decisions
Member
The rhetoric against third party candidates is unreasonably negative, you have the New York Times saying that he was unable to "name any foreign leader" - when that was clearly not the question he was asked.
Johnson didn't blank on naming a foreign leader, he blanked on naming one that he would want to be associated with and likened to, by saying that he "respected" them.
It is insignificant that he couldn't easily do that? No. Is the holier than thou, "he should drop out", overly insulting response unwarranted? Yes.
The media didn't care when he was well spoken on the second CNN Town Hall with Anderson Cooper, but they're trying to run him into the ground over human error, and it's not really right the way they exaggerate things, likely because he's third party.
Then again, if there was fairness among the candidates, him and Stein would've been on the debate stage.
Johnson didn't blank on naming a foreign leader, he blanked on naming one that he would want to be associated with and likened to, by saying that he "respected" them.
It is insignificant that he couldn't easily do that? No. Is the holier than thou, "he should drop out", overly insulting response unwarranted? Yes.
The media didn't care when he was well spoken on the second CNN Town Hall with Anderson Cooper, but they're trying to run him into the ground over human error, and it's not really right the way they exaggerate things, likely because he's third party.
Then again, if there was fairness among the candidates, him and Stein would've been on the debate stage.