• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Breaking: Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis kicked to the curb (shutout)

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
The final debate of the Virginia Governor's race will not include Libertarian Candidate Robert Sarvis.

WDBJ:

WDBJ7 and Virginia Tech are co-hosting a debate between the two major party candidates for governor on Thursday, October 24 at 7:00 p.m. As part of the negotiations regarding guidelines for the debate, the two campaigns agreed to language setting an average polling threshold that opened the door for the third party candidate to participate in the debate.

The language both campaigns agreed to is as follows:

The third party candidate will be invited to participate in the debate if he is polling at 10% or above in major statewide independent polls released within the period three weeks prior to October 10. The decision concerning eligibility will be made by WDBJ7 in consultation with political analysts Harry Wilson from Roanoke College and Bob Denton from Virginia Tech and will rely heavily on the averages of major polls as listed on www.realclearpolitics.com.

October 10 was agreed upon as a deadline for the third party candidate to reach the threshold to give candidates two weeks ahead of the debate to prepare and the hosting organizations time to set the format and staging for the event.

As of this date, the third party candidate is polling at 9.0% based on the averages on realclearpolitics.com and would, therefore, not meet the guidelines agreed upon by the campaigns.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Right, I mean, forget even challenging their hegemony, god forbid we introduce alternate approaches into the debate. Statism must prevail at all cost! :banghead:
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
Including a refreshing third voice in the debate would cause it to eat up too much prime time TV, no doubt. The best part about the third voice is what it forces the other two to admit during the debate, even when it will still be likely that they (the other two) will still be the leaders afterward. It makes for a better debate. Only the moderators should have made this decision; the opinions of the other two parties is completely self-serving. Generally speaking, we need more balanced organizations funding debates.
 

Marco

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
3,905
Location
Greene County
Including a refreshing third voice in the debate would cause it to eat up too much prime time TV, no doubt. The best part about the third voice is what it forces the other two to admit during the debate, even when it will still be likely that they (the other two) will still be the leaders afterward. It makes for a better debate. Only the moderators should have made this decision; the opinions of the other two parties is completely self-serving. Generally speaking, we need more balanced organizations funding debates.


1+!!!!
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
The Libertarians played no part in the conditions, from what I read.

But they did agree to the conditions....they should have known better...the choice: choose not to participate at all at the beginning because the conditions were unfair. Saying this now is a little too late IMO.
 
Last edited:

jwaldo

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
15
Location
Northern Virginia
ALL three candidates should be included. It's only fair.

But, given the current state of the race, does anyone think Sarvis might throw his support to Cuccinelli? Many are not pleased with what they hear coming out of the other candidates run for office.
 

2a4all

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,846
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
ALL three candidates should be included. It's only fair.

But, given the current state of the race, does anyone think Sarvis might throw his support to Cuccinelli? Many are not pleased with what they hear coming out of the other candidates run for office.
And many are also displeased with with what they hear from Cuccinelli's campaign. Gun rights ain't this issue in this election, although they will be impacted mightily by the outcome.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
ALL three candidates should be included. It's only fair.

But, given the current state of the race, does anyone think Sarvis might throw his support to Cuccinelli? Many are not pleased with what they hear coming out of the other candidates run for office.

Liberatrians generally do not do this ... the GOP has to change and they won't if other parties do this.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Including a refreshing third voice in the debate would cause it to eat up too much prime time TV, no doubt. The best part about the third voice is what it forces the other two to admit during the debate, even when it will still be likely that they (the other two) will still be the leaders afterward. It makes for a better debate. Only the moderators should have made this decision; the opinions of the other two parties is completely self-serving. Generally speaking, we need more balanced organizations funding debates.

Translation:


The third voice would cut into the time available for excluders to lie and defraud the public; and the third voice would expose those lies.
 
Top