Every candidate who is on the ballot in enough states that the electoral votes would win the election should be included in the debates or at the very least, those who appear on the ballot in all 50 states as previous LP candidates have.
--- In [email protected], "Eric Dondero Rittberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Just because someone has ballot access is not enough of a criteria to > include one in debates. > > Are you aware that over 200 people nationwide run for President every > 4 years, officially filing with the FEC. Many of them have ballot > status in 1 or two states. Should we have Presidential debates with > 20 to 30 people? > > Surely, there's got to be more criteria than just ballot access. > > I'd say polling at least 5 to 10%. > > The LPer in Texas is less than 2%. > > If he was up at 5% I'd agree with you 100%. But as it is, at 2% he > doesn't have enough support to warrant inclusion. > > And btw, how much money has he raised? > > > --- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@> wrote: > > > > Shove it up your ass Eric. He does deserve to be in the debate. He > > earned a place on the ballot and this is all that should be > required. > > This is just another exclusionary tactic by the asshole Republicans > > and Democrats. > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Eric Dondero <ericdondero@> > wrote: > > > > > > Libertarian Party leaders are whining about the LP candidate not > > being included in the debate for Texas Governor. > > > > > > The guy is polling less than 2%!!! He hasn't raised any money > to > > speak of. He doesn't deserve to be included. > > > > > > AND WE ALREADY HAVE A LIBERTARIAN IN THE RACE FOR TEXAS GOVERNOR > > > > > > Kinky Friedman!!!!!!! > > > > > > DON'T WASTE YOUR VOTE IN NOVEMBER. > > > > > > If you're a Libertarian, vote for the winner: Kinky Friedman!!1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > COMMENTARY > > > Reber, Malatesta and Dixon: When major political parties limit > > election choices, voters are the losers Doug Reber, Bryan > Malatesta > > and Patrick Dixon, LOCAL CONTRIBUTORSSaturday, September 30, 2006 > > > By the end of this piece, we hope that you, the voter, agree > with > > us that inclusion is better than exclusion. > > > We are referring to the Texas election code and the upcoming > Nov. > > 7 elections. Exclusion is the common theme that voters encounter. In > > nondemocratic governments, choices are restricted or don't exist. > Our > > democratic process is intended to give the people the power to > choose. > > In practice, political parties are taking voting power away and > > restricting choices. > > > MOST POPULAR STORIES > > > Statesman Homes > > > Horns fine-tune themselves in 56-3 rout > > > Aggies play good game; program floundering nonetheless > > > Mystery disease sends Austin girl to hospital in nick of time > > > Thanks for the scrimmage. Is it time for OU yet? > > > > > > > > > > > > Consider the practice of gerrymandering. Instead of voters > > choosing their elected representatives, an incumbent political party > > chooses the voters. Instead of representing compact regions of > voters, > > legislatures are composed of people who represent whatever voters > the > > party chose when it redrew the district maps. You as a voter are > just > > a pawn on the chessboard, and the incumbent party can move you > around > > wherever they like. Who is being empowered here? Clearly, it is not > > the voter. > > > Consider "primary screenout." Texas is alone in excluding > someone > > who votes in the Democratic or Republican primary from signing a > > petition to place another candidate or party on the ballot. The same > > incumbent legislators who take an oath to uphold the Constitution > > ignore the First Amendment when they deny this right. > > > Consider the exclusion of candidates and parties from the > ballot. > > We as leaders of political parties are well aware of how Texas is > far > > more exclusive in ballot access than most states. We certainly > > congratulate Kinky Friedman and Carole Keeton Strayhorn for raising > > the huge piles of money necessary to get signatures to get on the > > ballot. However, consider that Ralph Nader collected more than > 80,000 > > signatures yet failed to qualify for the 2004 presidential ballot in > > Texas. Voters want choice, and the restrictions on choice give many > of > > you nothing to vote for, and you stay home. We recognize reasonable > > qualifications for appearing on the ballot, but the current law is > > clearly excessively exclusionary. > > > These are a few examples of ways in which you, the voter, are > > being excluded from making choices. These are legal issues that need > > to be changed in next year's legislative session. > > > Yet, there is an exclusion you can fix before Nov. 7. > > > Consider the public debate for governor of Texas. Gov. Rick > Perry, > > Friedman, Strayhorn and Chris Bell have been included in the debate > > sponsored by the Belo network of television and radio stations to be > > held Oct. 6 and broadcast throughout the state. However, when you > vote > > on Nov. 7, there will be five candidates on the ballot for governor > of > > Texas. Who is being excluded? > > > In 2004, more than 82,000 voters in Texas signed a petition to > > place candidates of the Libertarian Party on the ballot. In that > > election, 843,911 (more than 16 percent) of statewide voters > selected > > Libertarian Quanah Parker for state judge on the Criminal Court of > > Appeals, Place 2, clearly demonstrating the significance of that > choice. > > > However, the Libertarian candidate for governor, James Werner, > has > > been excluded from the gubernatorial debate on Oct. 6. > > > We do not expect you to pity us. We, the leaders of our > political > > parties, understand the challenges of competing against the > incumbent > > parties. > > > What about you? Do you want to walk into the voting booth after > > seeing four candidates debate on television and then see five names > on > > the ballot? Wouldn't you be upset about this? Aren't you being > > excluded from seeing all the choices before you vote? > > > We began by asking whether inclusion is better than exclusion. > You > > as a voter are the one being excluded. You have the power to include > > yourself. > > > You can contact the debate sponsors and demand the inclusion of > > Werner in the public debate. You can contact your legislator to > reform > > the election code to be more inclusive of the concerns of voters > > instead of incumbent political parties. We want you included. We > hope > > you do as well. > > > Reber is co-chairman of the Green Party of Texas. Malatesta is > > chairman of the Constitution Party of Texas. Dixon is chairman of > the > > Libertarian Party of Texas. > > > > > > > > > Libertarian Republicans > > > > > > Fiscally Conservative, Socially Tolerant & Pro-Defense! > > > > > > Dondero is a US Navy Veteran, former Libertarian Party National > > Committeeman, fmr. Senior Aide to US Congressman Ron Paul R-TX, and > > Founder of the Republican Liberty Caucus. > www.mainstreamlibertarian.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
