Even if I support his cause, I would not support him in the race. I donāt support single issue candidates and I donāt support all the drama that would come from him resigning.
All heāll do is take votes from Sanders and help Clinton.
Heās not a serious candidate. His one policy wonāt ever pass. Better to have a real candidate like Sanders who wants to work on campaign finance reform with a lot of other policies.
And Iām happy for Biden to be in the run, because heāll hinder Clinton and help Sanders.
A minimum requirement to be in a presidential debate should be intending to, you know, actually be trying to be president. Saying that you intend to resign as soon as you win is a long-winded way of saying you are not running. Just because the Republicans think itās a great idea to put cranks on stage is no reason for the Democrats to follow suit.
The proper response to Lessigās complaint is to note that OāMalley, Webb and Chaffee shouldnāt be on the stage either.
He has one issue. He can only debate one question. Thereās no way anyone should let him waste space on stage.
Corey, please read this article, FFS. Lessig doesnāt understand politics.
Even though this is important, this is hardly his worst sin. His role in ramping up the war on drugs and his unrepentant attitude about it should immediately disqualify him from serious consideration by anybody not named William Bennett.
The fact that Biden is even being considered is yet another sign of how awful the major partiesā establishments are.
Youāre pointing to how he raised $1 million? Dude. Thatās proof he isnāt remotely near a serious candidate.
He failed to convince even 1% of the electorate to give so much as a dollar each to him. Rightly so, since he claims heād resign if he won. I like him as a legal writer, but there is no reason anybody should take him seriously as a presidential candidate.
On this one point, the Democratic party and the media happen to be right.
every aspect of lessigās so-called presidential bid says that he doesnāt understand electoral politics or even the structure of american legislative government. he is a deeply unserious candidate and he has no more business being on a debate stage than i do. his heart may be in the right place but everything he says, especially the headline āiām trying to run but the democrats wonāt let meā demonstrates his ignorance of democratic party rules and election law. if anyone is keeping him from running it is himself.
Right. And the whole concept sort of misunderstands base functions of our political system. You canāt just waltz in a āpassā campaign finance in a few weeks or months. You canāt act unilaterally. Youāre talking about an issue that could take a full two terms to come to fruition. What the hell does he plan to do in the meantime? Abdicate all his other duties to his VP and cabinet? Ignore important pressing problems for the sake of exclusively pushing campaign finance reform? Neither of those sound very good. If not how does he plan to govern otherwise? What other policies does he advocate? What other policies does he support? How will he respond to crises? Heās not just a single issue candidate. Heās basically the hardest core expression of that concept. Heās effectively signaled is unwillingness to consider or deal with any other issue or eventuality. And frankly that means heās not fit for the office. Its basically a stunt to promote his pet issue (however important that issue is), and its as good as saying heās not actually running for president. Its basically the same base misunderstanding of how the world works that has the GOP saying theyāll unilaterally repeal this or that policy, or somehow magically make Mexico pay for a wall along the border, or some how force Iran to give up on nukes without international support or going to war. President snaps his fingers and BOOM policy made. So it makes sense to keep him out of the debates and not take him seriously until such a time as he actually takes his campaign seriously.
INTERESTING
Whatever Lessigās positions and qualifications are, itās wrong to preemptively single him out for exclusion. Let the him have his say in the debates. The other candidates can respond, and the voters will decide.
This article is a Must-Read. Thanks.
@funruly
That just made my day.
Lessig is not an actual candidate for president. He doesnāt expect to get the job and he knows it, so heās using this as a publicity stunt for his cause celebre. Thatās OK, but stunt candidates shouldnāt be invited to serious debates.
As much as I like Lessig, I donāt have a problem barring from debates a candidate who promises to quit almost immediately. Thatās not a serious candidacy.
Iām picking up what youāre putting down, but Trump provides an obvious counterpoint.
As a stunt is something controlled and planned - yes, Trump and his candidacy is a counterpoint ; )
Thatās kind of my point. Even though the smart money is against Trump winning the nomination, he still intends to make a full run of it and gives every indication that he intends to win and be president after he wins. Lessig doesnāt give any indication of either of those.
What would Lessig even say in a debate?
I have no position on that, youāll have to ask my presumed running mate, Sen Sanders. Or Sen Warren, who isnāt here tonight.
āI am only answering questions about campaign finance reform.ā
Sorry, I was trying hard to come up with something snarky and poignant but totally came up short this time.
ĀÆ\_(ć)_/ĀÆ
