[Lnc-business] Change the Rule

[Joshua Katz]

I had a long car ride today, and happened to hear Ackerman on the radio.  I
was extremely uncomfortable with what I heard from him.  Here is an
executive summary:

1.  He bases his argument on the notion that, without guaranteed access to
the debate early in the season, serious candidates will not enter the race,
thus costing Americans options.  Perhaps he would meet Gary Johnson, 2 term
New Mexico Governor.  I strongly dislike promoting this idea that no
serious candidates exist.
2.  He insists "a third option is needed."  See above.
3.  There is a large effort to conflate "not R or D" with "centrist" and
"independent."  The picture that is presented is that of the Republicans on
the far right, the Democrats on the far left, and much of the country,
since they aren't registered R or D, "in the middle."  This is a misleading
and damaging approach, in many ways.
4.  He argues that having a third candidate in the debate will "force the
Republicans on the right and the Democrats on the right to better defend
their positions."  In other words, he sees a third debater as a way to
sharpen the others and promote discussion between them, not a way to, I
don't know, win the election.
5.  He claims that Trump and Sanders have support because "it's the only
way people have to say they're unhappy with the major party options."
 Besides that fact that both are now major-party options, this is simply
untrue.

It also seems he's changed his idea for how to choose the third candidate.
He wants to run a series of 5 debates among all candidates other than the R
and D candidates, and use a poll after each debate to essentially vote
candidates "off the island."  I chose that phrase because he wants someone
involved with Survivor to set it up.  He then wants a guarantee that CPD
will put the winner of this process into the debate.  He restated his
staunch opposition to simply putting in those candidates who have 270+
ballot access, and insists on the importance of having only three
candidates .

This system is better than the absurd signature standard he promoted
before, but it remains mind-boggling why he'd oppose a simple, uniform
standard, and try to turn a Presidential election into a game show, or, at
least, more of a game show than it is already.  Even if you think you can
only get one more in, why start negotiating at your bottom line?

When he gets media attention, all the reporters do is repeat these
destructive lies and talk about "should we have a third option for
President?"  This is a great diversion tactic, and a great way to reinforce
the idea that there are only 2 options at present.

There was an additional matter discussed that I'd rather not report on in
this format.

Joshua A. Katz
Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20150715/8d369ffa/attachment-0001.html>