Post: #1

This post was updated at 11:38 a.m. to include comment from the Gary Johnson campaign.

At least two of the original sponsors of the 2012 presidential debates have pulled their support over the exclusion of Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson, arguing that the commission which runs the debates is locked into a two-party outlook.

The first presidential debate will take place in Denver on Wednesday between President Barack Obama and Republican contender Mitt Romney.

[SEE ALSO: Cartoonists Mock 'Birther' Donald Trump's Hair, 'Narcissism']

Multinational corporation Philips Electronics and the women's organization the YWCA both dropped their sponsorship after being flooded with E-mails and letters from supporters of former Republican New Mexico Gov. Johnson, as well as two election watchdog groups, Open Debates and Help the Commission.

"I've been trying this since 2004 ... and this is first time any sponsor has peeled off from supporting the commission," says George Farah of Open Debates, who wrote the book No Debate: How the Republican and Democratic Parties Secretly Control the Presidential Debates. "For this to happen on the eve of the first presidential debate is a remarkable act."

The Commission on Presidential Debates, which runs the debate logistics, didn't immediately respond to request for comment from Whispers. But the commission, which is a non-profit, 501©(3) corporation and relies heavily on sponsors, is likely to feel the impact of its missing sponsors.

Back in July, the commission's executive director Janet Brown told Whispers that Johnson could possibly appear in the debates. Over the last month, however, it became clear that Johnson did not have the polled support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate, one of the commission's three debate participation requirements. Last week, Johnson filed a lawsuit over his exclusion from the debates, but that effort is not expected to be successful.

In a letter announcing its sponsorship withdrawal, Philips wrote that it was concerned the commission's work "may appear to support bi-partisan" instead of "non-partisan" politics. YWCA similarly wrote that it was dropping out because it is a "non-partisan" women's organization.

Joe Hunter, spokesman for the Gary Johnson campaign, says of the pulled sponsors: “It appears that they have recognized what we have recognized – that the debate commission is a product of the Democratic and Republican National committees, and that they have structured the rules and their agreements among themselves to exclude third party candidates like Gov. Johnson.”

[REPORT: Ron Paul is One of the Most Corrupt Members of Congress]

Open Debate and Johnson supporters have been sounding the alarm for months that they believed the commission was too loyal to the Republican and Democratic parties.

The commission, which was created by the two parties in 1987, was founded on the principle that the debates would be run between candidates, and said from the start that it was unlikely to include third-party candidates in debates. At the 1992 debate, however, third-party candidate Ross Perot appeared on stage with President George H. W. Bush and Gov. Bill Clinton.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washing...y-johnson-

Post: #2

Post: #3

There is no way they can allow GJ in on a debate between those to NWO assclowns. They can't risk restarting the RP revolution, regardless of your views on RP, the establisment can't risk it, it's late in the game.

Post: #4

AMPAMPERSAND  Wrote:

There is no way they can allow GJ in on a debate between those to NWO assclowns. They can't risk restarting the RP revolution, regardless of your views on RP, the establisment can't risk it, it's late in the game.

the establisment can't risk it

Post: #5

AMPAMPERSAND  Wrote:

There is no way they can allow GJ in on a debate between those to NWO assclowns. They can't risk restarting the RP revolution, regardless of your views on RP, the establisment can't risk it, it's late in the game.

Do you think any other sponsors will drop out if pressured enough?

Post: #6

Sweet Smoke  Wrote:

AMPAMPERSAND  Wrote:

There is no way they can allow GJ in on a debate between those to NWO assclowns. They can't risk restarting the RP revolution, regardless of your views on RP, the establisment can't risk it, it's late in the game.

Do you think any other sponsors will drop out if pressured enough?

Not likely, the mind set is either you're with us or you're a lazy Liberal, They won't pull support because of "lazy Liberals".

Post: #7

This is going to be the worst debate in us history. The to partys have move to the middle so much that they are now a twin party. It might aswell be called the Demorepulican party. Or even better, the money party. Because they got it all. WTO-NWO what a mess.

Post: #8

Is there a website out there that has a chart on what each candidate is for/against?

Post: #9

Gary Johnson is on the ballot in all 50 states. For him to not be included in the debate shows how corrupt our election process is.


"God bless America"

"In God we trust"

Theses two slogans should no longer be allowed.

Post: #10

It's been my experience the polling is rigged the majority of the time to either select Obama or Romney.

My state of Colorado has had extensive polling because it is a swing state and I would estimate I have answered at least 20 polls. Approximately 3/4 of those have been robocalls with about 10 questions asked and when asked to select which candidate I'd be most likely to vote for I was given only two choices and no 3rd party option.

When I've been polled by a live person I can remember only two times I've had the opportunity to select a 3rd party candidate. One of those times was for a Mitt Romney candidate poll. I highly doubt a Mitt Romney candidate poll reports the 3rd party results.

It's completely bogus to suggest Gary Johnson doesn't have 15% support because they don't know the percentage of his support with the rigged polls. Also with the rigged polls, both Romney and Obama are receiving higher support than they would normally since any person polled who may have selected a 3rd party candidate for the poll and will vote 3rd party on election day are most likely selecting either Romney or Obama for polling purposes.

Post: #11

Gracie  Wrote:

It's been my experience the polling is rigged the majority of the time to either select Obama or Romney.

My state of Colorado has had extensive polling because it is a swing state and I would estimate I have answered at least 20 polls. Approximately 3/4 of those have been robocalls with about 10 questions asked and when asked to select which candidate I'd be most likely to vote for I was given only two choices and no 3rd party option.

When I've been polled by a live person I can remember only two times I've had the opportunity to select a 3rd party candidate. One of those times was for a Mitt Romney candidate poll. I highly doubt a Mitt Romney candidate poll reports the 3rd party results.

It's completely bogus to suggest Gary Johnson doesn't have 15% support because they don't know the percentage of his support with the rigged polls. Also with the rigged polls, both Romney and Obama are receiving higher support than they would normally since any person polled who may have selected a 3rd party candidate for the poll and will vote 3rd party on election day are most likely selecting either Romney or Obama for polling purposes.

^^THIS^^

Post: #12

JF Priest  Wrote:

You can't bump. You're a self proclaimed ObamaBot. Did you get your phone, yet?

Post: #13

Gym Nasium  Wrote:

JF Priest  Wrote:

You can't bump. You're a self proclaimed ObamaBot. Did you get your phone, yet?

Post: #14

Post: #15

Wonder why he is not allowed to debate...