Apple Highlights iOS and tvOS Apps for Watching U.S. Presidential Debate

The candidate I'm voting for won't be present, so I see no point in watching.

#LetGaryDebate

Just to respond to anyone who wants to yell at me about voting third party in advance:

#1 - It is possible for third party candidates to win, as long as they run between the major parties. Ross Perot handed the 1992 election to Bill Clinton because he was running on the right. He stole votes exclusively from Bush Senior. Ralph Nader similarly handed the 2000 election to Bush Junior because he was running on the left, exclusively stealing votes from Al Gore.

Gary Johnson is running down the middle, stealing votes equally from both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. He easily leads with independent voters (AKA, swing voters, the people who decide elections), voters under the age of 30, and veterans.

If you want to vote for him, but are afraid you'd be handing the election to <insert name of candidate you hate most>, go to http://balancedrebellion.com/ - They'll match you up with someone who hates <your lesser of two evils> from the same state you live in. Both of you then pledge to vote for the candidate you most like, knowing that you haven't handed the election to anyone, because you nullified a vote for that person.

#2 - Gary Johnson doesn't have to sweep the map. If he wins a single state, it becomes difficult for either of the other candidate to reach 270 electoral votes. In that case, Congress determines who wins the election. Republicans control both houses by a small majority, but many have already said they back Johnson, not Trump. Thus the anti-Trump Republicans can cooperate with Democrats (who unanimously despise Trump) to hand the presidency to Johnson.

#3 - The presidential debates are controlled by a board of 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats. They set arbitrary rules for what it takes to be in the debates. In 1992, they said you only needed to have 5% support in national polls to be in the debate. Ross Perot had 6% so qualified. By the time of the election, he won with 19%, largely because the extra exposure from the debates gave him a huge boost in those final 2 months.

This year, Johnson has 13% support before the debates. So the threshold was arbitrarily moved up to 15% to exclude him. Had he been in the debates and received a boost similar to Perot's, it's reasonable to think his support would have gone to between 26% and 40%, potentially giving him the plurality.

No thanks. Apple has proven its bias against other candidates in the past. I'd rather find a source ran by grown-ups that may or may not like all candidates but won't actively run a bias.

All the outlets are literally showing the exact same debate, how is bias possible?

And Fox News is listed there, your point is invalid

Would love to see a 3 person debate, I think it would make things really interesting.

#letgarydebate

Thanks, but no thanks. These two for me are Trump: Nope. Hillary:Noper

I'm going to find a dumpster, light it on fire, and watch.

It'll be more entertaining and more informative than what's going to be on TV tonight.

If you believe in a 2 party system.... this election is like choosing between a colonoscopy or a root canal.

#LetGaryDebate

The candidate I'm voting for won't be present, so I see no point in watching.

#LetGaryDebate

Could be fun if you invite friends over for a drinking game.

All the outlets are literally showing the exact same debate, how is bias possible?

And Fox News is listed there, your point is invalid

Lmao that's what I was thinking. One of the reasons I hate politics. Left wing this. Bias that. Dumpster fire that.

They aren't worth wasting your time watching. There are no real candidates there, and it's all scripted and controlled anyway. What a joke.
[doublepost=1474916959][/doublepost]

As much as I love your rhetoric, Gary Johnson just hasn't garnered enough popularity nationwide to appeal to the masses. I wish that wasn't the case but it is wishful thinking at this point. Better for us to realize our collective errors and focus on the next election.

Actually, go check out Congressional Dish podcast... the episode on Electoral College. If Johnson won even a couple of tiny state, it would throw the election to a decision in Congress. That would create an interesting situation, for sure.

BTW, we should probably focus more on Congress, and be sure to check out that podcast anyway, as it's packed with info on what Congress is up to (the good, but mostly the bad and ugly).

The candidate I'm voting for won't be present, so I see no point in watching.

#LetGaryDebate

Just to respond to anyone who wants to yell at me about voting third party in advance:

#1 - It is possible for third party candidates to win, as long as they run between the major parties. Ross Perot handed the 1992 election to Bill Clinton because he was running on the right. He stole votes exclusively from Bush Senior. Ralph Nader similarly handed the 2000 election to Bush Junior because he was running on the left, exclusively stealing votes from Al Gore.

Gary Johnson is running down the middle, stealing votes equally from both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. He easily leads with independent voters (AKA, swing voters, the people who decide elections), voters under the age of 30, and veterans.

If you want to vote for him, but are afraid you'd be handing the election to <insert name of candidate you hate most>, go to http://balancedrebellion.com/ - They'll match you up with someone who hates <your lesser of two evils> from the same state you live in. Both of you then pledge to vote for the candidate you most like, knowing that you haven't handed the election to anyone, because you nullified a vote for that person.

#2 - Gary Johnson doesn't have to sweep the map. If he wins a single state, it becomes difficult for either of the other candidate to reach 270 electoral votes. In that case, Congress determines who wins the election. Republicans control both houses by a small majority, but many have already said they back Johnson, not Trump. Thus the anti-Trump Republicans can cooperate with Democrats (who unanimously despise Trump) to hand the presidency to Johnson.

#3 - The presidential debates are controlled by a board of 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats. They set arbitrary rules for what it takes to be in the debates. In 1992, they said you only needed to have 5% support in national polls to be in the debate. Ross Perot had 6% so qualified. By the time of the election, he won with 19%, largely because the extra exposure from the debates gave him a huge boost in those final 2 months.

This year, Johnson has 13% support before the debates. So the threshold was arbitrarily moved up to 15% to exclude him. Had he been in the debates and received a boost similar to Perot's, it's reasonable to think his support would have gone to between 26% and 40%, potentially giving him the plurality.

As much as I love your rhetoric, Gary Johnson just hasn't garnered enough popularity nationwide to appeal to the masses. I wish that wasn't the case but it is wishful thinking at this point. Better for us to realize our collective errors and focus on the next election.