Do you want Gary Johnson to make the debate stage?

[AGA]

Gary Johnson must have an average of at least 15% in the polls of five pollsters selected by the Commission of Presidential Debates. Regardless of his chances to make the debate stage, would you be happier if he did?

[dead0man]

Yes, and Jill.  Good left leaning people should have an option too.

[Californiadreaming]

Yes (D). After all, he should certainly have the opportunity to have his voice heard on the national stage.

[SWE]

Jill Stein would be more entertaining.

[RINO Tom]

Of course.  That'd be awesome!

[This account no longer in use.]

Both Johnson and Stein. It'll be the most hilariously bad debate in history.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Yes he should be included in the debates, but only if he is on the ballot in all 50 states and DC.

[LLR]

Yeah!

[Mr. Reactionary]

The debate already includes Hillary and Donald. How can adding someone else (thus diminishing the overall speaking time of the first two) be bad?

[Green Line]

No.  (Doesn't want a platform for his radical/dangerous views)

[Boston Bread]

No.  (Doesn't want a platform for his radical/dangerous views)

[Reginald]

No, but then again he's such a horrible public speaker that I doubt it'd make much of a difference.

[Pyro]

Johnson and Stein should be in, at least, one debate. If their numbers go up, keep them in.

[Maxwell]

Let's put him in the debate. Guaranteed his numbers dip afterwards.

[Vosem]

Of course, as long as he's on the ballot in enough states to hypothetically make 270 (and it appears he'll be on the ballot literally everywhere); I would be saying this even if I did not actually support him.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Of course.  That'd be awesome!

[OSR stands with Israel]

No.  (Doesn't want a platform for his radical/dangerous views)

Like having a platform for a racist demogaue like trump or someone who threatened national security like Hillary is better

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Absolutely! I think the rules restricting debate to the two parties are self serving, wrong, and help the parties get away with not addressing their shared failings.

That said, Johnson doesn't want to be there. I think it would actually lose him votes if the CNN town hall was any indication.

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

Of course.  That'd be awesome!

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I think anyone who is on the ballot on enough states to hit 270 and manages to break just 5%, none the less 15%, should be automatically invited. Of course I want him to debate. I want him to perform as well as possible so long as Trump still wins.

[ElectionsGuy]

I think anyone who is on the ballot on enough states to hit 270 and manages to break just 5%, none the less 15%, should be automatically invited. Of course I want him to debate. I want him to perform as well as possible so long as Trump still wins.

^

[Sir Mohamed]

No, because I want Hillary to win over 50% in the election.

[pho]

No (I/O). As much as I would love for there to be more than two viable parties in the US, including someone as awkward and inarticulate as Johnson in a nationally televised debate would be counter productive to that in the long run.

[Illiniwek]

Very torn. On one hand I don't like the two party system and would appreciate more opportunities for other, less bought parties out there. That being said, after watching the British debates last year, I struggled to appreciate how parties like Labour and the Conservatives had to debate on the stage while giving roughly equal time to the Greens and Plaid Cymru, who ended up getting 3.8% and .6% of the national vote share. It just gets distracting. In this case, I would only want Gary Johnson to be on the state if there was sufficient evidence that he was polling at above 15%. I just have a hard time believing that will happen.

[Sumner 1868]

There is no way this low-energy loser will win as many votes as he is currently polling. I guarantee it.