Jesse Ventura has made a campaign ad for Gary Johnson, which focuses on general election debates. Ventura asks viewers to telephone the Commission on Presidential Debates and request more inclusive invitations.
Jesse Ventura has made a campaign ad for Gary Johnson, which focuses on general election debates. Ventura asks viewers to telephone the Commission on Presidential Debates and request more inclusive invitations.
AWESOME !!! Thank you Governor Ventura
Their phone lines are flooded…if you get sent to a full voicemail box, keep calling, and drop an email:
comments@debates.org
IPR comments
zapper // Sep 26, 2012 at 1:31 pm
Well, I called several times, was transferred by machine to a mailbox that was full.
So, I tried “0? for assistance and was transferred to a mailbox that was full.
Then I experimented with transfer extension numbers … try 2 digit numbers beginning with “0? … 07, 08 etc. But, was transferred to a mailbox that was full.
Fun anyway. I’ll try again later.
2paulie // Sep 26, 2012 at 1:48 pm
Comments may be sent to: comments@debates.org
3paulie // Sep 26, 2012 at 2:38 pm
Excellent video!
I hope a new version can be made that also includes the CPD email address.
Also, other versions with Penn Jillette, Drew Carey, John Stossel, and so on.
4paulie // Sep 26, 2012 at 2:40 pm
Via facebook:
Dear Jason Melehani:
On behalf of the YWCA USA, I would like to thank you for your recent letter expressing concerns about the Commission on Presidential Debates and the YWCA’s sponsorship of the 2012 debates next month.
As a nonpartisan organization dedicated to eliminating racism, empowering women and promoting peace, justice, freedom and dignity for all, we have decided to withdraw our sponsorship effective immediately.
Again, we thank you for alerting us of your concerns and appreciate your support of the YWCA and our mission.
Sincerely,
Dara Richardson-Heron, M.D.
Chief Executive Officer
YWCA USA
5paulie // Sep 26, 2012 at 2:56 pm
2012 National Sponsors
Anheuser-Busch Companies
The Howard G. Buffet Foundation
Sheldon S. Cohen, Esq.
Crowell & Moring LLP
International Bottled Water Association (IBWA)
The Kovler Fund
Philips Electronics North America
Southwest Airlines
Via debates.ws :
The best way to contact the Commission is to write them directly at comments@debates.org. This address was added to the Commission’s website on Wednesday, August 22, as a response to intense public pressure to accept electronic forms of communication.
It is unclear who at the Commission will read this message, however, or whether it will get read before the first Presidential Debate invitations are sent out, because most people simply receive an automated response reading, “Thank you for your comment. Although this account is monitored daily, we are unable to personally respond to all comments due to the large volume. We appreciate your interest.”
And, to the best of our knowledge, no one has ever received a personal response, of any kind whatsoever, when writing to this email address, regardless of the contents of the email.
Therefore we recommend you send a copy of your email to helpthecommission@gmail.com, in which case a printed copy will be hand delivered directly to the Commission’s Washington office. Of course it remains unclear whether anyone will read these written comments, but it does appear likely the Commission’s Executive Director, Janet Brown, and the Commission board members are more comfortable with paper based communication.
Unfortunately, unlike most non-profit tax-exempt organizations serving the public interest, the Commission on Presidential Debates has no Facebook page. As a temporary solution to this problem Help the CDP has created a Facebook group dedicated to accepting input for the Commission.
Search on Facebook for the group ‘Help the Commission on Presidential Debates do its job.’ Ask to be accepted as a member of the group (response times vary – please be patient). After you are a member you may post a comment on the group page. Your comment will be printed, placed in an envelope, and delivered by hand to the Commission’s office in Washington DC, usually on weekday afternoons.
If you join this Facebook group you will also be able to see what other people are saying to the Commission on Presidential Debates, and make comments on their posts. It is an excellent place for public discussion of the important issues facing the Commission.
Via debates.ws :
The best way to contact the Commission is to write them directly at comments@debates.org. This address was added to the Commission’s website on Wednesday, August 22, as a response to intense public pressure to accept electronic forms of communication.
It is unclear who at the Commission will read this message, however, or whether it will get read before the first Presidential Debate invitations are sent out, because most people simply receive an automated response reading, “Thank you for your comment. Although this account is monitored daily, we are unable to personally respond to all comments due to the large volume. We appreciate your interest.”
And, to the best of our knowledge, no one has ever received a personal response, of any kind whatsoever, when writing to this email address, regardless of the contents of the email.
more in next comment
Continued:
Therefore we recommend you send a copy of your email to helpthecommission@gmail.com, in which case a printed copy will be hand delivered directly to the Commission’s Washington office. Of course it remains unclear whether anyone will read these written comments, but it does appear likely the Commission’s Executive Director, Janet Brown, and the Commission board members are more comfortable with paper based communication.
Unfortunately, unlike most non-profit tax-exempt organizations serving the public interest, the Commission on Presidential Debates has no Facebook page. As a temporary solution to this problem Help the CDP has created a Facebook group dedicated to accepting input for the Commission.
Search on Facebook for the group ‘Help the Commission on Presidential Debates do its job.’ Ask to be accepted as a member of the group (response times vary – please be patient). After you are a member you may post a comment on the group page. Your comment will be printed, placed in an envelope, and delivered by hand to the Commission’s office in Washington DC, usually on weekday afternoons.
If you join this Facebook group you will also be able to see what other people are saying to the Commission on Presidential Debates, and make comments on their posts. It is an excellent place for public discussion of the important issues facing the Commission.
Thank you Jesse “The Body”! Awesome!
Thanks so much Jesse!
Why is it so hard to have debates with many candidates??
First debate: all candidates who either are on at least 26 state ballots or on enough ballots to hypothetically win an electoral vote majority.
Second debate: all candidates that get at least 5% of the national vote in at least 5 national polls(this should also include the case if other gets at least 5%, then these voters should choose which of these candidates should get in)
Final debate: all candidates that get at least 15% of the national vote in at least 5 national polls (same criteria as for the second debate)
@9 and Hello Richard,
There are only 4 candidates on the ballot in enough states to win in the Electoral College. This would be a resonable requirement to limit the number of participants in the Debates.
Excluding Johnson and Stein is not reasonable. It amounts to rigging the election in advance.
Question to Richard: This year there are only 4 on the ballot in enough states to have a theoretical chance of winning in the EC.
What are the numbers of candidates so qualified in past years? What was the greatest and least number so qualified?
Thanks in advance for the info and for your time.
Please email the commision, and include these three takeaway points:
1) Gary Johnson polls right about where Ross Perot did in 1992.
2) The CPD knows that including Johnson would likely hurt the chances of both major candidates.
3) Disallowing Gary Johnson puts the CPD in violation of current tax code.
Let’s start a revolution! Get Gary Johnson in the debates!
Source:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/15380/gary-johnson-polls-why-the-cpd-decision-to-keep-him-out-of-the-debates-is-illegal
I tried calling but I got a busy signal…I’ll try again later.
I just emailed the below to the CPD. You can use some of the info that I used if you wish. (Sorry I’m kind of sp@mming the comments, BTW. This is the last comment I have.)
Dear Sirs or Madams:
I wish to write you because of your exclusion of Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson from the presidential debates. This decision is not only harmful to the wonderful American way of elections and democracy but is actually illegal under current tax code.
1.) Gary Johnson polls right about where Ross Perot did in 1992.
Perot was included in the 1992 debates. Therefore, I respectfully request that Johnson also be included. With all due respect, not putting Johnson in the debates is the highest form of hypocrisy.
2.) Disallowing Gary Johnson puts the Commision on Presidential Debates (CPD) in violation of current tax code.
The CPD is legally bound to include Gary Johnson.
The CPD was created in 1987 to “ensure that debates, as a permanent part of every general election, provide the best possible information to viewers and listeners.” According to your website, the CPD was granted and operates currently as a 501(c) nonprofit organization. This means that among other perks, the CPD enjoys the ability to conduct business without paying taxes.
There are certain political stipulations that come with such a designation. IRS Exemption Requirements — Section 501(c)(3) Organizations state that such organizations may not be an “action organization, i.e., it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.” Furthermore, the IRS says that “the organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests.”
What does that mean? Well, by barring any candidate that appears on enough ballots to win the election, the CPD is participating in “campaign activities against political candidate” — Gary Johnson.
For the aforementioned reasons alone, I humbly submit that the CPD please include Gary Johnson in the debates.
Sincerely,
(xxxxx)
Hello Richard,
Sorry to repeat question, but … if you have time:
There are only 4 candidates on the ballot in enough states to win in the Electoral College. Having a theoretical chance of victory would be a resonable requirement to limit the number of participants in the Debates.
Excluding Johnson and Stein is not reasonable. It amounts to rigging the election in advance.
Question to Richard: This year there are only 4 on the ballot in enough states to have a theoretical chance of winning in the EC.
What are the numbers of POTUS candidates so qualified in past years?
What was the greatest and least number so qualified?
Thanks in advance for the info and for your time.
Comments at youtube mention that in addition to YWCA, BBH NY has also withdrawn as a sponsor.
That’s 2 out of 10.
Contacting sponsors seems to have some effect.
#14, in every presidential election in U.S. history , there have always been between two and seven presidential candidates on the ballot in enough states to theoretically win the election. The list of each presidential election, and who those candidates were, can be seen at http://www.ballot-access.org. The upper right hand corner has links to past print issues. The chart is in the July 1, 2007 issue, and covers 1856-2004. In 2008 there were six candidates and this year, as you say, there are four.
For years before there were government-printed ballots, the variable is whether a presidential candidate prepared privately printed ballots in states with a majority of the electoral college.
Thank you Richard. I will check it out.
@9 Why have a polling requirement at all? National poll results are irrelevant in presidential elections, all that matters is the electoral vote (especially since there are no uniform polling requirements). Getting on the balot in enough states to win is no small feat and winnows the field sufficiently.