Would you approve or disapprove of the CPD including Johnson in the 1st debate?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Approve (Possible Johnson Voter). The standards were set to exclude third parties, not to "test viability" or "avoid including candidates with only a miniscule level of support". This is the most qualified third party ticket in modern history. Let's include them. Hillary and Trump can shut it. If they can't handle debating a third party presidential candidate, how can they handle unfriendly  world leaders like Kim Jong Un?

[Sumner 1868]

If the far more influential and popular Ross Perot wasn't worthy of debate time in 1996, than this guy certainly isn't.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

If the far more influential and popular Ross Perot wasn't worthy of debate time in 1996, than this guy certainly isn't.

making sure Ross Perot doesn't feel cheated about 1996 should definitely be the highest priority here.

[DavidB.]

Disapprove (doesn't support Johnson); libertarianism = joke ideology. More importantly, this election is between two people and everyone pretending otherwise is deluding themselves. Let's not pay too much attention to the other two wackos (let alone to McMuffin and the like).

Also lmao @ "most qualified". The guy literally doesn't know the largest city in Syria when asked about it.

[Clark Kent]

Johnson and Weld are actually qualified. They deserve to be there far more than an orange rapist.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I'm beginning to very torn because I want Gary to steal New Mexico from the Democrats, but I also don't want to risk him being President in any way as I would be very fearful of the dystopia that America would become at we descend into poverty that would take decades to reverse. Some risks are just not worth taking. 90% of an OK thing and 10% of a great thing  is better than say 55% of an OK thing, 40% of a great thing and 5% of a very frightening event (not that Gary necessarily affects the percentages in that manner, but just for argument's sake)

[Illiniwek]

On one hand I don't like the CPD, I like giving independent voices a chance, he is more competent and qualified than at least one of the other candidates, and the people deserve to know what options are out there.

On the other hand he clearly falls short of the requirement, and we know he has no chance of winning,

I would only let him in if he gets the same percentage of time/attention as his poll numbers. There is no way they should get 1/3 1/3 1/3 time.

[ElectionsGuy]

Approve. Him and Jill Stein should be in the debates by virtue of having ballot access in states that add up to 270 or more electoral votes.