With both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump touting the highest negative ratings in modern American history, 62 percent of voters want to see third party candidates in the upcoming Presidential debates, according to a recent poll conducted by Quinnipiac University.
The look toward third party candidates has been prominent this election season with many moderate republicans disavowing Trump and many young democrats untrusting of Clinton. The number of voters aged 18 to 32 who desire to hear third party candidates such as Gary Johnson included in debates increases to an overwhelming 82 percent, according to an article posted on A Libertarian Future’s website.
However, young people should not let their disillusionment with the current state of American politics fool them into thinking candidates like Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are better options.
Sure, your individual vote will not make a difference, and if want to throw your vote away to Stein or Johnson, you are free to do so. But do not argue that these candidates should impede on an already messy election season by participating in the debates without being serious contenders.
These third party candidates lack the qualifications needed to have a legitimate claim to the debates — no matter how hard you argue they should be allowed. The Commission on Presidential Debates requires that third-party candidates poll with at least 15 percent in predetermined polls to qualify. Johnson most recently came in at 7 percent in the latest CNN/ORC poll, with Stein is coming in even lower than that.
Numbers aside, Johnson clearly lacks the education to debate with Clinton and Trump. In a recent interview with MSNBC, Johnson asked “What is Aleppo?” when questioned about the humanitarian crisis there. As the literal ground zero of the Syrian refugee crisis, someone looking to become the leader of one of the most influential world nations needs enough basic knowledge to at least be aware of the fundamentals involving one of the largest current foreign policy debates.
Jill Stein, candidate for the Green Party, notoriously pulls stunts for publicity in the same manner as Trump.
Stein makes outlandish claims like speculating on Clinton’s health and saying Trump is a believer of climate change while Clinton is not. A significant part of Stein’s platform is bashing Democrats and Republicans as equals, which only serves to further infuriate both republicans and democrats. Stein simply wants to cause discord among the two party system, no matter the outcome — not a proactive addition to any debate.
Neither Johnson or Stein could give decent arguments as to why they should be elected over Trump or Clinton. Instead, they would only spend their time attacking the two main candidates and bringing more disorder into the debates, and we all know Trump will cause enough of this on his own.
The two third party candidates voters want to see included in the debates would do nothing but further degrade the quality of the debates. They would also take away valuable time from Clinton and Trump.
The Los Angeles Times reported recently that 1 in 5 voters are still undecided, more than twice as many as in past election seasons. Debates are intended to help voters decide on a candidate. We should give undecided voters the best chance to do that by ensuring Clinton and Trump the most time possible to speak and lay out their separate plans for our nation’s future.
We do not need to make the debates a mockery any more than they are already becoming after the republican primary.
Ryan Thaxton is a 20-year-old mass communication sophomore from Monroe, Louisiana.