Why is the libertarian nominee Gary Johnson getting ZERO media attention?

1. 96

   peeplesposted 12 years ago

   Why is the libertarian nominee Gary Johnson getting ZERO media attention?
   
   He never makes it to the news, my local station has never mentioned him, and half the people in the country don't even know he is running for president. So why does the media ignore the fact he is a presidential nominee?

   replyreport
2. 74

   AlexDrinkH2Oposted 12 years ago

   Because he is not a factor in the election.

   replyreport
   1. 96

      peeplesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      He could have been if the media had not ignored him. Also if they wouldn't have blocked him from debates.

      replyreport
3. 57

   mio cidposted 12 years ago

   i agree with alexdrinkh20.if at any point he becomes relevant enough that he can affect either of the major candidates than they might mention him

   replyreport
4. 78

   junksellerposted 12 years ago

   Same as Jill Stein and the Green party. Both Stein and Johnson are as far as I am concerned far more interesting candidates than Romney or Obama. They aren't corporate financed though and don't own any news organizations and our system is set up to make third parties a near impossibility. Not letting them in the debates, for example.
   
   I wouldn't necessarily say Johnson won't be a factor. While he's polling low overall, I have seen some polls which have him between 7-13% in the Mountain West. It's hard to say whether those votes are taken from Obama or Romney or if they are simply people who wouldn't have voted for either anyway, but it potentially is enough votes to alter the outcome. As an example, McCain won Arizona by 9 points, which is 200k votes. That's not a lot. it's possible Johnson could pull those votes from Romney and turn Arizona from a solid red to a toss-up. I wouldn't discount him from having an effect in other tight races as well (e.g. Florida). Some could be so close that a couple percentages can make a difference
   
   Put Johnson on a stage with Romney, and I'd bet a whole gaggle of Republicans would say, "holy smokes, that's the guy I've been dreaming of, let's dump the Grey Poupon guy." I think the same sort of thing would be said of Stein as well. It's easy to say they aren't a factor when we don't give them a chance to actually be a factor. Put them all up on stage and let people decide for themselves rather than choosing between the two guys who have the most money to spend.

   replyreport
   1. 96

      peeplesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Johnson is currently suing trying to get into the debates. While he probably won't win I wish he could get in the debates just to be fair and show everyone they have another option.

      replyreport
5. 70

   Theeyeballkidposted 12 years ago

   Junkseller has it right, the whole system is rigged to protect the two party duopoly. Take the debates for example the rules (written by repubs and dems) make it that a party has to be polling at 15% nationally to be allowed in the debates. Yet Johnson's name isn't even included on a lot of these polls. So how on earth is he (or any other third party) ever going to meet this requirement when his name is not even on the polls they are using to measure this 15% requirement.
   
   The libertarian party are currently challenging this requirement through the courts. I don't hold out much hope that they will succeed, but it is a worthy cause.

   replyreport
   1. 96

      peeplesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      No he won't get anywhere with the courts but the country needs to know they are being kept in the dark. Very much a worthy cause!

      replyreport
6. 57

   manningndposted 12 years ago

   For all the talk of different visions, Romney and Obama are very similar; as is usually the case between Republican and Democrat candidates. They will make allusions to do something different, such as eliminating welfare or restructuring taxes, but in the end they all end up just making small changes to the status quo. The media is a storytelling body, and they know how to tell the Republican/Democratic story. Third party candidates are different, it is difficult to predict how effective they will be and what the full repercussions of their policy changes would be. It is a harder story to tell to a public that is, lets be frank, stupid; so they ignore the story all together.

   replyreport
   1. 86

      yeagerinvestmentsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed.

      replyreport
7. 60

   fpherj48posted 12 years ago

   peeples....I too, feel it is not a good nor FAIR thing that the Libertarian candidates are never heard nor seen.  There's a lot of "talk" that we should go beyond the old 2-party system....and I'll certainly never understand why it remains the way it is.  This particular election ESPECIALLY.....I don't know how many times I have lamented....."So, these are our 2 choices, huh?" 
   The Constitution does not limit us to 2 parties....so why new political groups or parties to grow and compete with the old established parties.......It takes an enormous Movement by hundreds of thousands of dedicated and powerfully motivated Americans!    .

   replyreport
8. 0

   Eli Mooreposted 12 years ago

   We live in a plutocracy.
   
   That means that the country is basically run by a mix of wealthy individuals, elites, corporations, and lobbies who have created a political market for themselves.
   
   Politicians are bought and sold.
   
   Libertarians are bad products because they are ideological and want to do things like restore the constitution and help "the people."

   replyreport