Result of third-party lawsuit could decide outcome of 2016 election

parties cc

Having 3rd party candidates on the debate stage would only be good for the Republic. The debates are controlled by a political cartel and they should be broken open.

Remember Coke and Pepsi are not OPPOSITES, just flavors. Same for the Dems and the GOP.

(From Breitbart)

What is so wrong with offering the American people another choice─having outside candidates sharing the stage with Republicans and Democrats? Ultimately, it comes down to the issue of control by the behind-the-scenes power brokers. The smaller the number of choices, the easier it is to control the game.

What would happen if the anti-war left are presented with an alternative to war hawk Hilary Clinton? Where do free market capitalists go when Donald Trump backs ethanol and high tariffs? What happens when voters go to websites like and find out that who they side with is not even a Republican or a Democrat? The answer is, quite frankly, sheer panic amongst the political class.

The presidential debate lawsuit, if successful, will rewrite the political playbook going forward and seriously impair the political establishment’s ability to suppress third parties from gaining greater exposure. Most voters are already considered to be Independents, and the expansion of coverage from the national televised debates will hopefully reengage the 50 percent of the population who choose not to vote each election cycle. Dissatisfied with what is being offered from the major parties, the appeal of Libertarians and Greens, in particular, looks more attractive by the day. This year will likely show record turnout for these parties’ candidates. The true risk to the political establishment is that a defection of just a handful of former Republicans or Democrats could shift the political balance of power in ways no computer model has ever considered. The question now is:  just how many traditional voters will make the leap to a third party?

Click here for the article.