On February 24, the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C., will hear Level the Playing Field v Federal Election Commission, 19-5117. This is the case over whether the Commission on Presidential Debates is violating federal campaign law by setting the rules for general election presidential debates so as to make it inevitable that only the Democratic and Republican nominees will ever qualify. The three judges who will hear the case are now known. They are Gregory Katsas, a Trump appointee; Cornelia Pillard, an Obama appointee; and A. Raymond Randolph, a Bush Sr. appointee.
The hearing is at 9:30 am, and the panel only has two cases that day. However, each side only has ten minutes to argue.
This is right up my alley!
Of course I support a ruling favorable to Level the Playing Field.
But after my personal experience in US Courts, including my present experience of being shut out of District Court involving the Pittsburgh Synagogue Shooter, and the history of litigation involving the debates, I am skeptical.
BUT, fortunately it doesn’t matter what the Appeals Court does…IF…IF Top Ten and/or PLAS is implemented by the third parties THEMSELVES.
i.e. They would control their own destiny.
Because Top Ten would in effect “level the playing field:.
I believe under the present rules 15%polling is the threshold.
Top Ten would result in six parties polling at or near 15%.
Possibly also Independents.
Polling would be about: Green 27%, Constitution 27%, democrat 17%, republican 17%, Libertarian 13%, Reform possibly 15%, Independents possibly 15%.
If PLAS is implemented only, the polling would be PLAS ticket 40%, democrat 30%, republican 30%.
We know the dems and reps will get on all ballots.
The Libertarian party also should get on all or nearly all ballots.
The Green party should get on most ballots, mid fourties or thereabouts. So they need a ballot access boost. Perhaps the LP could help the GP!
Then both the LP and GP could help the Constitution and Reform parties get on all ballots. Rocky could help the Reform party also.
Independents are on their own by definition!
So there it is people. Deal with it.
The latest news at The PLAS Place is that I have secured a loan for $5000 for my campaign. I need a Treasurer to file with the FEC. I need a campaign manager. Tom Knapp was my campaign manager briefly years ago but bailed. I need a woman libertarian for the vp position on the PLAS ticket. Jo Jorgensen, remember me? I need a webmaster to start up a new campaign website with donations button. Tom, can you multi task? I can. I may need legal assistance also. Kevin Zeese? Can I poach you from Howie Wowie? He doesn’t need your legal assistance. He will lose with or without your help.
Abolish the CPD
the various media can invite whomever.
See zillion recent Donkey debates / town halls —
on top of candidate hype TV ads.
Crickets?
This reminds me of Tom Knapp. He kept insisting my numbers were wrong.
No, they are not.
A fundamental part of PLAS is that the voters MUST BE EDUCATED.
They have been brainwashed. BY far the bulk of voters are either leftists or rightists(nationalists).
This is why the real action in 2016 was Trump running republican instead of Constitution, which he fits much better.
He kept winning the debates and primaries. Bernie gained traction in reaction to Trump.
But the Clinton moderates successfully stifled Bernie.
This pattern is repeating in 2020.
Tom kept not getting it.
Trump has thoroughly polarized the system.
But the brainwashed uneducated voters can only see the leftist democrat, not the Green.
I guess most people are like Tom.
They just do not get it.
This is DFuverger’s Law.
Tom said more than once what good would it do to add at best 1% Green and 1% libertarian vote?
I said more than once, but that is not how it would work!
All voters with Top Ten, with the possible exception of the libertarians, would see as their ballot access approached 100% and their polls rising except for the democrats and republicans falling, that they are competitive, viable. They could possibly win!
The old, time worn saying is that third parties and independents, they just lose. Well, that is under Duverger’s Law, true. IN USA third parties and independents have lost, usually big time. On rare occasions they have polled, usually temporarily, significantly. 1912 Teddy Roosevelt, 1992, 1996 Ross Perot e.g.
Richard, do you support Top Ten Plus PLAS?