Once again, Gary Johnson was excluded
from the presidential debate, and with the final debate next week it looks
unlikely he will make the 15% polling threshold necessary to participate in
that one, as well. He currently hovers around 7% in the RealClearPolitics
average; Jill Stein seems unable to break 3%, and never had much of a chance to
make the debates.
Johnson, on the other hand, has been on
the cusp of 15% national support in several individual polls dating back to
August, and has declined in recent weeks only after his exclusion from the debates created a perception among
many voters that he simply wasn’t relevant. That fact in itself should be a
major embarrassment for the Commission on Presidential Debates—shouldn’t it be
the role of a debate performance itself to disbar candidates from office in the
minds of voters, rather than a candidate’s exclusion from the debates
altogether?
The fact is that, while Johnson’s
support may be plateauing in national polls, 7% is still hugely respectable for
a third party candidate, and if it holds through Election Day would be the
highest since Ross Perot in 1996. He is actually competitive with both Clinton
and Trump in winning outright voters under 35, and has been endorsed by more
print publications than Trump, including major newspapers in Michigan,
Illinois, Virginia, and New Hampshire. A solid majority of voters nationally
believe he should be included in the debates. And he regularly exceeds 15% in
polls of several states, including New Hampshire and his home state of New
Mexico—where a poll
released last week showed Johnson at 24% support overall, just a few points
behind both Trump and Clinton.
With numbers and support like that,
coupled with the fact that Trump, Clinton, and Johnson are the only three
presidential candidates with ballot access in all fifty states, the
Commission’s decision to exclude the Libertarian from debates becomes
increasingly hard to defend, except to the staunchest of Clinton and Trump
supporters.
No comments:
Post a Comment