No, that’s not what I’m saying at all. I said what I meant, and it was pretty clear: somebody who doesn’t actually want to be president, but simply wants to have their single issue (which is a very important issue, that I agree needs to be dealt with) solved, doesn’t really seem (to me) to be serious about running for president. I think he is QUITE serious about wanting to get campaign finance reformed (or eliminated entirely, in the case of publicly funded elections), but I don’t think he’s very serious about wanting to run for president. Because if he was, he would know that he realistically has zero chance of being elected president by being a single-issue candidate who refuses to comment on any other issues.
3 Likes
I see what you mean. Unless you have a good chance winning, you should not try because you risk being considered not serious since you entered the race without knowing you can win first.
The lesson being that if you think you might not win then you should not try.
1 Like
No, the lesson being that if you know you can’t win - that is, that you have a zero percent chance of winning, then you should not run. I mean, maybe he’s delusional, and really thinks he does have a chance of winning. That’s entirely possible. But the DNC is a bit more realistic.
And bringing this all back to the original story - if I was the DNC, even if I thought he had a chance at winning, I wouldn’t let him into the debates either. He’s going to be there to answer a single question, about campaign finance reform, and then just stand around the rest of the debate? We already know his position on campaign finance reform, so we don’t need him in the debate any way. We can just read his policy. There we go, problem solved. Unless he just wants to be there to stand around and look pretty.
Maybe this is why I feel like neither the DNC or the RNC has a chance in hell of enacting meaningful and needed reform.
I don’t think they do either. I admire Lessig’s efforts, but I think his chances of success, given a Congress (and Senate, for that matter) that is nearly entirely filled with career politicians who are there entirely due to the current climate of campaign financing, are basically zero. I’d love to be proven wrong, but the cynic in me is not particularly optimistic.
I think that Lessig is doing the same thing that Huckabee is doing – making a show of running for president to gain publicity for their pet causes. Huckabee has zero chance of even getting close to the nomination, and it’s obvious, but “running for president” gives him a public platform to spout his fire-and-brimstone craziness as he angles for a pundit job at Fox or something. Same thing with Lessig; I honestly feel he’s just doing this as an excuse to be able to shout publicly about campaign finance reform, which is why he’s upset he’s not being given a free pulpit to shout from on television.
2 Likes
Which brings us back to the topic of the thread. If the DNC doesn’t let this guy in to the debates, the people will never have a chance to say yes or no to his idea so you will never be given the chance for him to prove you are wrong or right, and it seems that is by design.
He has a strong argument that had he actually been included in the polls he would easily have the 1% needed to attend. But that line of thought seems to have run it’s course here.
1 Like
But again, you’re ignoring the main reason why there would be no point to include him in the debates: he’s not there to do anything EXCEPT talk about campaign finance reform. If the debate was only about campaign finance reform? He’d be a great addition. But there are going to be many other things to talk about, during which time he is just going to be standing around twiddling his thumbs. If he’s not prepared to participate in the entire debate, why should he be allowed in at all? The other candidates might go on and on talking about nothing of substance when supposedly answering questions, but at least they’ll be putting up a pretense of participating.
1 Like
He could buy ad space during the debate for the moderator to ask him that question.
4 Likes
What makes you think Lessig wouldn’t be able to point out for ANY POLITICAL SITUATION how MONEY IN THE WRONG PLACES enables or perpetuates a given situation?
There’s no need for you to “honestly feel” anything
Lessig is doing this to shout publicly about campaign finance reform
1 Like
Well, yeah, obviously, but I’m saying I “honestly feel” he’s lying. He’s pretending to be a presidential candidate for free publicity, the same way Huckabee is.
I had a lot of respect for his work on copyright reform, but this sham candidacy lost my respect completely.
1 Like
“Lizard People”, but his entire campaign is likely within a large margin of error.
1 Like
Hey man,
Lizard people do a lot to secretly run this country. The least we can do is let them debate.
3 Likes
Who could be intimidated by lizard people?
6 Likes
If you don’t vote for a lizard, the wrong lizard might get in.
5 Likes
He has already made it quite clear that his position on anything other than campaign finance reform is “I have no position on this. Ask whomever my VP will be.”
God I hope not. I hope Corey is wrong about this. F’n’a. The difference between Clinton and Biden is only a few degrees, the country really needs someone like Sanders.
bingo.
I sure do hope so!!!
I agree. I also think that Lessig is actually hurting his issue more then helping. He tried to rip apart Sanders, instead of supporting him, just to further his own chances. Which is a shame since Sanders actually stands a chance and is also adamant about campaign finance reform. I think Lessig has lost sight of achieving the actual goal, and is not rationally thinking about the path that stands the best chance of achieving said goal.
3 Likes
I wouldn’t worry too much about Biden. If he enters the race, there’s an argument that’s better for Bernie. Biden is more likely to peel off Clinton supporters than Sanders. Biden is also structurally unprepared to get in the race, with no ground infrastructure and a variety of looming filing deadlines.
2 Likes
You are privy to a Lessig quote which Google is not.
