choices, some not, but none of them are my first choice.
One relevant measure, is how active their campaign is and how much coverage and momentum they can drum up before the convention.
For some of the declared candidates we’re already a decent number of weeks and months into their campaign. If you can’t get any coverage and attention in the pre-nomination campaign (other than from IPR)- what’s to make us think you would do so as the nominee? If the only bump you’ll get is what the party name and reputation would give to whoever we nominate, e.g. “I’ll get more coverage because I’ll be the Libertarian nominee”- that’s pretty weak for indicating a value-added general election campaign. It’s not much more than a paper candidacy at that point.
It’s nice that some of the candidates are going around to state conventions to campaign, they absolutely should do that. But if you can’t get any significant amount of media coverage pre-Orlando, that should be at least in some measure a dis-qualifier, or at least a point not in their favor.
I haven’t ruled it out, but I’m not committing to it.
I don’t know what my ultimate conclusion will be, but I do know I will definitely not be voting for Johnson in the initial round.
Haven’t decided what I’ll do, but I gather there will be more candidate(s) announcing.
Andy Craig,
I think your analysis spot on. Whether or not I end up going NOTA (Paulie has given me a pretty convincing case on how that might be more harm than good), I will NOT be voting in the first round for Johnson. I will get behind whoever is the most radically libertarian and hasn’t made any blatantly anti-libertarian statements (i.e. I know I may disagree on some issues but if I find them items about which libertarians generally can disagree, I will still support them).
As to the original question, Gary has said yes the lawsuit will proceed and OAI will still support it regardless of if he is the 2016 LP nominee or not.
The others are also right, it’s vanishingly unlikely that he would be defeated for the nomination if he seeks it. If anything, the rump anti-Johnson vote will be split three or four ways instead of unified behind Wrights like it was in 2012. Not that it theoretically matters with progressive elimination, but it does matter insofar as it prevents any one candidate from building momentum as the anti-Johnson. Particularly if they’re all eliminated on the first ballot, which is still the most likely scenario.
Johnson will get the nomination if he wants us. That doesn’t mean I have to be thrilled about it.
I doubt that any of the less publicly known LP activists or newcomers can beat Gary. The only way I can see him not being the nominee is if he either decides against running after all or if another “name” candidate comes into the race. Not that Gary is some huge name, but he is compared to, for example, the currently announced candidates.
Mike–
If Gov. Johnson wants to run again, which I believe he does, do you really think he won’t get the LP nomination?
Does anyone (other than Dr. Feldman and Mr. Perry)?
I wonder if OAI will continue their lawsuit should Gary Johnson not receive (for whatever reason) the LP Nomination.
>OAI’s supported lawsuit to stop the Presidential Debate Commission from using polls to exclude viable candidates will be filed in DC’s circuit the week of September 21st.
A mere six months too late. Better late to the party, than not to show up.
Ha… I must have forgotten that.
Yeah, she was criticized in the 2012 F&E debate for being the “close mic talker”.
Why, is that something she does?
The standing in the lawsuit is based on 2012, not 2016. If Goode had made it to 270EVs, I’m sure and the C.P. nat’l cmte. would have been invited to participate too. But there’s nothing OAI/LP/GP can do about the fact that the C.P. candidate didn’t meet the ballot access threshold in 2012.
http://jrmyersforpresident.com/
Will the CP be included once we have ballot access to 270 electoral votes?
Appropriately, Jill’s mouth is closest to the mic.
———- Forwarded message ———- Charles Frohman, Juanita Billings , Lou Jasikoff , Sean Dunagan , William Sloane , Lloyd Schaffer , Michael Wilson , David Jones , Jeremy Kareken , Paul Frankel , Brett Pojunis , Andy Craig
From:
Date: Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:30 PM
Subject: DC press conf week of 9/21 for OAI lawsuit
To: Bruce Majors
Cc: Eric Blitz
FYI Bruce, Juanita, other Midatlantic OAI officers (& regional directors), and Eric:
OAI’s supported lawsuit to stop the Presidential Debate Commission from using polls to exclude viable candidates will be filed in DC’s circuit the week of September 21st. Early next week Ron will have details about what actual day and where the press conference will take place, as well as possible related events (for which you might be asked to offer some help).
Stay tuned, feel free to share the news, and once OAI has more details, I’ll forward….
Have a great weekend!