I Shocked Myself
 

No, not with B+ from working on antique radios.

No, I decided maybe the media is biased against minor parties and their candidates. Not because anyone told me they were; I figured it out by looking at data. I very rarely vote for minor party candidates, so I'm not a whiny activist, so I have some credibility here. Bear with me.

A friend of mine starting spouting off about the Green Party and the Libertarian Party. This made me look at some polls. You can see daily poll results at realclearpolitics.com. Multiple polls from reputable sources, so let's agree up front these are legit numbers. So Stein polls at 2-6% today and Johnson at 6-12%. That's 8-18% of voters - a very high number not seen since, what, Ross Perot? Holy cow.

One would think that major media coverage should be proportional. So maybe 1 in 10 stories should be on these parties or candidates.

I'm an unashamed NPR listener. I searched the site for stories back to July 1 and found only 6 or 8. Assuming multiple Trump/Clinton stories every DAY, there should have been a lot more.

One wonders: would these parties be more popular if people heard about them proportional to their poll numbers? Instead we are bombarded by the big shots.

I wrote to NPR to ask them this question. If I get a response, I'll post it.

Hiya Tox.

The also-ran are a relative curiosity with little chance of becoming significant players. Not much else to tell of them compared to having to live with the likely dominant players.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

RT hosted a Libertarian debate, admittedly without Garry Johnson but I found the calibre of their candidates to be instructive, to say nothing of the moderator, Jesse Ventura's baby boy Tyrel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1ugtes7ZYA

Jill Stein is a vanity candidate like Harold Stassen, nothing more. She's even less prepared to be president than Trump if that's possible. When the Greens start fielding serious people, I'll start paying attention.

There maybe a party that encompasses all of ones views completely, but will it win elections?
That is the problem, no one party can afford to be so narrowly focused. Must be a mosaic of common views if wanting to be victorious and able to then govern.
The power of the two parties in this country starts at the local level. That is where any Green or Libertarian party would need to start if wanting to ever get to the White House.



Agree the media is playing an active role in shaping this horse race. Sells air time and market share. All about the $$$$ even NPR needs funding and right now this is sucking in the interested. Much like a auto accident on the other side of the road slows traffic of rubber necks.



Barney

I just keep thinking how similar the two parties are in some ways, and we could use some other perspectives. Will it win elections? That's my point: how will we ever know?

I think it's the same reason that the national media follows the NE Patriots and the Seattle Seahawks and not the Jacksonville Jaguars or Tennessee Titans.

It's incredible all the reasons the media have to not cover these parties much--unless and until a 3rd party starts being credible to beat a major, like Perot did. And did you notice that was when he dropped out? Talk about elections being fixed. His job was to kill Bush, period.

I still have a 2004 Nader/ Camejo checklist on the kitchen cabinet, remember them? I still voted the percentages in my interests.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

IIRC PBS Newshour did have the Libertarian candidate on one evening.