Actual Final Third Party Debate Tonight
Separate from the debate moderated by Ralph Nader last night, Free and Equal is hosting a final third party debate tonight at 9:00 p.m. EST (pre-debate coverage began at 8:00 p.m. EST). As a follow up to the October 23rd debate, only Jill Stein (Green) and Gary Johnson (Libertarian) will be facing each other for ninety minutes of questions primarily focusing on foreign policy. It appears that this one isn't being picked up by C-SPAN, but it is being broadcast on RT America on a few cable networks as well as on YouTube (which should work if you have an HTML5 browser, or via the XBMC YouTube plugin). Discuss.
This is why we need them.
It lends them credibility. They see the success Al-Jazeera has worldwide and they're jealous.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Third parties have literally zero relevance on a national stage.
Unfortunately this will get modded down, but it's true. Having a debate amongst candidates who will never get elected is just an exercise in mental masturbation. Focus needs to be on how to get these candidates electable - how to show most Americans that it does not *have* to be a two-party system.
The U.S. party system is divided into two groups: major and minor parties.
Major parties get more than 5% of the vote at the last general election. Minor parties get less than that.
The difference is major parties are eligible for federal matching campaign funds and have easier ballot access. In order to get on the ballot in a State you have to get a certain number of registered voters to sign a petition.
Major parties have a threshold that is frequently fairly low. Minor parties often have much higher requirements, often 3 - 4 times the number of signatures that a major party candidate will need.
That is why Gary Johnson has "Give me 5%" on his homepage. He knows he isn't going to win, but is aiming to get equal ballot access and financing for the Libertarian Party for future elections. The idea is to maybe break the lock the Republicans and Democrats have on the electoral process.
If you want to see the grip of the Big R and Big D loosened, consider voting for Gary Johnson and contribute towards the 5%. If you're in one of the "undisputed" States that are firmly in the grip of Romney or Obama, consider casting your ballot for Johnson (or Jill Stein of the Green Party) even if you'd normally vote Obama or Romney. This way your vote isn't wasted.
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
This should be interesting not because of their relevance to the elections tomorrow because as much as I'd rather have Johnson, Stein, Goode or Anderson as our next president rather than 4 more years of Obamney, I think there is a general discord among people of both the Republican and Democratic parties about their candidates the last couple of years. McCain and Romney haven't really pushed for smaller government or for auditing the Fed, Obama hasn't closed Gitmo nor has he been a very peaceful, anti-war president after murdering a couple of American citizens as judge, jury and executioner via drones, involved the US in yet another war (Libya) and won't even release real statistics of how many innocent Pakistanis our Peace Prize winning president has killed (instead, if they are military-aged males they must be "enemy combatants").
Because of this, I think Stein and Johnson will help to shape the Democratic and Republican party platforms if they manage to get enough votes. If Johnson ends up getting 5% of the national vote (unlikely but he's at 5.2% in national polling...) it could radically change the American political landscape.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
the Ohio Secretary of State has illegally placed "experimental" software on voting machines in some counties; illegal because he should have gotten approval from a board. This was done just a few days before the election and an emergency suit has been filed to stop it.
http://www.salon.com/2012/11/05/ohio_republicans_sneak_risky_software_onto_voting_machines/
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
Loons and fruitcakes? Your brain has been washed. Wake up, look around, and think about the true meaning of the word "democracy".
The primary goal of every right-minded American should be to eliminate the Democratic and Republican parties with EXTREME prejudice. They are two massive weights sitting on a balance beam and we, REAL FUCKING PEOPLE, are the fulcrum. FUCK THEM.
Sorry about all the caps but some people need to be shouted at.
I agree there should be focus on how to get these candidates elected. But these debates are not entirely useless. There are people who are not satisfied with R & D, and are looking for alternatives. These debates do help these people (how ever small percentage of the population they are), to choose their right candidate.
Jill Stein has my vote. It's hard to be a liberal living in the DC suburbs, constantly being harassed by two-party evangelicals.
But, she has a good head on her shoulders, and she knows exactly what it will take to break out of this awful economy.
It turns out that you can't just exploit labor forever and expect them to have any money left to spend. For too long people have been alienated from their right to an honest day's pay for an honest day's work. She will work hard to fix that, and get us back to honest, living wages like we had in the middle of the 20th century.
It used to be that a family of four could survive on one income, but now it's hard to make ends meet even with two.
Adding to her fiscal vision, her positions on the environment, education, and drug legalization are all enlightened and future-forward.
I am a progressive. I am a liberal. She is the only liberal on the ticket, running against a bunch of right-wing warmongering fascists. I gave up on Obama when he illegally invaded Pakistan to kill OBL without any due process whatsoever.
If you're planning to vote for Obama, PLEASE take one last look at Jill Stein.
Focus needs to be on how to get these candidates electable - how to show most Americans that it does not *have* to be a two-party system.
As long as the election system is the way it is, it will be a two party system. Even if through some extraordinary circumstances a third party were to get support - like say uncovering that one of the existing parties is a satanic baby raping cult, because that's roughly the level of extraordinary you'd need - they'll either replace one of the existing two parties or return to obscurity, any three-way race is an extremely unstable constellation. And the only ones who can change that is Congress by a 2/3rds majority in both the House and the Senate or 2/3rds of the states calling a congressional convention. Would you care to wager on the odds of a bipartisan constitutional amendment to end their power duopoly? I think the chances are better for me winning the lottery each week for the rest of my life. Until then, the game is rigged for third parties to lose.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Whoever wins, we ... ... couldn't care less.
We have a 16 trillion dollar debt, and we are adding to it at an unsustainable rate of more than a trillion a year. We are heading for a cliff. The fruitcakes want to turn right, the loons want to run left, but the "moderates" think we should go straight ahead.
The problems facing our country were not caused by the fruitcakes or loonies. They were caused by mainstream politicians and the voters that support them.
Yech, in response to the "Iran crisis" and Syria, Dr. Stein went off on a terrible anti-nuclear rant. Goal: eliminate all nuclear all the world round because it can never be safe, and all reactors produce bomb material... someone's never heard of Generation IV reactors. Hopefully the Green party can be convinced over the next few years that working against nuclear is working against "green" energy...
HAL 7000, fewer features than the HAL 9000, but just as homicidal!
I see where you are trying to take it, but the proportional representation systems don't do as badly as you insist.
But then the point is, the 2 party system isn't the real problem. It's our system of voting that is wrong. So by focusing on breaking out of the 2 party system, we're focusing on the wrong problem (treating the symptoms rather than the disease).
Actually, it's not that uncommon to have a runoff between the two top candidates, or even runoffs just to GET 2 top candidates. That way at least gives the majority a voice, even if their ideal candidate doesn't make the cut.
Whether 2 parties or 2000, no candidate is ever going to do things exactly the way I want them. Heck, that's one of the problems we have now. "My Way or No Way". At least with multiple parties you aren't as likely to fall into the trap of political thinking in pure binary terms. Nor, for that matter, are the politicians.
Actually, having two parties STOPS extremism
It all depends on how you define "extremism." Personally, I think we need a bit more of it; I'd rather not have the TSA or the Patriot Act, for instance.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
It will not ever happen at the federal level simply because you need to change the constitution in order for it to happen
Actually, it wouldn't.
There's even less in the Constitution about how the president is elected, only that the electoral college makes the decision. The states get to decide how the electoral college is chosen, and Maine and Nebraska have already chosen to use something other than a winner-take-all system.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
You can compare the 3rd party candidates Johnson, Goode and Stein against Romney and Obama at voterscorecard.com Since there is a Ron Paul write-in campaign and he is a certified write in some states like CA, he also can be selected.
Just to recap, the OHIO REPORTING SYSTEMS DOESN'T NEED THIS SOFTWARE! It already tabulates the results as they are. What Ohio have ordered is an interface to something else. What happened in August is they were caught rigging the election, they need to improve their rigging and that needs early voting data:
http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Republican-Primary-Election-Results-Amazing-Statistical-Anomalies_V2.0.pdf
The Ohio vote in the Republican primaries was noticeable because the voter fraud had a linear slant. The more votes in a district the bigger the slant to Romney. So districts of size X, voted 35% for Romney, districts of size Y voted 30% for Romney and so on, regardless of anything else.
This INSANE result, showed an algorithm was at work, and comparing the districts with ES&S central tabulators against paper voting districts, showed how rigged the election was, and that this rigging was right across all the states.
http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/stolen-election-2004-plus-the-voter-fraud-scam-series/wisconsin-no-tabulator-versus-tabulator-counties/
To rig an election convincingly, you need the stats early, so that you can make just enough vote flipping near the beginning. If you set too much vote-flipping at the beginning you risk your candidate getting 80% win. If you flip it too late, your guy can lose.
They know they can't simply set constants for vote rigging because they were spotted in the statistical analysis of the Ohio Primaries vote.
It's actually not the only way. Each of the States control their own voting laws. All that is necessary is to amend the laws to allow Senators and Representatives to be elected via IRV, Condorcet, or whatever alternate system allows better representation in races with multiple winners.
You're so sharp you sleep in the knife drawer, right?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."