Gary Johnson will not be at debates

[RonPaulFanInGA]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/09/16/gary-johnson-won-t-be-on-debate-stage.html

Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson and the Green Party’s Jill Stein will not be on the presidential debate stage for the first contest sponsored by the Commission on President Debates. Johnson and Stein both fell short of the 15 percent polling threshold required to participate, the commission said in a statement, adding that Trump and Clinton will face off on September 26 and their running mates, Tim Kaine and Mike Pence, will debate on October 4. Johnson in particular was pushing hard for inclusion in the debates, as he’d polled in the double digits across several national surveys, and previously said he would only have a chance to win if he can debate Trump and Clinton.

 

[jllundqu]

If Johnson were a Libertarian, who actually held libertarian principles and policy positions, he would be polling much much higher. But alas, he swung WAY left to try to appeal to Bernie supporters and be the "moderate voice of reason"...

 

[Matt Collins]

Duh?


This was a foregone conclusion long before this election cycle began.

 

[TheTexan]

Duh?


This was a foregone conclusion long before this election cycle began.

Collins, as usual, is correct on this

 

[Danke]

Collins, as usual, is correct on this

He had inside sources.

 

[eleganz]

If Johnson were a Libertarian, who actually held libertarian principles and policy positions, he would be polling much much higher.

Silliest statement ever.

In fact, it can be argued Gary Johnson's methods are the most effective since he is the most successful libertarian candidate in history. And that argument would be factual vs. your theory.

 

[William Tell]

Silliest statement ever.

In fact, it can be argued Gary Johnson's methods are the most effective since he is the most successful libertarian candidate in history. And that argument would be factual vs. your theory.

No. Ron Paul was the most successful libertarian candidate in history.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Silliest statement ever.

In fact, it can be argued Gary Johnson's methods are the most effective since he is the most successful libertarian candidate in history. And that argument would be factual vs. your theory.

The single-party that has traditionally functioned under the illusion of two parties just expanded to a single party functioning as three. The establishment is what was successful. This was predictable. After those monumental Independent and third party turnouts during the 2014 Mid-Term, the largest Independent and Third-Party turnout in modern history, there was no way the establishment didn't notice it and weren't going to do something about it.

And here we are.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Seems like some friends are content to keep kicking the same old can down the road and blowing smoke up our rear ends like we're stupid or something. Heh.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

he is the most successful libertarian candidate in history

Repeated for emphasis

The LP wouldn't be looking at 8% in the general right now if Gary had come out against the CRA, or died on some other such hill.

 

[donnay]

Silliest statement ever.

In fact, it can be argued Gary Johnson's methods are the most effective since he is the most successful libertarian candidate in history. And that argument would be factual vs. your theory.

That would be true if he were a true libertarian, but he is not. Ron Paul did more for the Libertarian party. Johnson is a pretend libertarian.

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Repeated for emphasis

The LP wouldn't be looking at 8% in the general right now if Gary had come out against the CRA, or died on some other such hill.

Not to be argumentative, but I will eat my hat if Gary Johnson even gets half that (4%) nationally.

First, his base of support in the polls consists of the most unreliable voters (18-29). Secondly, the Libertarian Party's high-water mark in presidential elections is the 1.06% Ed Clark received in 1980, and Johnson himself failed to get even a full 1% in 2012.

Yeah, yeah, the polls. Third party candidates are notorious for how they never live up to the media or polling hype. It's a quadrennial thing: "Oh, this is the year of the third party, so-and-so non-D/R candidate is polling 10% nationally in this poll!" Then it just collapses, because no one has the guts to "waste" their vote on someone they know won't win. In presidential elections especially.

Trump-Clinton reminds me of Angle-Reid in Nevada in 2010, where everyone acted like the two major party candidates were so terrible we were going to see this big third party support. Nevada even has a quirk where you're literally allowed to vote "none of these candidates", but it only mustered 2% that year. It just never happens, outside of crazy exceptions (like Ross Perot and his money).

 

[euphemia]

I hope some of you die-hard Johnson people are paying attention. Here you have a group of very diverse liberty thinkers, and they all think Johnson is not a libertarian. Maybe it's time to accept the truth.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Yeah, yeah, the polls. Third party candidates are notorious for how they never live up to the media or polling hype. It's a quadrennial thing: "Oh, this is the year of the third party, so-and-so non-D/R candidate is polling 10% nationally in this poll!" Then it just collapses, because no one has the guts to "waste" their vote on someone they know won't win. In presidential elections especially.

You're right that 3rd party candidates tend to fade as the election approaches.

...the difference this time is that Gary Johnson Isn't Fading.

Gary Johnson doesn’t seem to be going anywhere. In recent elections, third-party candidates have tended to lose support as Election Day approaches. But the Libertarian Party presidential nominee and former New Mexico governor is holding steady in the polls, and we’ve reached a point in the race at which past third-party candidates had already started to see their support nose-dive

I expect he'll underperform his polls somewhat, but I'll eat my hat if he doesn't at least triple the LP's all time record.

I'd give him a 50:50 shot of quintupling it, which would mean the end of ballot access hell for the party.

 

[69360]

If Johnson were a Libertarian, who actually held libertarian principles and policy positions, he would be polling much much higher. But alas, he swung WAY left to try to appeal to Bernie supporters and be the "moderate voice of reason"...

Um no. He does so well because he has centric cross over appeal. If he was a LP purist he would get the usual 1%.

Not to be argumentative, but I will eat my hat if Gary Johnson even gets half that (4%) nationally.

First, his base of support in the polls consists of the most unreliable voters (18-29). Secondly, the Libertarian Party's high-water mark in presidential elections is the 1.06% Ed Clark received in 1980, and Johnson himself failed to get even a full 1% in 2012.

Yeah, yeah, the polls. Third party candidates are notorious for how they never live up to the media or polling hype. It's a quadrennial thing: "Oh, this is the year of the third party, so-and-so non-D/R candidate is polling 10% nationally in this poll!" Then it just collapses, because no one has the guts to "waste" their vote on someone they know won't win. In presidential elections especially.

Trump-Clinton reminds me of Angle-Reid in Nevada in 2010, where everyone acted like the two major party candidates were so terrible we were going to see this big third party support. Nevada even has a quirk where you're literally allowed to vote "none of these candidates", but it only mustered 2% that year. It just never happens, outside of crazy exceptions (like Ross Perot and his money).

The polls are usually right. I think we will get the predicted 5-10%



This article is wrong by the way. Johnson won't be in this debate. He is not excluded from all the debates. If his numbers rise, he could get it. Granted it's a catch 22 and his exclusion probably precludes any rise in polling.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I expect he'll underperform his polls...

2% max.

 

[kpitcher]

I hope some of you die-hard Johnson people are paying attention. Here you have a group of very diverse liberty thinkers, and they all think Johnson is not a libertarian. Maybe it's time to accept the truth.

Judging from all the Trump supporters on the forums I'm not entirely sure what liberty minded people actually think nowadays.

 

[eleganz]

No. Ron Paul was the most successful libertarian candidate in history.

Ok we all love Ron, every day doesn't need to be a competition about who thinks Ron is more badass, its getting super tiring after all these years.

Ron ran in the LP but his most successful stint was as a Republican and NOT a third party candidate. Let's just stick to the facts here.


End of the day, Gary has a pretty chance to get on the second debate. We all know he isn't the ideal reflection of Ron Paul but let's get real, he'll be the only voice up there saying what we've been saying for many years. If you want to give up the spotlight to say things like, "audit the fed", "abolish the IRS", "libertarians are non-interventionist not isolationist", and so on and so on, just because you want to be a purist. Fk, why are you even in electoral politics? Just move to NH already and chill out there.

 

[William Tell]

Ok we all love Ron, every day doesn't need to be a competition about who thinks Ron is more badass, its getting super tiring after all these years.

Ron ran in the LP but his most successful stint was as a Republican and NOT a third party candidate. Let's just stick to the facts here.

Not to nitpick, but the post I responded to was one where you used the "small l". That's what I thought you meant. If you meant large L Libertarian, then it remains to be seen.

 

[RJ Liberty]

I love Ron Paul. Ron Paul is the shit. But, for the record, Ron Paul's 1988 presidential campaign only garnered him 431,750 votes. Gary Johnson already beat that number, by a lot, back in 2012, when he received 1,275,951 votes (almost three times as many).