Gary Johnson

New 7% Showing in CNN Poll Almost Certainly Dooms Gary Johnson's Debate Chances

Libertarian nominee needs the next three polls to average 20% to qualify, unless the Commission on Presidential Debates changes its criteria at the last minute.

|

Bernie sez 15 percent threshold is too high. ||| YouTube
YouTube

CNN/ORC this morning came out with its first national presidential poll in more than month, and the results are terrible for Gary Johnson's fading hopes of getting into this fall's presidential debates. The Libertarian nominee pulled just 7 percent in the survey, down from 9 percent in the same poll at the end of July, and 13 percent—his highest-ever showing nationwide—two weeks prior to that.

CNN/ORC is one of the Big Five national polls that will be averaged by the technically nonpartisan, effectively bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) in "mid-September" to assess which candidates will be taking part in the initial Sept. 26 event. Since another of the Big Five, Fox News, dropped a 9-spot on Johnson last week, that means that the other three polls would need to average 19.7 percent for Johnson to get to the unreasonably high 15 percent threshold. As it stands now, if the CPD were making its decision today, the Libertarian nominee would be at 8.8 percent across the selected five polls. Which, while being the most impressive third-party showing since Ross Perot in 1992, would still fall far short.

The Johnson campaign, which has thrown all its eggs into the get-into-the-debates basket, signaled a shift in public relations strategy last Thursday when vice presidential nominee William Weld warned that the CPD could be stripped of its tax-exempt status if he and Johnson are left on the outside looking in. "They can play favorites," Weld told Politico. "They would lose their tax exempt status if they did that. And saying 'we're only going to have an 'R' and a 'D' we're not going to have the third party Libertarians even if everyone wants them,' I think their tax exempt status would be in jeopardy and I think they know that….You know when the commission was set up something like 30 percent of the voters were Independents and now that's climbing toward 50 percent….So the rationale for having only an 'R' and only a 'D' is dissipating."

The campaign is also pouring $3.8 million into ads that will run this week, the Washington Times reports.

On Meet the Press over the weekend, Democratic presidential primary runner-up Bernie Sanders said that the CPD's 15 percent threshold is "probably too high." A spate of recent national polls show that Americans agree, including a Suffolk University/USA Survey last week showing 76 percent of Americans desiring third-party candidates be included in the debates. Unless that broad sentiment is converted into fantastical amounts of political pressure over the next two weeks, or one of either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump suddenly demand his inclusion, Johnson almost certainly will not make it into the first presidential debate.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

204 responses to “New 7% Showing in CNN Poll Almost Certainly Dooms Gary Johnson's Debate Chances

  1. I hate to say I told you so, but I told you not to rely on the CPD.

    1. Taking those bitches (CPD) down would be a reward in it’s own right.

      1. Started working at home! It is by far the best job I have ever had. I just recently purchased a Brand new BMW since getting a check for $25470 this 8-week past. I began this 6 months ago and I am now bringing home at least $92 per hour. Go to this website and click tech tab to start your own business…. http://goo.gl/LtI1C0

    2. not to rely on the CPD.

      Dunno… thought they were pretty reliable.

      If you thought they’d look for a reason to include 3rd party, you’re not paying attention.

    3. My brother’s friend Bryan showed me how I can make some cash while working from my home on my computer… Now I earn $86 every hour and I couldn’t be happier… Before this job I had trouble finding job for months but now when I got this gig I wouldn’t trade it for nothing. Start this website
      go web and click tech tab for more info work… http://goo.gl/AzTMwA

    4. My brother’s friend Bryan showed me how I can make some cash while working from my home on my computer… Now I earn $86 every hour and I couldn’t be happier… Before this job I had trouble finding job for months but now when I got this gig I wouldn’t trade it for nothing. Start this website
      go web and click tech tab for more info work… http://goo.gl/AzTMwA

  2. He was at 7% in the last poll. They just changed from Likely voters to registered voters. And they also didnt polled millenials 😀

  3. He was at 7% in the last poll. They just changed from Likely voters to registered voters. And they also didnt polled millenials 😀

  4. He was at 7% in the last poll. They just changed from Likely voters to registered voters. And they also didnt polled millenials 😀

    1. And they also didnt polled millenials 😀

      All your sqvirrelz are belong to us.

        1. Boris: We don’t need computer weapon to kill moose and squirrel. We’ve been trying to kill moose and squirrel for 35 years.
          Natasha: And we’ve never even come close.
          Boris: Exactly.

  5. On Meet the Press over the weekend, Democratic presidential primary runner-up Bernie Sanders said that the CPD’s 15 percent threshold is “probably too high.”

    You don’t need fifteen percentage points when there are children starving in this country.

  6. Even if the Libertarian nominee‘s needs the next three polls to average 20% to qualify, unless the Commission on Presidential Debates will changes its criteria at the last minute.

    1. ^This. Maybe the anger at an obviously-rigged system will…oh, I can’t even delude myself any longer.

    2. No kidding, 144. I think at this point, if Johnson was actually polling for a win, they would exclude him.

      That said, I think if he DID make the stage, Donald and Hillary pull out. They have nothing to gain by elevating Gary Johnson’s name recognition.

    3. That’s a bit overwrought. Perot was allowed to debate in 1992, and I’m not aware of any instance where the CPD raised the polling threshold after a third-party candidate polled higher than the originally stated threshold.

      1. Perot wasn’t a threat to dismantle the precious (the federal bureaucracy).

      2. That would be in 2000. The CPD upped the threshold to 15%, “coincidentally” the year after Jesse Ventura was polling at 10% and won election as Governor after being permitted to debate. There is great video from 2000 of that year’s Reform Party candidate for President… Donald Trump… saying the threshold is too high.

  7. He doesn’t stand a very good chance of getting in even if he does make the fifteen percent but, yeah, this result pretty much rules out even that remote possibility.

  8. Libertarian moment! Just think if they let them into the debates how confused voters would be on what an actual libertarian is supposed to sound like? McAfee needs to do some “the more you know” ads informing the average Joe/Ann what it means to be a free market/mind kinda guy/girl/xe.

    1. I imagine that making a Libertarian Moment comment must feel the same way that it feels to wake up on a Saturday morning very comfy in bed but having to pee, and realizing that you have to wash the bedding today anyway so you might as well just go for it. A resounding triumph of laziness.

      1. Just get yourself a chamber pot already, Hugh. Gosh.

        1. Winston’s mom charges by the hour, dude.

          1. It depends.

            1. I see that

          2. But she doesn’t charge very much.

      2. Most of us don’t have rubber sheets on the bed, Hugh.

      3. Hugh is Winston’s mom. Go out their and eat another bag of dicks tiger!

    2. McAfee

      You mean that EEVUL rich guy who’s also a wanted murderer? /99% of the mouth breathers in this stupid country

    3. “…actual libertarian sounds like?”

      Libertarian?!!! Where, where? That shithead does not even come close. A shithead poser by any other name is still a shithead poser. Stop abusing/torturing the meaning of the word, “kinda” as it violates the NAP.

    4. I am personally glad Johnson isn’t in the debates because if he was, I’d have to explain myself to my Republican and Democrat friends, they’d both look at and point “So this is what you believe? Then your a REPUBLICAN.” Then I’d have to explain to them how Johnson isn’t a real libertarian which was going to be pain in the ass.

      1. Yep, I didn’t want to have to explain that either. Sometimes its better to lose a battle to win a war.

  9. Look, the CPD is the duopoly standing on a street corner with a card table and three shells, asking you to guess which shell has the pea under it.

    Instead of playing their game, expose it, mock it, shame people into not taking part in it.

    1. “Ooh, bad luck, you didn’t get your third-party access, wanna try again?”

    2. So I was wrong. I thought there was demand for a 3rd party to rise, but I guess there was.

      Or perhaps the demand was there, but GJ just hasn’t been charismatic enough to close the deal.

      1. I was saying that there’s not demand *from the duopoly* that they be subject to competition.

        The actual voters…well, try various appeals which *don’t* require duopoly consent in order to work.

      2. He was well on his way, at 10-11% in the average only a few weeks ago – the last two polls have gone out of their way to skew the results against him. They undersampled independents by about 30 points in the last poll, and excluded everyone born after 1982 on this one.

        These latest polls are nothing more than (further) proof that the game is rigged. They say nothing about momentum, which is CLEARLY AND WITHOUT RATIONAL DISPUTE on GJ’s side.

    3. Yeah, I’m not sure that trying to convince an organization funded and managed by the two major parties that it should include other parties was ever going to be a success. On the other hand, if the strategy was to drag the CPD into the light and show that it’s effectively a conspiracy between the major parties to limit the ability of anyone else to participate in the process, they’re doing a pretty decent job.

      1. Direct Democracy an GJ is the Sheep

  10. Gary is at 8% in the RCP avg today, about where he has been for the last couple of months. There was never any chance that he was going to get into the debates. He would have to get well north of 15% to even have a chance. At 16% the two party duopoly would find some reason to keep him out. It’s a moot point anyway.

    If we’re just going to rely on the CNN poll, then BTW, Trump is now beating Hillary by 2%. Are we going to talk about that? No. Does the 2nd paragraph on page 5 of Reason’s presidential coverage tell us tell us these things? No, it says ‘blah blah, blah blah blah, blah, blah blah blah blah’.

    1. “BTW, Trump is now beating Hillary by 2%. Are we going to talk about that? No. Does the 2nd paragraph on page 5 of Reason’s presidential coverage tell us tell us these things? ”

      “A.M. Links: Trump Leads Clinton By 2 Points in New Poll, Conservative Activist Phyllis Schlafly Dead at 92, Philippine President Apologies for Insulting Obama”

      1. Forget it, he’s rolling.

  11. Has anyone ever considered suing the CPD on antitrust grounds? As it is, the GOP and Dems are basically businesses that provide representation (a service) to voters. This would be akin to restricting sales or marketing of a service that did not have at least 15% market share.

    On the other hand, being left out of the debates might actually help Gary. Especially if it turns into the feces-throwing match everyone expects, and he runs some clever ads before and after the debates.

    1. “Has anyone ever considered suing the CPD on antitrust grounds?”

      yes

      1. Go ahead and take away their non-profit status. So what? That just means that the CPD gets disbanded and a new non-profit gets created to take it’s place to do the same thing, with the added bonus of new fundraising needed to feed the new beast. Winner!.

    2. It’s not going to turn into much of anything. Hillary’s going to start coughing and they’ll cut the feed, then say that Hillary is unable to continue the debates for health reasons, but that her health is 100% perfect. 50+% of the country will believe this and the rest is history.

      1. No, they would claim there was some type of security threat – and claim that the HVAC system was tampered with. [adjusts tinfoil headgear]

      2. Query:

        During her last public coughing fit, Hillary had a water bottle, and somebody brought her a glass of “water”.

        I wonder what was in that glass, that wasn’t in the bottle?

        1. Cerebrospinal fluid drained from a living infant.

            1. Fucking Christopher Reeve. Ooh, I still get mad thinking about how he limp-fished me.

              1. I went to the KY Derby back in the early 90’s and got to shake Pat Day’s hand in the paddock. He was about 4’10/110 lbs and his hand was like a bunch of lumpy leather-skinned bananas with steel cores. It seemed that even the tendons around his knuckles had muscles…

  12. I think you may be able to argue the rule itself is being satisfied. I have not seen the rule. Reason should print the specific rules and do an analysis on their interpretation.

    15% in 5 polls…well, is that polls for “Who would I vote for?” or is that polls “Should he be in the debate” often on the same poll. Just sayin’ it would be fun to continue to throw rotten plant matter at the CPD.

    1. Just sayin’ it would be fun to continue to throw rotten plant matter at the CPD.

      ?????.

      1. Announcer: “And now the candidates will be served refreshing beverages from our sponsors, Russia.”

        ????? ?? ?????? ???????

        BLAM!

        Announcer: “Joe Biden appears to be licking the candidates. Folks this is disturbing.”

        1. To be fair, Diamond Joe was probably gonna do that anyway.

          1. Or, at the very least, be smelling their hair.

    2. That point was already raised.

      Because it is a Catch-22.

      A lot of people would vote for the brand name (R or D) because they do not know about the alternatives.
      But unless the 3rd party can participate in the debate, the vast majority of people would not know them.

      So asking “Who would you vote for if the election was held today?” was basically designed to rule out the minor parties.

      In the age of the internet and social media, that Catch-22 effect is lowered though.

      So it would probably still come back to: Is GJ charismatic/’good’ enough at explaining his positions? In my opinion, he really hasn’t been. He has gotten a lot better in the last few weeks though but probably too little too late.

    3. Well, to answer my own question here is all I came up with:

      and have a level of support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations’ most recently publicly-reported results at the time of the determination.

      That seems like “support” is a VERY squishy word…Support in what way? I would run ads sayin “I have 71 percent support in national polls, and their requirement is 15. So why am I not invited?” etc.etc. Cause there are any number of polls that show much greater “support” for Gary.

      1. Oh it’s all very subjective and squishy:

        five selected national public opinion polling organizations Are the criteria for selecting those organizations spelled out? Once selected are those organizations accredited for the entire election cycle or can they be de-selected on a whim?

        1. If you don’t name the polls and the date(s) the average will be run, this is an open invitation for manipulation.

          1. Data manipulation is what government does best.

      2. That seems like “support” is a VERY squishy word

        That’s by design. They make the requirement as squishy as possible, that way they can do things like cherry pick only the polls that third party candidates do the most poorly in to make sure that they stay below the 15% threshold. Also, the polling methodology and phrasing of the questions is important too. This latest CNN poll, for example, is a poll of “registered voters,” not “likely voters.” The previous polls, where Johnson did better, were polls of “likely voters.” And I may be getting into tin-foil hat territory here, but I believe that’s also by design. By manipulating the polling to show falling poll numbers for Johnson (or any other 3rd party candidate) they create a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts. More people see the falling poll numbers and figure “What the hell, they’re not going to do anything, so I might as well hold my nose and vote for Clintrump/ Trumpton (whichever is the “lesser evil”) and hope for the best.” Now that we’re getting closer to the election, I expect to see more flawed polls like this showing declining support for 3rd parties so that the media can focus on the two way horse race between the “serious” candidates and forget about those party candidates. “It was fun to ask “what if” but now that things are getting serious, it’s time to focus on the two ‘real candidates’ instead.”

      3. “Selected” is the key word, I think. They do the selecting.

  13. Is this the right time to mention my own idea of organizing a third-party debate and inviting the major-party candidates? And if they won’t show, have a couple of empty chairs or else have celebrity spokespeople give the case for them?

    1. Good luck finding a network to carry that (other than Stossel!) hehe

      1. A TV network? Why not just print it in a newspaper or write it on a papyrus scroll?

        1. Yeah, Stossel ought to be over this, maybe the Fox brass won’t let him.

          1. ought to be *all* over this

          2. Oh, Eddie, you actually believe that Fox isn’t all-in for you-know-who?

            1. Is there some part of the phrase “maybe the Fox brass won’t let him” which was unclear to you?

              1. We find the ‘maybe’ part to be offensive.

                1. Hedges and qualifications in predicting the future are offensive?

    2. One of the CPD rules is that their invitees are not allowed to participate in any other debates.
      So you could have Jill and Gary and Evan and Darryl participate in the kiddie table debate but Clitrump won’t be there.
      I’d still watch

    3. I think those exist (or have existed). They have been on C-SPAN, which counts as a network, I guess.

  14. The CPD has no incentive for letting Gary Johnson into the debate, and the powers that be think that’s just dandy. Surprise!

    1. ^This. They are very much a tool of the duopoly.

  15. How sure are any of you that even Trump & Clinton will debate?

    1. They are committed to having a debate involving up to two participants.

    2. I am hearing that Trump may only agree to debate just once.

    3. Trump has committed to going again just recently and Hilary has 80% of the media on her side to spin whatever happens. I’d say 75% certainty there will be at least one debate.

      1. Better for Hillary to take a knee until November. She already has the media running interference, and her most successful strategy to date is to expose herself to the public as little as possible. Declare Trump unfit to govern and refuse to give him a platform to spread his message of hate.

        1. I agree, but she is already fighting a rearguard action against not talking to reporters and there is the very real possibility that Trump will meltdown on the debate stage. I mean, she won’t come off well herself, but since this election is all about who pisses off non-base voters on the other side enough to get them to vote, she has an easier gameplay for a debate overall.

          1. I can imagine Ailes coaching Trump before he goes onstage, snapping his fingers to get his attention and repeating slowly and sternly, “Do not mention Vince Foster. Do not mention Vince Foster. Do not mention Vince Foster.”

            1. “What did that guy say? Something about Vince Foster…”

              1. No. It was a distant ship. Smoke on the horizon.

            2. What they both need is a moderator willing to ask the tough questions.

              “Secretary Clinton, when asked if you wiped your server of emails, you replied ‘What, like with a cloth?’ Were you lying about what you did, too stupid to understand the question or just being a flippant asshole?”

              “Mr. Trump, what is 13×9? You have 4 seconds to answer.”

              1. “My dick.”

                *wins election*

                1. “Your penis is a two-dimensional rectangle?”

                  “Secretary Clinton, same question.”

                  1. “Well, Ivana was kind of rough. But the classiest rough.”

                  2. “Secretary Clinton, same question.”

                    “Why my lotus of pulchritude is planely and actutely obtuse!” *cackles – then gets hit with a saddle embolism*

              2. A standard baking pan.

              3. “Mr. Trump, what is 13×9? You have 4 seconds to answer.”

                Jeopardy is re-running their “Power Players” tourney this week. Today had Anderson Cooper (Gloria Vanderbilt’s pretty boy son), Lara Logan (best known for getting sexually assaulted in Egypt), and Michael Steele (Republican Affirmative Action at it’s best)… I would have so liked to be on that show.

                I’d go up in my sweat pants and stained t-shirt carrying a red Dixie cup with a strong vodka/tonic with a squeeze of lime, tell them I was a proud grad of Westerville South HS (after I spent a year in jail as a juvenile)- and then absolutely destroyed them.

                Pathetically easy questions for Jeopardy- and they all stood around laughing with each other about how clueless they were…

          2. Chance of Trump melting down weighed against the chance she coughs up a lung onstage. This is probably keeping her team awake at night.

            1. It’s just seasonal allergies. Like all of the seasons, apparently.

              1. Too many bong hits.

            2. She went through her entire convention speech without a cough. I’m not sure why this is even a story; it’s honestly a retarded attack.

              1. I like the idea that the stress of people thinking she is sick is making her sick in actually.

                Or that it will force to prove she isn’t sick by doing something physically challenging and that will kill her. And then Trump has a stroke while laughing about it so vigorously.

                1. She already opened the jar of pickles. What more strength is needed than that?

                  1. She already opened the jar of pickles. What more strength is needed than that?

                    The fortitude to endure witnessing what she does with said pickles.

                    1. The fortitude to endure witnessing what she does with said pickles.

                      Ain’t no way I’m fuckin with anyone who’s that strong!

                2. And then Gary Johnson, faced with the prospect of winning the presidency, smokes a brick and stumbles into traffic.

              2. What kind of fucking idiot thinks it is “retarded” to attack someone who is obviously unhealthy for failing to disclose facts about their health while running for the presidency.

                “She went through her entire convention speech without a cough”

                See that? THAT is retarded.

                1. Seems a little harsh.

              3. Some stuff makes it look like she might be hiding health problems, but I have no idea how much of that is just wacko conspiracy nut stuff.

          3. I personally think Trump will have a meltdown if he goes through with all three debates. One of his “zingers” will be ill-timed or just plain offensive, he will be confronted with a policy detail that will leave him completely stumped, etc.

            I mean, how is he going to answer “How will you make Mexico pay for the border wall?” without coming across like somebody who hasn’t actually thought about it for more than 2 seconds? That can’t be spun as a “gotcha” or “unfair” question; he’s literally promised that for over a year without providing any sort of details on how.

            1. “Everything we seize from their cartels will go to pay for the wall!”

              /hooting from supporters

              1. Yeah, or “well, we’re gonna reform the immigration system to triple the number of Mexicans that can enter legally on an annual basis and we will make they dependent on Mexico funding the border wall,to prevent the drug cartels from terrorizing both sides of the border.”

              2. Or “I’m going to ask them to pay for it in exchange for us helping them enhance drug interdiction in border areas where their citizens are being terrorized by drug cartels with weapons the Obama DOJ sold them with Mrs Clinton’s knowledge.”

                That would kill and Clinton couldn’t refute it without exposing herself to some serious scrutiny.

        2. I suspect that might backfire, commodius. But then again we have seen a certain candidate stonewall certain topics which would have derailed the candidacy of anyone else.

          1. Adolf Hitler?

      2. “I expect to do all three. I look forward to the debates. I think it is an important element of what we’re doing. I think you have an obligation to do the debates,” Trump said Monday

        Nice sounding but left himself an out, very presidential actually.

    4. Trump played this “will I debate?” game during the primaries, too. Somebody tallied up how many he either didn’t attend or threatened to not attend… it was almost half (there were a shit ton of Republican primary debates). Using that standard, I am going to say there will be two debates. But it’s dangerous not going to debates: he arguably lost Iowa to Cruz because he refused to go to the last pre-Iowa debate because it was moderated by Megyn Kelly… which (quite justifiably) makes him look like a big fat coward.

      I personally don’t think Trump will gain anything in debates. His grasp of policy is poor, he does not take criticism without lashing out like a crazy person, and both of the Two Trumps (the coked-up manic one and the oddly morose pretty much limp one) are annoying in different ways.

      He maybe won one or two in the primaries but his strategy was to be an attack dog with a good zinger or two for a few minutes and then just slide into the background, largely ignored, as the other candidates hammered on each other’s policy positions (Trump doesn’t have actual policy positions and he likely didn’t know what his opponents’ are so it’s not like he could participate in the meat of the debate).

      He didn’t attend debates with fewer than four participants (he attended “forums” with three participants but those aren’t the same thing) so his “I can be ignored 95% of the time” strategy was effective. He won’t be able to do that in the debates with Hillary.

      1. Doesn’t matter how either does in the debate. The media will tell us who won. No independent thinking required by the audience. Just enjoy the spectacle and let the actual words wash over you. Unless there’s something more interesting on, like football. Watch that instead.

    5. There won’t be a debate. An insult-hurling match? Maybe. But not a debate, since the two of them would end up agreeing on things.

  16. Libertarian nominee needs the next three polls to average 20% to qualify, unless the Commission on Presidential Debates changes its criteria at the last minute.

    The duopoly represented by the CPD really only has one candidate.

    So CPD changing criteria at last minute is possible, just depends on

    1) How Hillary is doing in polls – worse she’s doing the better chance of 3rd partier in debates assuming…
    2) 3rd partier in debates will help Clinton’s numbers.

    That criteria makes Jill Stein a radioactive non-starter no matter her polling. Johnson peels off too many Clinton voters for his own good vis-a-vis CPD letting him in debates on sentiment alone. More he hurts Trump in polling, more his chances improve making debates even falling short of the 15% number.

    1. That’s cynical. I like it.

  17. The Clinton News Network should do everything they can to get Johnson on that stage. He’s only going to sap Trump of votes, not Hillary. I WILL HEAR NO DEBATE ON THIS.

    1. That is not true.

      In a two-party system, people who do not want to vote R have 2 choices
      1) Not vote
      2) Vote D

      So GJ would actually take votes away from D on the whole.

      1. Actually, I take that back. ha!

        The 3rd option still exists, where people vote R regardless.

      2. Sometimes Eugene just says stuff, man.

        1. “Rupert, put the cork back on the fork.”

          1. Prince Ruprecht reference? Nice.

            1. May I take your trident, Sir?

    2. FoE, you are correct. You will hear no debate that involves Trump, Clinton, and Johnson.

  18. Looks to me like a couple of related things are going on:

    1) Trump’s campaign staff shakeups made a big difference, and Trump is listening to his campaign staff.

    He hasn’t said anything outrageously stupid for a while now. That trip to Mexico was a coup for Trump.

    2) When Trump isn’t acting like a jackass, disaffected Republicans are less disaffected and start breaking for Trump.

    We keep hearing about how Johnson is pulling more support from Hillary than Trump lately, but maybe we haven’t really thought about what that really means for Trump.

    Trump can stop saying outrageous shit at any time, but Hilary’s association with corruption in voter’s minds is forever.

    1. Kelllyanne was a good add

    2. People who won’t vote for Trump because he once said something nasty about a disabled person or an ethnic minority will never vote for him. People who won’t vote for him because he keeps saying those things are basically just waiting for him to stop so they can.

      Firing his staff and changing his position on stuff like immigration is Trump’s pivot for the general election. He has the luxury in this case of running against Hillary Clinton, who is running as herself. She’ll never pivot to the center because she can’t afford to lose what base she has and nobody would believe her if she did. Trump, on the other hand, is for many a protest vote, and so long as he doesn’t sound like Adolf Hitler or Archie Bunker come election day he’ll get most if not all of the anti-Hillary votes.

      1. “so long as he doesn’t sound like Adolf Hitler or Archie Bunker come election day he’ll get most if not all of the anti-Hillary votes.”

        He’s let more than a few Archie Bunkerisms fly and it seems to help him.

  19. Trump can stop saying outrageous shit at any time

    “Can” and “is willing” are about as far apart as they can be in his case.

    1. Why stop doing what’s worked so far?

    2. Donkey, you have the right. What you lack is the ability!

      -Shrek

    3. My point is that he seems to have already stopped.

      Before, I think it was mostly about not spending his own money for advertising. He could just write an obnoxious tweet, and the media would focus on nothing else for the day.

      Some of his tweets during the Democrat’s convention got more coverage than the Democratic convention.

      He hasn’t said anything outrageously stupid since the new campaign team came on. I doubt that’s just a coincidence.

  20. When the day of reckoning is distant and indistinct, it’s easy enough to idly speculate as to who you’d like to see win. As the dogs of war bay ever-closer, fear surpasses hope as the driving force of decision. It doesn’t matter who you most love, the vote is on who you most fear. In a close race between Satan and Beelzebub, Johnson will be lucky to get 1%.

  21. Five reasons Hillary could be blowing it

    I think its sort of funny the way the media alternates between smug triumphalism when Hillary is up by 2%, and “WE KNEW IT ALL ALONG”-head-shaking whenever she’s down by 2%. They’re *experts* either way.

    The expression du-jour re: Hillary = “”nobody is better at handing her adversaries talking points“”

    Which is a tortured way of saying, “She’s not very good at lying to cover up her misdeeds”.

    But they refuse to admit any *substance* to her faults; its all really just “accidentally providing ammunition to her crazy enemies”

    Clinton is still queasy about electoral politics as a profession, grinds it out because it’s the only path to power, is allergic to most media and, in general, does the bare minimum required to get by

    The best-possible spin = “”She’s such a good-hearted person that this ‘election’ stuff takes a toll on her. Media (aka “us”) are parasites that tax her patience. And oh, i guess she’s lazy too. But aren’t we all?””

    I so want her to win. They need her so.

    1. If only she *were* lazy! She’d spend less time thinking up ways to screw people.

  22. Johnson should hold a couple debates with empty podiums as a stunt. Hell, invite Stein and the Constitution Party guy if they’re interested. Maybe it’d attract some attention to the third parties and shame to the debate gatekeepers but it’s a little late for stunts to have any real effect.

  23. OR… Gary Johnson is just an asshole who nobody likes, and that’s why he’s doing so terribly in the one election the Libertarians could have really broken out.

    1. I don’t really care for Johnson either but if Jesus himself came back to earth and ran for President as a Libertarian they’d try their best to keep him out of the debates.

      1. “Jesus, Son of God, did you, in fact, build this man’s hotrod?”

        [spotlight picks out Gibby Haynes in audience]

        1. I gotta ding a ding dang my dang along ling long.

          1. These masturbation euphemisms are getting pretty direct.

            1. Tommy played piano like a kid out in the rain
              Then he lost his leg in Dallas, he was dancin’ with a train
              They were all in love with dyin’, they were drinking from a fountain
              That was pourin’ like an avalanche comin’ down the mountain

              Doesn’t get much more direct, does it?

              1. Huh. Wouldn’t have pegged you as a Butthole Surfers fan.

        2. They need to make another album before one of them croaks.

          1. It’s only been three years since the last one. And they make all their money touring at this point anyway.

            1. Sorry, I was talking about the Butthole Surfers. Ministry I can take or leave.

              1. +1 X-Ray of a Girl Passing Gas

          2. Which member of Ministry are you worried about?

            And if it isn’t Al, they don’t matter.

          3. I haven’t been impressed with much since Electric Larryland anyway.

    2. Given that the two major parties are running Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, I defy you to prove that individual charisma has anything to do with the success or failure of a political party at the national level.

  24. “The Johnson campaign, which has thrown all its eggs into the get-into-the-debates basket…”

    Which tells us that the people running the Johnson campaign are either morons or delusional (possibly both).

    1. It’s a moonshot, and I think it’s not a bad idea. It was a lower bar than, say, actually winning the presidency.

      Libertarians have the best shot at success running for local offices. If the LP can build up a stable of actual elected officials on a regular basis, get some name recognition, maybe even score a few seats in Congress, then you’ve got popular recognition. People have to start thinking of the LP as an actual party with real politicians in it if you’re going to convince them that a vote for an LP candidate isn’t just a protest vote or a wasted vote.

      This was a step towards just getting the brand out there. Even not making the debates, at the very least you have non-libertarian media outlets referring to Johnson and Weld as representing a sane, responsible vision of government. Hopefully, next time there’s an opening for city council, mayor, what-have-you, an LP candidate can run and get some votes from that association.

    2. The people running the campaign in Utah refuse any input from us local LP people.

      Here is Maryland we have learned that they refuse to listen to us or our feedback.

      When I said, Send a bumpersticker to anyone who donates any money at all, it took them months to finally do this. And then only a tiny, microscopic sticker that no one can read.

      We better do better than this if we want to actually compete with ClinTrump.

  25. Ain’t it amusing to see that Johnson and Weld are more non-Libertarian than Trump is non-Republican? The one true blue politician in the race seems to be Hillary Clinton who is perfect pitch DemonicRat criminal gangster through and through.

    1. DemonicRat

      +1 Bollocks Insane Yomomma

      1. I wish people would just use the actual words. Making up silly names isn’t actually clever.

        1. Making up silly names isn’t actually clever

          +1 Redundancy

          1. More like Romdundaney.

        2. Making up silly names isn’t actually clever.

          Says the dude who went “woodchipper” in his handle…

          1. (Googles…) OOOH! You went “woodchipper” and “mattress girl” at the same time.

            Is that actually double “not clever”?

    2. Her party is promising to send men with guns to beat the bloody snot out of warriors for the babies and other mystical bigots who coerce girls. To a young woman of impregnable age, that is not a bad reason to vote against the Dems’ opponents. You like polls? Ask a young lady: “Why not vote for pulpit-thumping bigots who want to force you to squeeze out Hitlerjugend as cannon fodder in a Crusade against the Saracen backamoor?”
      Go ahead…
      Someday the LP will again have a manly and principled choice plank, and actual unwizened women will join.

  26. 15%?

    The threshold is too damn high!

    1. That was Ben Carson, right ? The rent is too damn high guy.

      1. Ben Carson with the “Rent’s too damn high” guy’s hair would be awesome.

    2. Gary has always saying 15% is fine. What a stupid thing to say. Of course, it is just an arbitrary number that is very hard to meet. We were doomed from the start in obsessing on 15 and allowing the media to hold us to it.

      1. Read the media bribery law Nixon signed within 24 hours of the LP becoming a thing and it makes sense. Nixon decide to use taxation to subsidize the looter kleptocracy, plain and simple. Before 1971 not even the communist, fascist or ku-klux parties got to use the Treasury to shake down taxpayers for campaign funds.

  27. Unless that broad sentiment is converted into fantastical amounts of political pressure over the next two weeks, or one of either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump suddenly demand his inclusion, Johnson almost certainly will not make it into the first presidential debate.

    Donald Trump Will Not Debate Hillary, if Gary Johnson not Allowed to Participate

  28. How does Johnson do so well in so many states but only 7% at Clinton Network or CNN if you prefer

  29. RE: New 7% Showing in CNN Poll Almost Certainly Dooms Gary Johnson’s Debate Chances

    It is for the best the little people should not hear the insane rantings of a pro-capitalist pig like Mr. Johnson. The lowly plebian class would only get confused when faced with the many blessing totalitarian socialism (or fascism) has to offer if there was another candidate. Therefore, let us all thank our lucky stars there is no such thing as an open debate since our two ruling political parties will be saying the same thing anyways, only in different ways. Let us then go forward toward and elect the slaver of the choices given. This way, the ugly and evil concepts of financial freedom, political freedom and independence from The State will not surface and cause confusion. Such counter-revolutionary ideals must be avoided at all costs if we are to continue down the path of socialist totalitarianism. So let us all be grateful for such oppression because we are all too stupid to be left to our own decisions.

  30. Regardless of whether Gary is in the debates or not the LP will have a greater impact this election than ever before.

    Sadly, they have blown it on some local levels such as here in Maryland where the LP candidate for Senate? will not be on the ballot since he forgot to pay the registration fee!! This from a local party guy who told me it.

    However, things are looking good overall. We will probably get enough electoral votes, another first, to deny ClinTrump 270.

    So even though the first debate ( there are 2 more) would have been great, the national LP lack of $ ( need at least $20 million to blanket the nation to kick up the national numbers) and its strategy of only advertising in a handfull of Western states could never have produced high national numbers and never will.

    So please stop saying that it’s game over if we are not in debates!

    That is so dumb and self-defeating.

    Putting all the eggs in one basket when our enemies control it is just stupid.

    We will still make a huge dent in the ClinTrump numbers in November.

  31. No polling of Millennials, Johnson’s strongest demographic. Check the cross tabs. P22 in particular, all the 18-34 categories are “N/A.” MSM is resorting to dirty tricks to keep him off the debate stage.

  32. No polling of Millennials, Johnson’s strongest demographic. Check the cross tabs. P22 in particular, all the 18-34 categories are “N/A.” MSM is resorting to dirty tricks to keep him off the debate stage.

  33. Well, well. The libertarian moment continues. I don’t understand why Reason contributors are so down though. Surely this is a minor setback.

  34. The CPD 15% standard is corrupt by their own mission statement :

    To “provide the best possible information to viewers and listeners .”
    http://cosy.com/Liberty/y2012/OpenLtr2CPD2012.html

  35. Are there any set standards, regulation, or auditing of these national polls? If we are going to decide who will be in the presidential debates based on these polls, it seems like there should be some regulation in place.

    Surveys can be skewed easily in many ways. How do we know if these people actually represent the whole country?

  36. Good. I hope he falls into a pit and stays there for about 2 months.

  37. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,
    ——————>>> http://www.works76.com

  38. Sorry guys but Gary Johnson dooms Gary Johnson.

    Put up someone who understands the Constitution and the fact that we don’t want gubment telling us, basically, ANYTHING, then you can have our votes. Until then, we have to defeat Dems (and RINOs) at every turn. The pissboy at the back of the league is not actually a threat, yet.

  39. And to be clear, the Russians are GOOD at what they do, namely fucking it up for everyone else, and they have done a good job of pushing us to the point whereby we have to pick a Clinton or a Trump. Good job, but we are ON to you. We may be slow, but we finish STRONG. Only our good nature let you get a foothold. But that is all we will give you.

    One day, 3-4-5 potential candidates will be on the ballots, most (some?) with some good ideas. But the fact will be they won’t matter much because we brought the power back to the people, stopped importing stupid people (why did they leave their home countries in the first place? I rest my case.), and woke up to the fact that those who produce are, oddly enough, worth more than those who do not.

    1. Observe how nationalsocialist infiltrators co-opt the audience by asserting X about how the commies are hoodwinking “us”, then adding prophesies from Divine Revelation as a chaser.
      I vote for the LP platform. Gary and Billy are the yellow dogs that allow me to vote for the platform I prefer. Without his candidacy, my remaining option would be to serve warrants for trial at Nuremberg. Republicans surely wouldn’t want to repeat that episode… or would they?
      Thanks to Herbert Hoover’s Moratorium on Brains helping the NSDAP achieve power, Christian National Socialists were being hanged even as Ayn wrote the non-aggression principle while on the 10th chapter of Atlas Shrugged.

  40. What in the world does, “almost certainly will not,” mean?

    “Johnson almost certainly will not make (it).”

    Am I supposed to take this article seriously?

  41. If the poll doesn’t doom him – CNN sure as hell will.

  42. CNN rigged this poll by excluding everyone in the 18-35 age group, Johnson’s best demographic! Furthermore if surveys were designed fairly with the candidates ranked in alphabetical order, Johnson’s numbers would double. Survey design matters. This is a criminal misconduct of journalistic duties.

  43. Anybody see the official poll publication from CNN/ORC? http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2…..or.day.pdf
    Embarrassingly non-robust for a poll determining Debate access.
    786 usable responses (compared to 32,226 by NBC News, for example).
    And by its own measurement not enough millennials or self-identified “independents” surveyed to project a number accurately reflective of the census population. And so of course they conclude the poll and publish “results” with these populations REMOVED from the equation, because that’s how you make it accurate, right? What?? (And those just happen to be the populations where Gary Johnson is LEADING all the candidates…according to actually robust polls, that is…)
    Really weak work here, CNN/ORC.
    CPD should recognize the poor quality and throw it out for Debate-access consideration.
    Or better yet, CPD could change its rules to use a poll question that actually reflects the public’s interest in the debates–a direct question like “Do you want [candidate name] included in the national debates as a basis of forming your voting decision?” rather than try to subjectively extrapolate the value of a candidate’s appearance through the question “Based on what you know today, if the election were held today, which candidate would you vote for?” Debates are to HELP people make their decision, not be the result of a decision already made. Really backwards logic.

  44. I just got paid ?6784 working off my laptop this month. And if you think that’s cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over ?9k her first month. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less. This is what I do,……….
    http://WWW.ONLINE.INCOMEHINTS.ORG

  45. Olivia . I can see what your saying… Matthew `s storry is great, last tuesday I bought a gorgeous BMW M3 since I been earnin $9756 this last month and-a little over, 10/k this past munth . without a question it is the most-financialy rewarding Ive ever done . I began this 7-months ago and practically straight away earned more than $71 per hour . More Info..
    ???????>>> http://www.earnmax6.com/

  46. “What is Aleppo?” Buh bye Gary, thanks for playing.

    1. Aleppo is the same as Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Treblinka, Auschwitz. These are important goals on the way to global Christian National Socialism, but that’s not part of the LP Platform. Reading the GOP or Dem platform is reading a 50,000 word digest of Mein Kampf or a 35000-word rehash of the communist manifesto. Yawn…

  47. I find it interesting that the Republican party who supposedly hates Trump won’t step up to allow a 3rd party candidate that is “technically” more in line with the republican platform.

  48. Weld complains that the CPD is saying “we’re only going to have an ‘R’ and a ‘D’ we’re not going to have the third party Libertarians even if everyone wants them.” But that’s not the problem? Th problem is that “everyone” doesn’t want this LP ticket – only 7% do.

    1. 1.4% of the vote made beer a felony with thousands murdered to make it stick. Half divided by 1.4% is 36. That’s the spoiler vote gear ratio for prohibition. Half divided by 8.5% is 6. That’s the spoiler vote gear ratio for changing income tax laws. The Solomon Asch experiment proved that 3/4 of the college educated will lie to ape the mistaken majority. So aren’t we lucky that small third parties votes have 600% to 3600% the vote-changing clout of votes cast by mindless collectivists?

  49. I am making $89/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $10 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website.

    ??? http://www.NetNote70.com

  50. Thank Bob! If Gary had read the LP platform he could qualify for the debates. Better he be kept out as a harm-reduction measure. Besides, in 1892 William Jennings Bryan’s dry commies got 8.5% of the vote and three of their simians made it past the bouncers into Congress. By inauguration day the Panic of 1893 was in full swing and within two years a communist income tax was federal law. If we repeat the performance we can be rid of the income tax and all Gary has to do is smile, kiss babies, sign the bills and have broad coattails. Exaggeration? Try oiltranslator.com

  51. before I saw the paycheck which had said $4647 , I have faith that my mom in-law woz like they say realie taking home money part-time at there labtop. . there moms best frend has done this less than six months and just now repayed the mortgage on there home and got a great new Ford Mustang . more tips here ..
    –?????>>> http://www.earnmax6.com/

  52. Why does Reason continue to say ‘the’ presidental debate? Why not ‘this particular Republican and Democratic debate’?

    There is no ‘the’. There is no ‘The’. There is only a Republican and Democratic presidential debate.

    I don’t particularly care if the Republicans and Democrats want to stage their own debate. Of course they can. I might even watch it. And i don’t care if the media decides to give the CPD free air time for their debate. Of course they can (well,maybe not, but let’s not get bogged down in FCC rulings).

    And, as much as I hate them for their mendacity, I respect the CPD. They are incredibly successful at doing what they are there to do – convince the media the CPD sponsors ‘the’ presidential debates. Three cheers for the free market winners of the debate sponsorship competition!

    But the media? And Reason? Where are they? Why haven’t they laughed the CPD out of their little office hideout at 1209 New Hampshire Ave NW in Washington DC? Are they really that impotent? Lapdogs, not watchdogs?

    1. It’s not as if the ammunition is not there. The CPD has blatantly lied as to their source of funding through two entire Hillary cycles (sorry, that was uncalled for). For decades the CPD spread the information that their ‘National Debate Sponsors’ were the funders. Proved false in 2012 by examining CPD tax form 990s.

      Then the CPD spread the information that the universities were paying $2 million each for the privilege of hosting the debates. Proved false by examining CPD tax form 990s.

      So who does fund them? And why doesn’t the CPD want anyone to know? Because, I speculate, if we knew exactly who the funders were, even the laziest of the media would perk up their ears and demand an honest sponsor for all debates. In which case, bye bye CPD.

      Why doesn’t the media simply demand to see a list of names and amounts? Upon what principle will the CPD claim that information cannot be safely released to the public? Privacy? Because who – the big secret donors? – don’t want anyone to know who they are?

      Aren’t they doing us a public service, saving us from listening to the CPD beg for our alms, as actual Public Charities are forced to do? Shouldn’t they be spitting proud to be known as the generous people who handed over some chump change so the CPD could pay a couple of cheap salaries and rent a tiny office and sponsor some debates? It’s only $7 million every four years! It’s insignificant pocket money!

      What, exactly, are the CPD donors ashamed of?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.