Jeff Trigg makes a pretty good plea for the Libertarian Candidate in comments.
Vote Libertarian Jerry Kohn for US Senate. 😉 Where are his results in the polls? Yeah, I know. 30% who consider themselves “very conservative” said they were leaning toward Obama. That seems like a strong case to include Kohn in the debates. I bet if someone did a poll more than 80% would agree all candidates on the ballot should be included in the debates. We’ll see what type of democracy Obama actually believes in. Kohn is just as qualified as Ryan. Ryan’s never held office, while Kohn is an elected Library Trustee in Cook County. Ryan is pushing his minimal teaching experience, while Kohn has taught in public schools for years and years longer than Ryan. If that many people dislike Ryan, the voters would probably appreciate hearing about other choices. That used to be the American way.
Kohn’s website is here
Though notice the connection between
John Kerry
Jerry Kohn
Sort of like those old Kennedy-Lincoln conspiracy thingees.
Jeff Trigg asks, “Where are [Libertarian Jerry Kohn’s] results in the polls?”
What *is* the answer to this question?
The Trib/WGN poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. That means if Kohn’s numbers are 4% or less, I am in a statistical dead heat with him — and so is my cat. And I don’t think that either my cat or myself should be included in the debates.
I am for expanding the democratic conversation — I was one of those dopes passing around Nader petitions in 2000 — but I still think that a candidate should have a minimum of support before he or she is permitted to participate in the debates.
And with the Ryan campaign slowly sinking beneath the waves, this year should be as good as any to get the libertarian message (“I got mine, screw you”?) out to the people of Illinois. And with guys like Jeff pushing hard, maybe the polls will indicate that the libertarian candidate is statistically significant by the time of the debates rolls around.
Determining a “minimum of support” typically turns out to be arbitrary and only used quiet dissenting voices. Candidates have to provide a “minimum of support” already just to get on the ballot, so why shouldn’t that suffice? I’d point out that Jesse Ventura was not polling at 5% before their debates, but the Dem and Rep agreed to invite him even though he didn’t qualify. Winning the debates turned his campaign into an eventual winner. That shows how much things can change in a short time if candidates are given more equal coverage.
I’d also argue that we’ve already shown a “minimum of support” in several ways. Statewide, we averaged 85,000 votes in 2002 and Libertarians received 580,000 total votes in the state. For State Rep. we averaged 9% with a high of 20.2%. Our Comptroller candidate got 144,000 votes, which was more than all but the top two Dem and Rep Senate primary candidates, including Blair Hull and his $30 million, and Rauschenberger’s near newspaper endorsement sweep. Joyce Washington, Nancy Skinner, and the rest of the list were mostly all invited to their primary debates, even though they had not shown a “minimum of support” and ended up getting Libertarian-like vote totals. Likewise Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton, Braun etc in the Presidential primary debates. That’s a blatant double standard in my humble opinion.
As far as Jerry Kohn goes, he was endorsed above both his Rep and Dem opponents by both the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times in 2002 for his race for State Rep. That should bolster his legitimacy and credibility.
Let the voters decide the “minimum of support” at the ballot box instead of having the media or Rep and Dem opponents decide for them, is all I expect.
Big thanks for the attention Arch.
No the name similarities are not a conspiracy. Jerry Kohn announced in Oct. 2003, well before anyone had any inkling that John Kerry would win.
http://www.il.lp.org/article.php?id=445
We will take the votes if people are that easily confused, however. 🙂
Someone jokingly did suggest we find a Peter Fitzgerald to run for Senate at one point. That would’ve been entertaining, but it just isn’t our style.
Austin, after reading that I’m sorry if I came off as confrontational more than informative. I do respect your opinions on the issue, but this is a passionate item for me if you can’t tell. And you and your cat don’t have the minimum of support of money and volunteers needed to collect 40,000+ signatures in 90 days to get on the ballot. 😉
Jeff can make the argument much better than I could, but why not go ahead and have the Libertarian (and the Green, and the Independent) participate in the debates. If a party has made it as far as getting on the ballot, then let them be part of the rest of the process. I recently had a chance to talk with a small group of senior citizens. They all stated that they are fed up with both the Republican and Democrat parties. When I asked them about Jerry Kohn, none of them knew who he was. Although, one 78 year old self-employed gentlemen who has always voted Republican, said he will now give his vote to anyone other than the two main parties. I would think that if these other parties were in the debates, then their positions would get the much wider coverage and knowledge and understanding. What’s wrong with that?
Jeff,
No offense taken.
Arch will correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure that posters to this site lose their right to be offended when they characterize a fellow poster’s position as “I got mine, screw you.”
And the only reason I can’t gather the 40K signatures to get on the ballot is because I am blessed with the charm of Peter Fitzgerald and the personal fortune of Barack Obama.
So-Called Austin Mayor