Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:18 PM Aug 2015

It is not about the official debates. It's about barring Democrats from participating in debates.

The DNC invoked a punitive exclusionary rule that mandates that ALL democratic candidates participate ONLY in the 6 DNC sanctioned debates or be barred from the DNC sanctioned debates.

This is unfucking democratic. And a rule that originated with the Republican Party.

Any of our candidates should be allowed to debate each other and any member of the Republican party any where at any time with no sanction from the DNC.

There should be an expanded debate schedule without penalty. If Ms Clinton doesn't want show up, fine. Personally, I'd like to see the other 4 agree to break the rules, schedule their own series of debates and boycott the official 6 leaving Clinton on the podium alone. In that scenario, the networks would drop the official debate schedule like a rock and pick up on the alternative debate schedule.

I'd like to hear from Ms. Clinton whether or not she agrees with the exclusivity rule.
She's been asked and has not answered. Does she or does she not believe that any Democratic candidate should be able to debate anywhere and at any forum without consequence. I.e., being barred from the 6 DNC debates.

Her campaign has been asked. The answer to date?

……

39 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It is not about the official debates. It's about barring Democrats from participating in debates. (Original Post) Luminous Animal Aug 2015 OP
who is going to tune into a debate that does not include HRC? KMOD Aug 2015 #1
Lots of people FBaggins Aug 2015 #4
I don't see how that would make a difference. KMOD Aug 2015 #7
Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2015 #17
The country is so divided, I would not be surprised that voters don't KMOD Aug 2015 #22
Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2015 #24
I do not watch R debates because hell wil freeze over before i vote R. jwirr Aug 2015 #37
I would. In a freakin' heartbeat. cherokeeprogressive Aug 2015 #5
yes, but you are not the average voter. KMOD Aug 2015 #14
I would listen to a debate that does not include HRC. JDPriestly Aug 2015 #6
Who is going to tune into a debate that only includes HRC? Luminous Animal Aug 2015 #8
Maybe Joe Biden will step in and debate her if that happens. KMOD Aug 2015 #10
It is not the debate schedule we are talking about here. The DNC for jwirr Aug 2015 #38
There were 26 debates in 2008. She did not participate in many of them. Plenty of people Luminous Animal Aug 2015 #9
I would.... daleanime Aug 2015 #20
Why does it matter how many tune in? Live and Learn Aug 2015 #31
I completely agree. It is undemocratic. AtomicKitten Aug 2015 #2
I would like to hear Bernie change his mind on going by the rules of the DNC Thinkingabout Aug 2015 #3
"If Secretary Clinton wants more debates, we'll get them" slipslidingaway Aug 2015 #12
So, Bernie is wanting to go against the rules, interesting. Thinkingabout Aug 2015 #30
Bernie did say, a while ago, that there should be more etc. elleng Aug 2015 #13
Sanders has never said he won't participate in any debate that does not include all of the candidats Luminous Animal Aug 2015 #27
I sense recent repositioning from Sanders, less assertive than O'Malley. elleng Aug 2015 #28
O'Malley is very vocal and it looks like his campaign might sue on grounds that it is Luminous Animal Aug 2015 #15
I'm waiting to see how the O'Malley campaign deals with this. elleng Aug 2015 #21
I am sure you would. That would give plenty of fodder to the anti-Bernie crowd on here. Live and Learn Aug 2015 #32
Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2015 #11
Nope Keep. The more the better! Luminous Animal Aug 2015 #16
That does sound undemocratic of them and it sounds like a violation of the First Amendment Uncle Joe Aug 2015 #18
Not 'state action,' so wouldn't violate First Amendment. elleng Aug 2015 #23
Well if not violation in the letter of the law definitely in the spirit. Uncle Joe Aug 2015 #25
The Democrats are behaving in an un-democratic way, no doubt. elleng Aug 2015 #26
ummm...maybe it is the company that they have been keeping.... glinda Aug 2015 #29
If the boys feel that way, they should go it alone. Problem solved. leftofcool Aug 2015 #34
K&R.... daleanime Aug 2015 #19
Let the guys break the rules and go it alone. Non-problem solved leftofcool Aug 2015 #33
This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Aug 2015 #35
Is she ducking non-DNC mandated debates? If so, why? Tierra_y_Libertad Aug 2015 #36
Since we have the exclusionary clause - no one else has planned a debate. jwirr Aug 2015 #39
 

KMOD

(7,906 posts)
1. who is going to tune into a debate that does not include HRC?
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:21 PM
Aug 2015

If the other candidates want exposure, she needs to be on that stage as well.

But if they want to break the rules and schedule their own, they should go right ahead.

FBaggins

(26,696 posts)
4. Lots of people
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:28 PM
Aug 2015

They might not be interested if the frontrunner isn't invited... but they would probably watch is she is invited and chooses not to come.

 

KMOD

(7,906 posts)
7. I don't see how that would make a difference.
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:30 PM
Aug 2015

Most voters don't even watch debates. Of the ones that do, they watch one or two.

Response to KMOD (Reply #7)

 

KMOD

(7,906 posts)
22. The country is so divided, I would not be surprised that voters don't
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:49 PM
Aug 2015

tune into GE debates. Most will just vote their party. I will still think that people would watch a couple of them though.

I'd be interested, since you saw a graphic, if you could tell me how many primary debates voters watch. Are they watching 20? Or are they watching 2?

Response to KMOD (Reply #22)

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
37. I do not watch R debates because hell wil freeze over before i vote R.
Fri Aug 21, 2015, 07:02 PM
Aug 2015

But I and my family have always watched the debates regardless of how many Plus today we have internet - snips from debates are watched even if the whole thing is not.

 

KMOD

(7,906 posts)
14. yes, but you are not the average voter.
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:38 PM
Aug 2015

You are a political junkie. Plus you have already decided on your choice.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
8. Who is going to tune into a debate that only includes HRC?
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:31 PM
Aug 2015

If the other four candidates break the undemocratic rules, she's up there by her self. The networks would drop coverage like a rock. Because no tension. No sound bite. Nothing for talking heads to talk about.

Really. You honestly believe that network news would continue to provide national coverage of a national Democratic debate with only one candidate.

Nope. They would rush to the unofficial debates.

 

KMOD

(7,906 posts)
10. Maybe Joe Biden will step in and debate her if that happens.
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:34 PM
Aug 2015


Seriously, I don't see this scenario playing out. The debate schedule is fine in my mind. Average voters won't watch many anyway, so hopefully more voters will tune into the ones we are having.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
38. It is not the debate schedule we are talking about here. The DNC for
Fri Aug 21, 2015, 07:24 PM
Aug 2015

the first time in history included an exclusionary clause they adopted from the Rs for use in their own rules.

In the past anyone who wanted to could host a debate. I remember watching many debates hosted by the League of Women Voters. Many television networks were hosts. That is no longer allowed.

Today the only debates that the candidates can take part in are the ones that the DNC hosts. If they appear in any other debates they can be kept out of the DNC ones.

I for one do not like any kind of exclusionary clause. It limits free speech and allows the DNC to have full control of the situation. That makes it undemocratic both in the Democratic party sense and our Constitutional sense.

We used to call ourselves the Big Tent Party. The Inclusive Party. Not so much anymore.

It is not about how many voters tune in - it is about how many opportunities they have to tune in. The DNC can host 6 debates if they want that is fine but they should not be able to limit the right of others to host any debate they would like to hold. And they definitely should not be able to punish any candidate that wants to take part in an outside debate.

That is what we are talking about here.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
9. There were 26 debates in 2008. She did not participate in many of them. Plenty of people
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:34 PM
Aug 2015

tuned into listening to any candidate that was available. And not all were nationally televised.

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
31. Why does it matter how many tune in?
Fri Aug 21, 2015, 12:50 AM
Aug 2015

If a venue is going to offer it, why not give it a chance? Bernie has been able to draw many to his campaign venues, why not to a debate? And O'Malley and Chafee could use more exposure themselves. I would certainly like to hear more from all of them.

Actually, I think Hillary is the one most people are least interested in hearing since we already know so much about her views.

 

AtomicKitten

(46,585 posts)
2. I completely agree. It is undemocratic.
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:25 PM
Aug 2015

All the other candidates are anxious to debate; she is not (by virtue of her silence on the issue).

One of these things is not like the other.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
3. I would like to hear Bernie change his mind on going by the rules of the DNC
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:27 PM
Aug 2015

As far as debates and debates, after a few they will be ignored. Allow the GOP to continue to run their clown car campaign, the DNC does not have to work 16 people in to some sort of debate.

On Hillary's campaign, I have not heard whining or cheering about not enough debates or too many. In fact I have not heard Bernie complaining about there isn't enough debates or there are too many.

slipslidingaway

(21,210 posts)
12. "If Secretary Clinton wants more debates, we'll get them"
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:36 PM
Aug 2015

From an August 7th email

"Did you watch last night’s Republican presidential debate, Deborah?

If you are one of the wealthiest people in this country, then you had ten candidates talking about your needs for two hours.

But in the entire time I watched, I saw very little discussion about the issues important to most American families. There was no talk about climate change and clean energy, raising wages and providing healthcare for all Americans, criminal justice reform and the undermining of the Voting Rights Act, and nothing at all about the crushing burden of student debt.

And when they did talk about campaign finance reform and the billionaire class buying candidates and elections, it was the butt of a Donald Trump joke.

We need to be discussing issues facing working families at a debate hosted by trade unions. We need to discussing climate change and environmental issues at a forum hosted by the environmental community. We need to be discussing civil rights issues and racial injustice at a forum sponsored by civil rights groups. We need to be discussing gay rights at a forum hosted by the LGBT community. In other words, more discussion, more debate is good for the Democratic Party and good for the American people.

I know, and you know, that the best chance for this country is to discuss the issues that matter. Republicans aren’t going to do it, so we need more Democratic debates — more than the four scheduled by the Democratic National Committee before the Iowa Caucuses.

And I know that if Secretary Clinton wants more debates, we’ll get them.

Sign my petition and tell Secretary Clinton to encourage the Democratic National Committee to schedule more debates before the Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire primary in February and to allow important constituencies within the Democratic Party to host their own debates.

Here’s what I did hear a lot about last night: I heard a group of ten Republicans on stage longing for a return to the days of George W. Bush. The return to more war and tax breaks for the rich, and less jobs and health insurance for most American families.

Do they remember the two wars George Bush put on the credit card?

I do. Some of us voted no.

Do they remember the 800,000 jobs a month we were hemorrhaging when Bush left office?

I do. Some of us voted against the policies that led us there.

The American people deserve more debates — debates about how we got to where we are today, and how we move this country forward. And if all the candidates running for the Democratic nomination, especially Secretary Clinton, call for more, then we’ll get them.

Add your name and encourage Secretary Clinton to call on the Democratic National Committee to schedule more debates before Iowa and New Hampshire, and let’s start right away.

We are at a moment of truth. We need to face up to the reality of where we are as a nation, and the best ways to move forward.

Thank you for standing with me."

Bernie Sanders




elleng

(130,126 posts)
13. Bernie did say, a while ago, that there should be more etc.
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:37 PM
Aug 2015

and then appears to have changed his mind about agreeing with Governor O'Malley's position.

'Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley's campaign has reportedly contacted Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders about trying to put together more debates beyond the six organized by the Democratic National Committee.

Time magazine is reporting that O'Malley's campaign manager, Dave Hamrick, called Jeff Weaver, Sanders' campaign manager, and had a conversation about whether or not the DNC has the authority to make decisions on the number of debates

When the DNC announced that it was scheduling six debates between the Democratic contenders, O'Malley and Sanders both complained about having so few.

"Over here on our side there's no debate," the Maryland Democrat said Tuesday on New Hampshire radio.

"Right now, the DNC in a very strange way, unprecedented, never before, is telling the people of New Hampshire that the Democratic Party can only afford one debate that's going to happen at the height of Christmas shopping season, which adds insult to the injury," he added.

The Democrats held more than a dozen debates in 2008 before the Iowa caucuses.

The first debate is scheduled for Oct. 13, more than two months after the Republicans held their first primary debate.

Sanders even created an online petition in an effort to increase the number of debates and to have them begin earlier than planned.

However, Sanders says that he won't participate in any debates that don't include all of the candidates.'

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Bernie-Sanders-Martin-OMalley-Democratic-Party/2015/08/19/id/670880/

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
27. Sanders has never said he won't participate in any debate that does not include all of the candidats
Fri Aug 21, 2015, 12:04 AM
Aug 2015

In fact, Sanders has said he wants to debate Republicans as well as Democrats.

Newsmax. Really?

Sanders has said he will debate any candidate at any time from any party. And I bet, the Sanders and O'Malley campaign are still figuring out how to thwart the DNC.

elleng

(130,126 posts)
28. I sense recent repositioning from Sanders, less assertive than O'Malley.
Fri Aug 21, 2015, 12:20 AM
Aug 2015

'But the Vermont Senator, who is attracting large crowds at campaign rallies—including 28,000 at a recent event in Portland—is less eager than O’Malley to pursue a path that would put him at odds with the Democratic Party. He is highly unlikely to participate in a debate that does not include Clinton, and his campaign spokesman said Wednesday that the debates must include all candidates.

Tad Devine, a top advisor to Sanders, called the “debate debate” a “distraction.”

“I don’t think we’re looking to be part of some splinter group or something like that,” said Devine. “Our view is we want to work with the Party and not against it.”'

http://time.com/4001669/martin-omalley-bernie-sanders-debates/

Still feeling their ways, I suspect, with different interests.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
15. O'Malley is very vocal and it looks like his campaign might sue on grounds that it is
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:39 PM
Aug 2015

totally and wholly un-Constitutional. And yes, the Sanders campaign have protested the exclusivity rule. Bernie has stated flat out that he want to debate Republicans now, during primary season but the DNC exclusivity rule bars him from doing so.

elleng

(130,126 posts)
21. I'm waiting to see how the O'Malley campaign deals with this.
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:49 PM
Aug 2015

I was fairly confident, when it appeared that Bernie was with him, that they would act, maybe on separate 'debates,' but not so sure now. O'Malley badly needs to appear in debates, and won't likely jeopardize that. Without more, I'm thinking he may wait til the October debate to decide how to act.

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
32. I am sure you would. That would give plenty of fodder to the anti-Bernie crowd on here.
Fri Aug 21, 2015, 12:55 AM
Aug 2015

Bernie isn't that stupid though.

Response to Luminous Animal (Original post)

Uncle Joe

(58,111 posts)
18. That does sound undemocratic of them and it sounds like a violation of the First Amendment
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:44 PM
Aug 2015


Thanks for the thread, Luminous Animal.

Uncle Joe

(58,111 posts)
25. Well if not violation in the letter of the law definitely in the spirit.
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 11:53 PM
Aug 2015

Particularly as the Democratic Party is so intricately entwined with the government, the same would hold true for the Republicans.

leftofcool

(19,460 posts)
33. Let the guys break the rules and go it alone. Non-problem solved
Fri Aug 21, 2015, 01:24 AM
Aug 2015

Let me break this to you gently. Hillary is a Democrat and will abide by whatever rules are set down by the Party.

Response to Luminous Animal (Original post)

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
39. Since we have the exclusionary clause - no one else has planned a debate.
Fri Aug 21, 2015, 07:32 PM
Aug 2015

That is also why none of the other candidates have been in any debates. The only allowable debates are the DNC ones. The candidates can be eliminated from the DNC ones if they take part in any other debate.

Both Bernie and O'Malley have asked to end the exclusionary clause. As far as I know Hillary has not.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»It is not about the offic...