120 votes

Three Major Sponsors have pulled advertising from the Presidential Debates in protest...

This is getting serious.

It was only a week ago that the Commission on Presidential Debates had ten sponsors for the 2012 debates. Today, they're down to seven. Phillips Electronics has, as of this morning, pulled their sponsorship.

What does this mean for us?

We're that much closer to seeing and hearing Governor Gary Johnson and Judge Jim Gray on the debate stage this autumn!

I know what you're thinking. "It's entirely too late for the Commission on Presidential Debates to invite Governor Johnson to debate." Fortunately, it takes very little effort to add a podium to a stage. It takes a whole lot of effort, however, to convince a multi-billion dollar corporation that you wield the power to hit them where it hurts worst -- their pocketbooks.

Power. That's the key word in this previous sentence. YOU HAVE ALL THE POWER NOW.

Phillips Electronics
BBH New York
YWCA

That's three down, seven to go.

Get to writing those letters, guys! This election cycle, you will CHANGE THE COURSE OF HISTORY. Change it for the better.

Power to the people!!

LIVE FREE,

Crystal Gross
State Director
Georgia for Gary Johnson 2012

SOURCE



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Anheuser Busch won't budge

As I remember: in 1992 The League of Women Voters, who had for some time organized the presidential debates decided to allow Andre Morrou of the Libertarian Party to debate Bush Sr. and Clinton. Within a week the CPD was established and Anheuser Busch was its first sponsor, providing the seed money to create CPD.

BTW, Anheuser Busch is owned by a foreign corporation now.

edit: I should have read more of the thread before I posted. It appears someone else covered this more accurately than me.

Southwest replied to my comment... this is their response

Thank you for your e-mail. We are very sorry to learn of your disappointment with Southwest Airlines.

Southwest Airlines’ involvement with the upcoming Presidential debates is not aimed at promoting or endorsing any political agenda or candidate. Essentially, our sponsorship consists of us chartering planes between the debates to accommodate the debate staff's travel needs. Our sponsorship does not include travel for any of the candidates or their staff.

After careful review of the CPD’s request for Southwest Airlines involvement in the upcoming debates, our Senior Leaders felt that the core values of Southwest Airlines aligned with the CPD’s mission of providing American Citizens the opportunity to make informed decisions.

We hope that you will look to Southwest when you are planning future trips as your patronage is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,

Jody, Southwest Airlines
------------------------

The email address is not monitored so can't reply, but will send another regarding citizen's "opportunity to make informed decisions."

informed decisions

That's like saying they've got 2 of the 4 engines on a plane out, but they'll let the passengers on anyway, telling them it's really a 2 engine plane? Still airworthy...

.

that is such a BS response.

its not a response

Its Business as usual.

His name is Edward Snowden

What is Capitalism?
http://youtu.be/yNF09pUPypw

Presidential Debates - League of Women Voters 1976, 1980 & 1984

  • Television Networks (1960)
  • League of Women Voters (1976, 1980, and 1984)
  • The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) established 1987. (1988 - 2008, 2012 schedule w/ 2 jesters)

Controversy Over the CPD http://www.p2012.org/chrn/debs12.html

Critics charge that the CPD is a bipartisan rather than a nonpartisan organization, and can scarcely be expected to be fair to third party and independent candidates. They also question the CPD's reliance on corporate money and maintain that it lacks transparency.

"Instead of the present, stifling, programmed three debates by the CPD, these twenty one debates would throw aside many of the taboos, bring the people into the process, address regional needs, excite larger voter turnout and compel the candidates to be better, more forthright candidates," — Ralph Nader

"I commend to you the 1996, 2000 and 2004 presidential debate agreements which run 53 pages apiece. They are bizarre examples of lunacy. No serious adult should agree to them. They're childish. You don't elect a president to memorize. You elect a president to have wisdom, to have serious thought, to reflect." — Newt Gingrich

In 2012 the campaign of Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson decided to have another go at it, employing a new argument in a Sept. 21 lawsuit charging the CPD with violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890 http://www.p2012.org/johnson/johnson092112pr.html

A large amount of scholarly & legal work has been done on presidential debates. Links provided above have many references.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Ron Paul, Gary Johnson & Jill Stein: Ready to Debate & Serve

Power to the people!! LIVE FREE!

Under the Commission for Presidential Debates, two 3 additional candidates would qualify: Ron Paul (Republican), Gary Johnson (Libertarian) and Jill Stein (Green), the only [viable] candidates were not invited to the CPD debates. [Odd. The scheduled debaters are unqualified, dubious & shameful. Yet uninvited candidates who] are on enough ballots to win the Presidency and are Constitutionally qualified for the office.

[Oddly, the only two candidate that are currently scheduled to debate are not qualified nor fit for service (proof of citizenship (parents & self), high crimes & misdemeanors, over stepping Constitutional authority, etc....]

Commission on Presidential Debates - Due diligence is required. Aiding & abetting crime is a crime itself. Election fraud is a crime. Etc.

Your choice is among the 3 qualified candidates:

  • ☑ Ron Paul (Republican) My personal favorite.
  • Gary Johnson (Libertarian)
  • Jill Stein (Green)
  • ☒ write in vote is every bit as valid as preselected check box candidate vote (some state laws pretend to limit requirement to count votes; ridiculous & unconstitutional).

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Liar.

Please point to where it says they dropped out because of GJ not being in the debates. "protest"?????lol hardly.
This post is a mislead.
Just like GJ is.
His supporters may try to mislead you but there will ALWAYS be someone smarter then these confused liberals, in the room.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

seriously

say something else. every one of your posts say the same crap. don't you have something better to do than try and convince GJ supporters to vote for Ron Paul/Romney/Obama/whoever you want them to vote for?

That is good

Hopefully more do so though I doubt it.

Debate: Ron Paul vs Gary Johnson. October 3, 2012. (qualified)

The CPD's nonpartisan criteria for selecting candidates to participate in the 2012 general election presidential debates are:

P R O J Candidates Qualified or Presumptive?
a o b o Official size & weight
u m a h
l n m n
e a s
y o
n
1.☑☐☐☑ EVIDENCE OF CONSTITUTIONAL ELIGIBILITY
-
The CPD's first criterion requires satisfaction of the eligibility requirements of Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution. The requirements are satisfied if the candidate:
-
a. ☑ ☑ is at least 35 years of age;
-
b. ☑ ☑ is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States and a
- resident of the United States for fourteen years; and
c. ☑ ☑ is otherwise eligible under the Constitution.
-
2. ☑☐☐☑ EVIDENCE OF BALLOT ACCESS (on enough state ballots to win)
-
The CPD's second criterion requires that the candidate qualify to have his/her name appear on enough state ballots to have at least a mathematical chance of securing an Electoral College majority in the 2012 general election. Under the Constitution, the candidate who receives a majority of votes in the Electoral College, at least 270 votes, is elected President regardless of the popular vote.
-
3. ☑☐☐☑ INDICATORS OF ELECTORAL SUPPORT (No poll tax.)
- [N/A. Not qualification & highly subjective.]

The CPD's third criterion requires that the candidate have a level of support of at least 15% (fifteen percent) of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations' most recent publicly-reported results at the time of the determination.

Debate: Ron Paul vs Gary Johnson. October 3, 2012.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Get real > Low ratings

They could give a rats ass about anything other than making money. No one is going to watch the so-called debates anyway. As Romney pointed out 47% don't have any money to buy their products anyway. lol

.

.

Sanctions: Austerity measures move debate to wreslting ring.

Volunteer referee sought. Will someone please post on CraigsList or AngiesList?

The Sopranos will not be appearing. All paid entertainment was replaced by an organ grinder. The monkey will be taking the day off to spend time w/ his family.

Mr O supports have down sized their hope & change. Their offerings correspondingly diminished. As most Big Banks cancelled line-of-credit for Mr O's campaign parade float this year, no VISA nor MasterCard. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Mittens supports could not be found for comment. As Big Banks have joined the band wagon, you will see them, each on their own float, in the Big Bank Parade before wrestlers weigh in. Also as an additional convenience to customers, VISA & MasterCard are accepted.

Reporting live, Mark Twain, as himself.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Thank You Emails

Could someone please post the emails to these three companies? I would like to send a thank you note.

.

for what?
No where does it state why they pulled their support, bob 45 wrote it, but no where does it say that.
You have all been misled.
anyone care to quote where it states these corps pulled their support because Gairy isnt in the debates???

I didnt think so

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

all right--

where were these people when Romney and his thugs hijacked the RNC--

?

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

all because of pressure from thousands of activists

Another article on the subject:
http://hammeroftruth.com/2012/third-sponsor-pulls-out-of-com...

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Shorter e-mail for Anheuser-Busch Companies-character limit

September 30, 2012
To Whom It May Concern:
I will not buy any of your products in the future and will also discourage friends and family from doing so unless you withdraw as a sponsor of the 2012 National Debates run by the Commission on Presidential Debates.
http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=national-debate-sponsors
It is very disheartening that in America, a country that markets itself as having equality for all, some Presidential candidates will not be allowed to debate due to an absurd and arbitrary polling percentage requirement used to solidify the failing two-party monopoly in this country.
The U.S. Constitution in Article 2, Section 1 is clear about the criteria to become U.S. President.
If a person meets all three of the requirements and has been nominated by their party they should have as much equal access to the debates as anyone else, especially if they took the time and paid the expenses to appear on the ballot in all 50 states.
There is something inherently un-American about excluding a Presidential Candidate from any debate simply because he/she does not represent the Republican or Democratic Party. Increasingly, more and more Americans are waking up and finding that neither of the major parties offer any real solutions, just more of the same in different packages.
It is time for millions of Americans to hear different solutions to our very real problems.
Groups are now sharing my outrage on the issue.
“And now, 18 pro-democracy groups -- Open Debates, Common Cause, Public Citizen, Rock the Vote, Judicial Watch, Public Campaign, FairVote, Demos, Democracy Matters, League of Rural Voters, Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, Essential Information, Personal Democracy Media, Reclaim Democracy!, Center for Study of Responsive Law, Citizen Works, Free & Equal Elections Foundation, and Rootstrikers -- calling on the CPD to make public the secret debate contract that was negotiated by the Obama and Romney campaigns.”
http://tinyurl.com/9vklln8

So by the logic of some of

So by the logic of some of you guys, Ron Paul is controlled opposition because Peter Thiel donated 2.5 million to our superpac, right?

Sample E-mail: Use, Modify, or Lose

September 30, 2012
To Whom It May Concern:
I will not (PICK ONE OF THESE DEPENDING ON THE SPONSOR:buy any of your products, donate to your group, or use your services) in the future and will also discourage my friends and family from doing so unless you withdraw as a sponsor of the 2012 National Presidential Debates run by the Commission on Presidential Debates.
http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=national-debate-sponsors
It is very disheartening that in America, a country that markets itself and prides itself on having equality for all, some Presidential candidates will not be allowed to debate due to an absurd and arbitrary polling percentage requirement used to solidify the horribly failing two-party monopoly in this country.
The U.S. Constitution is clear about the criteria to become U.S. President.
Age and Citizenship requirements - US Constitution, Article II, Section 1
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

If a person meets all three of the aforementioned requirements and has been nominated by their party they should have as much equal access to the debates as anyone else, especially if they took the time and paid the expenses to appear on the ballot in all 50 states such as Gary Johnson.

There is something inherently un-American about excluding a Presidential Candidate from any debate simply because he/she does not represent the Republican or Democratic Party. Increasingly, more and more Americans are waking up and finding that neither of the major parties offer any real solutions, just more of the same in different packages.

It is time for a real change and the opportunity for millions of Americans to hear different solutions to our very real problems.
As the following linked article shows, more and more groups are sharing my outrage on the issue:
“And now, 18 pro-democracy groups -- Open Debates, Common Cause, Public Citizen, Rock the Vote, Judicial Watch, Public Campaign, FairVote, Demos, Democracy Matters, League of Rural Voters, Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, Essential Information, Personal Democracy Media, Reclaim Democracy!, Center for Study of Responsive Law, Citizen Works, Free & Equal Elections Foundation, and Rootstrikers -- are calling on the CPD to make public the secret debate contract that was negotiated by the Obama and Romney campaigns.”
http://www.policymic.com/articles/15487/ron-paul-on-presiden...

Thank you for your time,

Thanks for sharing this

.

My pleasure. Hope it does some good.

:-)

Sponsor E-mails

Keep it rolling

Keep it rolling

Southern Agrarian

boycott letters

... are a creative writing challenge. When written well with a hint of angry and generous dollop of motivated ... one or two quotations of relevance ... with moving appeals to morality and decency ... absent of any fallacies ... and never never crossing the line to any sort of threat in any way other than

"I'm taking my shopping dollars elsewhere"

... the well-crafted boycott letter can move mountains. YOU are the power. Creative writing is what we do here at the daily p•AU•1 ... the simple act of resistance is itself victory.

http://quotationsbook.com/book/herbreck/

This Is Interesting But Confusing

I mean, how many big businesses do the right thing for the good of the country? Is there any chance GJ promised those 3 businesses something in return for their support?

On the other hand, that theory doesn't make much sense either because why would these businesses risk "buying influence" in order to support the least likely guy to get elected?

Anyone have any input into this?

These companies are not doing

These companies are not doing that because they believe in Liberty and want Gary Johnson as President. They just think Gary Johnson will be a good spoiler to take votes away from Romney and give to Obama. I don't care about their intentions, as long as they give the People the opportunity to hear a great message of Liberty, that's awesome.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." Ben Franklin

Exactly!

No companies were complaining about the treatment of Dr Paul. Very fishy. Gary Johnson is controlled opp.