Gary Johnson 2012: "Tell CNN"

GaryJohnson2012

Online Petition to get Gary Johnson in the debate.

CNN
(404) 827-1500 or (202) 898-7900
Text: CNN (space) and your news tip to 772937 (don’t forget the space after CNN). http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html
Twitter: @CNN or @teamCNN

WMUR
http://www.wmur.com/contact/index.html
(603) 669-9999
Twitter: @WMUR9

Union Leader
publisher@unionleader.com
http://www.unionleader.com/tip
(603) 668-4321 Twitter: @unionleader

Governor Gary Johnson has Qualified for the Debate!

Does Governor Gary Johnson qualify for the debate using the debate partner's criteria?
First we need their criteria:

The Union Leader and its partners invited every potential candidate who met any one of three standards:

An average of at least 2.00 percent in at least three national polls released in April by ABC, AP, Bloomberg, CBS, CNN, FOX, Gallup, Los Angeles Times, Marist, McClatchy, NBC, Newsweek, Pew, Quinnipiac, Reuters, USA Today or Time.

An average of at least 2.00 percent in at least three national polls released in May by any of those organizations.

An average of at least 2.00 percent in polls of New Hampshire voters conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center and released in May.

Let's take the second criteria since Johnson only needs to meet one of the three to qualify and debate sponsor CNN didn't include him in their April polling.

CNN's Opinion Research Corporation Poll May 24-26

Johnson only polls at 1% if we use CNN's poll question that includes the unlikely and undeclared candidates of Giuliani, Palin, and Bachmann. Johnson is the second choice for 2% of respondents, and when Giuliani and Palin are removed from the list of candidates then Johnson is at 2%.



Gallup Poll May 20-24th

A similar story plays out in Gallup's poll. Johnson is at 2% when undeclared candidates Palin and Bachmann are included, but when excluding Palin then Johnson is at 3%.



The last poll is the most difficult because of the polling firms listed as acceptable I couldn't find polls from most of them and the polls from AP didn't include Johnson.

Quinnipiac had a poll from April 26-May 1 with Johnson at 1% which included Huckabee and Palin. If we count this as a May poll then that would round out the criteria of being in 3 national polls. [Added: thanks to Kreationz commenting and pointing this one out.]

There were two respected polling firms that listed Johnson in May:
Harris Interactive has him at 1% with a poll including Palin, Bachmann, and Guiliani.
Zogby International has him at 1% with Palin, Christie, and Bachmann in the poll.

Let's assume Johnson only polls at 1% from any of these other polling agencies listed. This still gives Johnson an average of 2% in three polls in May. For the math challenged (3% + 2% + 1%) / 3 = 2%.

Conclusion
By using the debate sponsors' own objective criteria Johnson does average at 2% in at least three polls in May. The only question is why are they choosing to exclude one of the most qualified people running for president?

Supporter buys ad in NH's largest paper to protest media elite's exclusion of Johnson

The exclusion of Governor Gary Johnson "gnaws your craw" according to Kerry Welsh who bought two ad spots in NH's largest newspaper the Manchester Union Leader to express his frustration and highlight Governor Johnson's personal, business, and political record.

Welsh's website www.kerrywelsh.com has links to email, phone, and twitter contacts for the three media cosponsors of the first GOP debate in NH, along with the pdf version of the advertisement.

The ad appeared on page A5 of Wednesday's issue. While on the front page the Union Leader listed the criteria for the debate. Johnson's poll numbers ranged from 1-3% depending on how many non-candidates the pollsters decided to include, or if they even included Johnson. CNN only included him in one poll in May.

Welsh's ad is scheduled to appear again in the upcoming Sunday issue.

Why Won’t CNN Let Me Come To Their Debate?

FOXNEWS.com



In the early part of 1991, there was a governor from a relatively small state who, away from the national spotlight, had compiled a credible record, been reelected by those he served, and who was in the early stages of putting together a national campaign for President. His ranking in national political polls – when he was included – was in the neighborhood of 1-2%. By the end of 1991, he had skyrocketed to roughly six percent.

His name: Bill Clinton.

The so-called “frontrunners” for the ’92 Democrat presidential when Bill Clinton was still a blip on the screen? Mario Cuomo and Jerry Brown, both of whom were polling in double-digits. We all know how that turned out.
Likewise, in 1975, another governor, Jimmy Carter, was polling at 1%. And in 1987, the same was true of a fellow named Dukakis.

The point is clear: Using polls this early in a presidential election cycle to define who is a serious candidate or pick potential winners is a bad idea. Using them to exclude me, another Governor with a solid track record, from a critical national primary debate is even worse. But that is precisely what CNN and the other sponsors of the June 13 New Hampshire Republican presidential primary debate are doing.

Debates are important. Polls taken 7 or 8 months before the first votes are cast are not. Polls at this point in the 2012 election cycle are little more than reflections of name ID, selective coverage by the national media, and campaign war chests. Debates, on the other hand, are unique opportunities to put those meaningless factors aside, level the playing field, and let actual voters decide who is credible, who has the credentials, and who offers the ideas they are looking for. No handlers, no fluff, no advertising – just the candidates, their words, and their plans for the nation.

Unfortunately, by splitting hairs and drawing lines in polling data that clearly fall within those polls’ margins of error, CNN is ignoring not only history, but basic fairness. In 1994, nobody believed I could be elected governor of New Mexico. The news media, the Republican “establishment”, the career politicians – none of them gave me a shot. Due in large part to the opportunity to debate the other candidates, my ideas, my background as an entrepreneur, and my proposed solutions resonated with voters, and I was not only elected, but reelected as a Republican in an overwhelmingly Democrat state.

In short, I didn’t just crawl out from under a rock and declare myself a candidate for the presidency. I served for eight years as arguably the most fiscally conservative governor in the nation. I turned a budget deficit into a surplus, reduced the size of state government by more than 1,000 employees – without firing any qualified workers, and cut taxes 14 times. In the course of reducing government and balancing the budget, I vetoed 750 bills – probably more than all other governors in the nation combined. And I lived to tell the story in a heavily Democrat state.

Having traveled the country and spoken with literally thousands of Americans in the past year, regardless of CNN’s Gary Johnson poll arithmetic, it is clear to me that more than a few Republicans, Independents, and Democrats are looking for new, dramatic, and unadulterated ideas and leadership. My purpose in running for president is to give those Americans a voice and an alternative to business-as-usual.

The voters ultimately may or may not decide that Gary Johnson is the alternative they want; but, they should at least have a chance to decide for themselves, rather than have CNN preselect their candidates for them.

This is not about me. Whether I am on CNN’s stage Monday or not, I will continue to give voice to an approach to government that is otherwise largely missing. The real issue is that a major network is using largely irrelevant polling data and statistically insignificant arithmetic as justifications to impose its political wisdom on the American people.

The Daily Caller - Presidential Candidate Gary Johnson On CNN’s Silence: “Really Disheartening”

The Daily Caller

It has been five days since CNN announced that presidential candidate Gary Johnson, the former governor of New Mexico, will be excluded from next week’s debate in New Hampshire.

In that time, Johnson has garnered a wealth of support, though CNN has remained steadfast in requiring candidates to receive at least two percent in the polls.

In an interview with The Daily Caller, Johnson called it “really disheartening” and “really disappointing.”

“I never contemplated being excluded from the debate table,” he said. At this point, he’s no longer hopeful that CNN and the other debate sponsors will have a change of heart.

“I was hopeful going into the weekend,” said Johnson. “Now I’m not because we haven’t heard a word.”

On Tuesday, a senior adviser to the Johnson campaign, Ron Neilson, sent a letter to CNN, saying that the decision to use polling criteria “seven months before a single vote is cast is not only absurd, but counter-intuitive to the very purpose of a debate.”

One Johnson supporter was so incensed by the exclusion that she took out a full-page ad that will run Wednesday and Sunday in the Manchester Union Leader under the headline “Tis A Sad Day for Democracy.”

Johnson also told TheDC he was excluded in part because of his political beliefs. “I halfway have to think it’s the positions I have also,” he said, adding that Bill Clinton was in the same polling range at this stage in his campaign. Moreover, said Johnson, he was actually left out of CNN’s polls for the month of April.

Seven other candidates are scheduled to appear at the debate, held on the campus of Saint Anselm College: Rep. Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, and Rick Santorum.

Will Johnson still attend – as a form of silent protest? No, he told TheDC, saying it would be “terribly uncomfortable.”

“It’s an embarrassment.”

Gary Johnson On The Issues - Spending and the Deficit

Spending and the Deficit

Government spends too much because it does too much. Unchecked deficits are the single greatest threat to our national security. Unless we take significant steps soon, our federal debt will equal the entire economic production of the United States.

We should start by reassessing the role of the federal government, and always asking the question: Should the government be doing this in the first place?
We must act now to:

Balance the Budget
THE U.S. IS BORROWING OR PRINTING MORE than 40 cents of every dollar the government spends today. The math is simple: Federal spending must be cut not by millions or billions, but by trillions. And it must be done today.

It's time to:

* End excessive spending, bloated stimulus programs, unnecessary farm subsidies, and earmarks.
* Reassess the role of the federal government and identify responsibilities that can be met more efficiently by the private sector.
* Recognize that you can't have limited government at home, but big government abroad.


Enact Responsible Entitlement Reform
MOST PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON SEEM TO THINK that we can control spending and balance the budget without reforming Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. This is lunacy.

* Identify and implement common-sense cost savings to place Medicare on a path toward long-term solvency.
* Block grant Medicare and Medicaid funds to the states, allowing them to innovate, find efficiencies and provide better service at lower cost.
* Repeal ObamaCare, as well as the failed Medicare prescription drug benefit.
* Fix Social Security by changing the escalator from being based on wage growth to inflation. It's time for Social Security to reflect today's realities without breaking trust with retirees.


Audit the Federal Reserve
THE FEDERAL RESERVE SHOULD BE TRANSPARENT and its actions held to the same level of scrutiny as any other federal department.

* The American people deserve to know the extent to which the Fed has purchased private assets at home and abroad.
* Many Americans have become interested in the Federal Reserve in recent years. America's representatives in Washington, D.C. need to also become a lot more interested in how this government institution affects the American economy.
* The role and the activities of the Federal Reserve are long overdue for examination, reassessment, and ultimately, thoughtful reform. Can the Federal Reserve pursue both stable prices and full employment, or does its currency manipulation cause malinvestment, inflation, and prolonged unemployment?
* Conduct an audit to provide true transparency of the Federal Reserve's lending practices.
* Establish clear Congressional oversight.
* Get the Federal Reserve out of the business of printing money and buying debt through quantitative easing.

Johnson Campaign Protests CNN Debate Exclusion

GaryJohnson2012.com

June 6, 2011, Santa Fe, NM – A senior advisor to former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson’s presidential campaign, Ron Nielson, today sent the following letter to CNN concerning Governor Johnson’s exclusion from the June 13 New Hampshire primary debate:

“The Gary Johnson for President campaign has been overwhelmed over the weekend with phone calls and emails all asking the same question: How is it that Governor Johnson is being excluded from the June 13 New Hampshire presidential primary debate? Of course, they are asking the wrong people.

“Having heard nothing to the contrary from you, the debate sponsors, we assume the decision not to invite Governor Johnson was based upon your “objective” polling criteria. Certainly, you have to apply criteria. We get that. However, the idea that inclusion – or exclusion – from a critical debate in a critical state will be based entirely upon polling arithmetic, seven months before a single vote is cast, is not only absurd, but counter-intuitive to the very purpose of a debate.

“At this point in the process, a candidate’s ranking in the polls is almost entirely a factor of name identification, news coverage by outlets such as yours, money, and/or previous exposure on the national level – including that gained from previous unsuccessful campaigns. In short, relying solely on polling numbers at this stage simply grants an enormous advantage to “establishment” candidates – and excludes a successful two-term governor whose express purpose in running is to give Americans an alternative to business as usual, and who actually has a track record to back it up.

“Given that poll rankings at this point are largely the result of decisions by the elite media, such as CNN, about who and what to cover – and to whom to give precious air time, it is more than a little ironic when those same media use those poll numbers to deem certain candidates deserving and others not. That irony is not lost on Republican primary voters who most assuredly do not want media elites pre-selecting their candidates for them.

“Consider: In early 1991, then-Governor Bill Clinton was in 11th place in presidential primary polling with 2%. By November of 1991, he was only at 6%, a fact which led one commentator to later observe: “If the front runners in the 1992 Democratic primary had been successful in excluding all the “non-serious” candidates, Bill and Hillary Clinton would have never made it to the national stage.” The “frontrunners” in 1991, by the way, were Mario Cuomo and Jerry Brown.

“And there is this excerpt from a memorandum sent to supporters by the Mitt Romney campaign in 2007: “Carter, Dukakis, and Clinton were all governors of small states who began their campaigns with low national exposure and went on to win their party’s nomination. At this point in 1975, Carter was polling at 1%; in 1987, Dukakis was polling at 1%; in 1991, Clinton was at 2%.”

“In short, applying your criteria, the ultimate nominees in several modern elections would likely not have been invited to a CNN debate. And in each case, they were Governors of relatively small states who simply had not enjoyed the advantage of the national media’s attention – a rather precise description of Governor Johnson. The polls were not predictive then, and they are not now.

“The fundamental unfairness of relying solely on polling criteria aside, there are obvious problems with the polling criteria themselves. Even the most extensive and professional political polls carry margins of error from 3-5%. When reporting polls in which candidates are separated by margins within that range, the news media invariably points out that those candidates are essentially tied or the race is “too close to call”. While we have not seen your precise calculations, based on the polls we have seen, we have to assume that the “margin” between Governor Johnson and some of those who were invited to the debate were equally “too close to call”. Yet you made a call – and decided to exclude Governor Johnson.

“Adding to the mystery of your arithmetic is the simple fact that Governor Johnson was not even included in much of CNN’s own polling during the month of April – one of the time periods you used to determine eligibility. It is hardly surprising that a candidate would not fare well in a poll in which he was not included.

“Debates play an important role in the American political process. They uniquely provide an opportunity for voters to hear, see, contrast and compare candidates – on a level playing field uncluttered by funding, name I.D., past notoriety and public relations machines. Rather, they are about credentials, ideas, philosophies and policies.

“By those measures, a two-term Republican governor from a Democrat state — who turned a deficit into a surplus, vetoed 750 bills, and successfully governed from a philosophy many, many Republicans are today seeking – deserves a chance to participate in the June 13 debate. Early and largely irrelevant polling arithmetic certainly should not trump the obvious: Gary Johnson has a record, a resume and the proven accomplishments to merit inclusion among any serious gathering of Republican candidates for president.

“We respectfully ask that the decision to exclude Governor Johnson be revisited, and that the American people be given an opportunity to hear a voice on June 13 that otherwise will not be heard.

Sincerely,

Ron Nielson
Senior Advisor
Gary Johnson 2012”