Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday August 08 2016, @03:17AM   Printer-friendly
from the representation-is-a-privilege dept.

Ballot Access News reports:

On August 5, U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer, a Bush Jr. appointee, ruled against Gary Johnson and Jill Stein in their debates lawsuit. The case had been filed on September 28, 2015, and is Johnson v Commission on Presidential Debates, U.S. District Court, D.C., 1:15cv-1580.

[...] The 27-page decision[Redirects to a PDF] [...] says, "Because Plaintiffs have no standing and because antitrust laws govern commercial markets and not political activity, those claims fail as a matter of well-established law."

[...] Footnote three, based on the judge's own research (or the research of her clerks), has factual errors. The judge relied on election returns published by the FEC, but the FEC returns do not say which candidates were [...] in states with a majority of electoral college votes, and the opinion's list of candidates is erroneous.

[...] Another factual error in the decision is on page 21. The decision says Ralph Forbes, an independent candidate for U.S. Senate, lost a case over debates in the U.S. Supreme Court in 1998. Actually Forbes was a candidate for U.S. House.

In the comments, Richard Winger notes a similar case.

the lawsuit Level the Playing Field v FEC is still pending, before another judge, in the same court

The presidential debates were previously moderated by the League of Women Voters (1976, 1980, 1984). The Democrats and Republicans screwed things up in 1988. The Commission on Presidential Debates, a corporation controlled by the Democratic and Republican parties, has run each of the presidential debates held since 1988.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday August 08 2016, @10:53PM

    by butthurt (6141) on Monday August 08 2016, @10:53PM (#385522) Journal

    You're with Hillary. She says she favours "universal, quality, affordable health care" and she has a flexible position on fracking.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/09/politics/hillary-clinton-health-care-public-option-bernie-sanders/ [cnn.com]
    http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/03/hillary-clinton-debate-fracking [motherjones.com]

    In 2010, shesaid: [state.gov]

    Sixth, the United States will promote the use of shale gas. Now, I know that in some places is controversial. But natural gas is the cleanest fossil fuel available for power generation today, and a number of countries in the Americas may have shale gas resources. If developed, shale gas could make an important contribution to our region’s energy supply, just as it does now for the United States. And the geologists at the U.S. Geological Survey are ready to work with partners to explore this potential. And we want to do it in a way that is as environmentally respectful as possible. So there are some best practices that we would be more than willing to share, and as countries develop the legislation or regulation necessary for this industry, to make sure it gets off on the best foot.

    "Shale gas" is produced by hydrofracturing.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2