Sign on Options
Theme: [Light Selected] To Dark»
ForumsOff-Topic Discussion › Shouldn't Gary Johnson be allowed to jo ...

The Classic Off-Topic forum is a place where games or platforms discussions are taboo. Here, you can talk about just about anything outside of games, just make sure to stay classy and follow the rules.

Forum Rules:
- Follow the Terms of Use and read the FAQ.
- Keep your discussions friendly and respectful of others.
- Keep the discussions work friendly. More details in the FAQ (For something more laid back go to Off Topic: After Hours
- Game and platform discussions NOT allowed (For that go to the Primary Games Board or System Wars.
- Do NOT post or bump extremely abusive discussions.
- Hate speech not permitted.

Shouldn't Gary Johnson be allowed to join the Presidential debates?

Forum Actions
Should Garry Johnson and Jill Stein be allowed to join Presidential debates?
Sure,I see no problem with adding them.
81% [38]
Only Garry Johnson
9% [4]
Only Jill Stein
0% [0]
Heck no!
11% [5]
Total Votes: 47

(Note: you must be a registered member to participate in polls. Sign in or sign up now!)

  • Level 65
    You're Winner !
    Posts: 29835
    Site moderatorBoard Moderator
    User is Online
    Oct 7, 2012 9:13 pm GMT
    They may as well admit write in candidates as well, I'd love to see ALF at the podium.

    They may as well admit write in candidates as well, I'd love to see ALF at the podium.
  • Level 28
    Bionic Commando
    Posts: 613
    User is Online
    Oct 7, 2012 9:30 pm GMT
    This topic came up prior to the first debate. In order to allow them on the stage, one must redefine what measuring stick we wish to use for those of whom wish to have a podium. There are roughly 43 political parties in the U.S. If each one nominates a candidate and gets an equal amount of time, no one gets much substance in a 90 minute debate. If we only wish to allow the five major party candidates (Dem., Rep. Libertarian, Reform, Green) we must have a measuring stick that clearly shows why these five belong there, and the other 38 do not. Otherwise we end up with 6th party supporters making the same argument that 3rd party supporters are making now, only without clear guidelines.

    The current guidelines are available from the Federal Election Commission. One additional thing of note: the qualifications for being on the stage are the same as for qualifying for the $91.2 million campaign matching funds, so this could get absurdly expensive, very quick.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fear of failure: True ruler of the world since the beginning of consciousness.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This topic came up prior to the first debate. In order to allow them on the stage, one must redefine what measuring stick we wish to use for those of whom wish to have a podium. There are roughly 43 political parties in the U.S. If each one nominates a candidate and gets an equal amount of time, no one gets much substance in a 90 minute debate. If we only wish to allow the five major party candidates (Dem., Rep. Libertarian, Reform, Green) we must have a measuring stick that clearly shows why these five belong there, and the other 38 do not. Otherwise we end up with 6th party supporters making the same argument that 3rd party supporters are making now, only without clear guidelines. The current guidelines are available from the Federal Election Commission. One additional thing of note: the qualifications for being on the stage are the same as for qualifying for the $91.2 million campaign matching funds, so this could get absurdly expensive, very quick.
  • Level 40
    Abobo
    Posts: 22578
    User is Online
    Oct 7, 2012 10:39 pm GMT
    hoola wrote:

    Yes. All third parties should be allowed to. 15% to join the debates is way too much considering the only way to get a good percentage in the polls is to advertise yourself and advertising yourself requires money which is all spent on just getting on the ballots for third parties. That essentially limits any third party/independent candidate to those who are really rich.


    it is not as limiting as the polls not including third party players, but what does one expect when the democrats and republicans formed the Commission on Presidential Debates after the League of Woman voters stopped overseeing the debates

    [QUOTE="hoola"]

    Yes. All third parties should be allowed to. 15% to join the debates is way too much considering the only way to get a good percentage in the polls is to advertise yourself and advertising yourself requires money which is all spent on just getting on the ballots for third parties. That essentially limits any third party/independent candidate to those who are really rich.

    [/QUOTE] it is not as limiting as the polls not including third party players, but what does one expect when the democrats and republicans formed the Commission on Presidential Debates after the League of Woman voters stopped overseeing the debates
  • Level 37
    Heiankyo Alien
    Posts: 11659
    User is Online
    Oct 7, 2012 10:52 pm GMT
    Cave Johnson would be a far better candidate.
    BMD004 wrote:
    Nibroc420 wrote:
    Once you've given money to an organization, corporation, or government. You do not have that money any more. Do you not understand that?
    I understand exactly what you are saying. I just know you're wrong.
    Cave Johnson would be a far better candidate.
  • Level 26
    Cyber-Lip
    Posts: 3507
    User is Online
    Oct 7, 2012 11:31 pm GMT
    Ok, I am running for president. Let me in the debates, no reason not to!
     photo shake_zps958f5faa.gif
    Ok, I am running for president. Let me in the debates, no reason not to!
  • Level 60
    Master Chief
    Posts: 9034
    User is Online
    Oct 8, 2012 10:12 am GMT

    Nobody is saying everyone would should be allowed. I just think its rather obvious that they chose 15% with the knowledge no 3rd party candidate would ever reach it.

    Nobody is saying everyone would should be allowed. I just think its rather obvious that they chose 15% with the knowledge no 3rd party candidate would ever reach it.

  • Level 45
    Mishima Zaibatsu
    Posts: 6783
    User is Online
    Oct 8, 2012 10:18 am GMT
    Only if he changes his name to Harry Johnson.
    Only if he changes his name to Harry Johnson.
  • Level 18
    Flicky
    Posts: 2249
    User is Online
    Oct 8, 2012 10:20 am GMT
    yes he should be able to be in it. would be nice seeing some actual contrast for once
    yes he should be able to be in it. would be nice seeing some actual contrast for once
  • Level 45
    Mishima Zaibatsu
    Posts: 5491
    User is Online
    Oct 8, 2012 10:26 am GMT
    thegerg wrote:
    sexyweapons wrote:
    I see no reason why he shouldn't be allowed

    Really? What if those putting on/administrating the debate don't him to participate?

    what happens if they don't like Romney or Obama,you expect them to not let them participate?

    SNIPER4321 wrote:
    AussieePet wrote:
    SNIPER4321 wrote:

    AussieePet wrote:
    Are you calling me a barbie doll?

    barbie, dora, hello kitty, hanna montana or any other crap why it matter?


    I assume you have all that inside your room

    what? Im Hardcore PC gamer and cant put these casual/girly/animish/pink stuff.
    [QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="sexyweapons"]I see no reason why he shouldn't be allowed [/QUOTE] Really? What if those putting on/administrating the debate don't him to participate?[/QUOTE] what happens if they don't like Romney or Obama,you expect them to not let them participate?
  • Level 25
    Defias Brotherhood
    Posts: 3962
    Oct 8, 2012 10:36 am GMT

    Nibroc420 wrote:
    Cave Johnson would be a far better candidate.
    He has a strong stance on lemons.

    [QUOTE="Nibroc420"]Cave Johnson would be a far better candidate.[/QUOTE]He has a strong stance on lemons.

  • Level 34
    Paramecium
    Posts: 5449
    User is Online
    Oct 8, 2012 1:48 pm GMT

    Ring_of_fire wrote:
    What is the criteria to be in the debates?
    You know it already. But here it is for everyone else. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDQsIKbQLFY&feature=plcp

    The best podcast in the universe

    noagendashow.com

    [QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"]What is the criteria to be in the debates?[/QUOTE] You know it already. But here it is for everyone else. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDQsIKbQLFY&feature=plcp

  • Level 40
    Abobo
    Posts: 10335
    User is Online
    Oct 8, 2012 4:28 pm GMT
    sexyweapons wrote:
    thegerg wrote:
    sexyweapons wrote:
    I see no reason why he shouldn't be allowed

    Really? What if those putting on/administrating the debate don't him to participate?

    what happens if they don't like Romney or Obama,you expect them to not let them participate?

    That's not very likely. They're the 2 leading candidates for the position. I do not expect that. Now. please try to answer my question.
    [QUOTE="sexyweapons"][QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="sexyweapons"]I see no reason why he shouldn't be allowed [/QUOTE] Really? What if those putting on/administrating the debate don't him to participate?[/QUOTE] what happens if they don't like Romney or Obama,you expect them to not let them participate?[/QUOTE] That's not very likely. They're the 2 leading candidates for the position. I do not expect that. Now. please try to answer my question.
Forum Actions
ForumsOff-Topic Discussion › Shouldn't Gary Johnson be allowed to jo ...