Does Hillary want fewer debates than usual?

[Bloofer]

Is the number of debates Hillary want to participate in atypical for a Democratic primary?
Is it 3? 4? 5?
How many debates were there last time? And the time before?

[left-of-center2012]

1. What do the voters want?

Why ask what Hillary wants?

[Luminous Animal]

11. Yep. State level Democratic orbs want more debates. The Feds rules disallow them

by levying a penalty to those candidates who participate in them.

[left-of-center2012]

22. The Feds rules disallow them ????

Isn't party rules, not "fed" rules?

[Luminous Animal]

23. Democratic NATIONAL committee. You are picking at a nit.

The DNC instituted and intends to enforce clearly undemocratic rules. Give it a try. Give me your best shot as to why the exclusionary rule is pro-democratic.

[left-of-center2012]

26. I read "Feds" as the government

Not the DNC

[elleng]

27. You were right, and not at all picking at a nit,

as suggested. Guess someone hadn't had dinner, or a nap. :?:
Welcome.

[Aerows]

29. The DNC has really upset me with this

O'Malley is going to shine in the debate, and Sanders will knock the socks off of people. We all know that Hillary is horrible in debates, and frankly, she looks rather ill from the pictures we have gotten from events.

I'm actually rather concerned for her, and not in a "concern troll" sort of way. She looks like the campaign it taking a toll on her physically.

[elleng]

30. I'm sure the campaign is taking a toll on her

(and on all of them, but her expectations have been so high for so long, imo, she may be most at risk, emotionally.)

I do expect that MO'M will shine, and I read something today about Sanders' technique, was looking and couldn't find it, among other points: Not difficult to 'counter' him as he usually goes back to his well-rehearsed talking points, so challengers can study them and develop their replies/challenges thereby.

DNC has pissed me off, and kind of looking forward to their response after Oct. 13.

[Aerows]

31. That makes two of us.

This whole situation fabricated by the DNC is ludicrous.

The "Elite" are desperate for another Bush or another Clinton. Which makes you wonder why.

I want neither a Bush, nor a Clinton, nor anyone associated with either.

I think most voters, left, right and center, agree with me.

[left-of-center2012]

43. I think (no, honest - sometimes I do)

I think Bernie would get a lot of Republican votes.
Mainstream, middle of the road, right of center -- who are disgusted with the right wing nut jobs.

[left-of-center2012]

42. I'm a Sanders guy

But I really like O'Malley a lot too.
That's be an easy vote for me if Bernie doesn't get the nomination.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

32. ^^RIGHT ON!^^

[daleanime]

2. She says that she's open to more....

the question is, do you believe her? My problem is I seem to respect Hillary more then she respects herself, I think if she wanted more debates she would get more debates.

[Scootaloo]

33. She can say she wants more, since she knows that DWS isn't going to schedule more.

I don't see Clinton actually joining Sanders and O'Malley, and pressing for more debates, or an end ot the exclusivity. So. We have to conclude that what she says isn't actually what she wants.

[Motown_Johnny]

3. In '08 Hillary wanted a 22nd one, but didn't get it.

Does that put things into focus?

[jfern]

8. There were 26 in 2008

[MADem]

34. There were eight candidates, too.

Technically, most of those debates were in 2007--17 of them.

By January 2008, most of the candidates had dropped out.

The last six debates, which all took place in 2008, were between Obama and Clinton -- no one else.

[jfern]

35. The top candidates got the most time in the debates

So it's not really relevant that there are somewhat fewer candidates now.

[MADem]

36. I didn't watch all of them in 2007. I did watch the 2008 ones.

I'm sure they considered viewership in their determination. I follow politics fairly closely, and that was too many debates, IMO, especially given the shitty format they have for these things. Too much "If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?" and "Say something nice about the person to your left..." and not enough "What to do about Israel?" "Do you have a plan to repair the infrastructure?" "Getting off oil and natural gas and coal and getting onto renewables--what's your plan?" ... stuff like that.

I hate the cringe-worthy shit.

[jfern]

37. Obviously you don't like having candidates talk about the issues

You would rather have your candidate avoid taking a position on important issues.

[MADem]

38. Obviously you didn't read my post. nt

[kenfrequed]

44. Well...

In 2008 we had the crappy CNN debate hosted by Wolf Blitzer where CNN literally decided which candidates deserved the most time, the most questions, and the most rational questions.

And, despite hating the way the DNC is handling the debates, in some minor way this would be one of the few points where I would say that free for all debate hosting might result in this kind of nonsense.

But to contradict that concern the AFL/CIO was host to one of the debates that was acutally a hell of lot more egalitarian in the amount of time they gave to each candidate and the demand that all candidates would be given the same question to answer.

Surely a better balance could have been reached where any outlet would have to give all candidates the same questions and the same time with which to handle those questions. If you want to have a candidate answer some absurd personality question or personal history then schedule a proper interview or ask the question like a journalist. If you feel foolish asking about it in an interview setting then perhaps it is a stupid question that shouldn't be asked.

[MADem]

45. There's usually very little "debate."

No compare/contrast, no back/forth at these things. At best, there's sometimes some "gotcha."

It's interesting to see how the candidates handle themselves, but after awhile you can figure out, say, that Trump is a blowhard, Jeb! is unprepared, Walker is soporific, e.g. I can't imagine anyone sitting through 20 debates with those idiots.

The way debates are done in America, it's more like a "Think on your feet" game with a lot of topics--like Jeopardy! except they don't have to answer in the form of a question.

[kenfrequed]

47. I don't watch republican debates

I mostly wait for the Daily show or the You of Tube to put out videos mocking these nuts.

Without a drinking game a republican debate would result in long term psychiatric damage. With a drinking game it would cause intense neurological damage through alcohol poisoning. A lose-lose scenario.

I eagerly await the Democratic debates and am grateful that Blitzer isn't going to be the moderator. The last few he has done he ate up more time than the candidates.

[MADem]

48. I do--you never know what they might say that could be useful.

If they had twenty of 'em, though, I wouldn't be that dedicated. I'd go for the highlight reel, too.

It's been years since I've seen a moderator who hasn't gotten on my nerves--Bitzer is at the top of the list. I really get annoyed when the question is longer than the time allotted for a response.

[sabrina 1]

4. The people want more debates, what the candidates want SHOULD be irrelevant.

[NanceGreggs]

5. Well, according to DU ...

... Hillary wants as few debates as possible, because she's "terrified" of Bernie, who is going to "mop the floor" with her.

Yes, that's right. The woman who has lived in a fishbowl for decades, having to think on her feet and respond to "gotcha" questions from reporters and pundits as the First Lady of Arkansas, a Senator from NY, and the Secretary of State, is "terrified" of Bernie.

She's probably worried that there will be questions about foreign policy - an area she only a passing familiarity with - while the Senator from Vermont will dazzle the audience with his vast experience in dealing with foreign affairs.

Perhaps HRC would feel she was on surer footing if only she knew in advance what BS was going to say in response to every question asked. She undoubtedly lives in fear of being blind-sided by BS, should he suddenly decide to do something other than rattle-off the same laundry list of complaints he's been spouting for forty years. If he did so, it would be a historic first in his lengthy career - but you never know. There's always the outside chance that he could say something different for once in his life.

Yes, HRC is "terrified" of Bernie - as is (according to DU) the media, the pundits, the bankers, the corporations, the voters who support anyone but him, and especially the congressmen/women who won't endorse Bernie - because they're all "terrified!!!"

I see the excuses for Bernie's lackluster performance in the debates are already being proffered in advance of any debates taking place: The debates are rigged in HRC's favour, all questions to Hillary will be "softballs", audiences will be packed with HRC supporters so that she gets more applause than he does, they'll find a way to give Hillary more response time than is allotted to BS, etc.

Does Hillary want more debates, fewer debates, or does she think the current number of scheduled debates is just fine as it is? Why bother asking the question on DU - when you already know what the answer is?

If she asked for more debates and more were scheduled, there would be endless posts about how the game is rigged and anything HRC wants, she gets.

If she stated she wanted fewer debates, we'd be back to the "she's terrified to face Bernie" posts.

And if she says that the current number of debates scheduled is fine with her, we'd hear about how everything has already been done according to her wishes.

In short, the "number of debates" question need not be asked here - for the thousandth time - because the number will never be the "correct" number, and it will always be Hillary's fault.





And if she

[Luminous Animal]

10. Nope. All she has to say is that she disagrees with the exclusionary rule. Simple.

Then it will be her choice to show up or not.

It is not rigged because of the maximum of 6 national debates. It is rigged because of the penalties placed on Democrats who wish to participate in debates outside of the DNC sanctioned debates.

But you know this.

[NanceGreggs]

12. What I know - according to DU ...

... is that everything is rigged in HRC's favour, and the entire world is conspiring against Bernie.

[HerbChestnut]

14. Well, I don't know about the conspiring against Bernie part...

But the rigging in Clinton's favor is pretty apparent.

[Luminous Animal]

15. Do you agree with the exclusionary rule? FYI, I refuse to accept your broad swath

characterization… there are many O'Malley and Sanders supporters who have asked Hillary supporters the same question in my post.

*Crickets*

So, please post here your best support of the exclusionary rule.

[cherokeeprogressive]

20. Could you possibly be more obtuse?

Don't bother answering... it was a completely rhetorical question.

[MADem]

39. And even if Bernie says something that goes against the mythology, he didn't really say it.

Or he said it, but it's not what he meant.

Or something.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/10/05/bernie_sanders_on_marriage_equality_he_s_no_longtime_champion.html

[Live and Learn]

40. 'She's probably worried that there will be questions about foreign policy'

You mean, like her vote for the Iraq war? Hell, if I were her, I would be worried about that too. In fact, one couldn't have a current worse foreign policy, claim to fame, if you asked me.

The rest of your message was pretty indecipherable to me, so I can't really speak to it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. Why bother with risky debates when she thinks she can win the nomination with money?

Nice, slick, well edited, expensive commercials paid for by friendly corporate money full of empty platitudes pose little risk and are far safer.

[jfern]

7. There were 26 debates in 2008

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_debates,_2008

[Luminous Animal]

9. There were 26 Democratic debates during the 2008 campaign.

I think 6 national ones and 20 independent regional ones organized by state Democratic committees, media and/or local issue oriented organizations.

The DNC no longer allows for independent regional debates and have re-written the rules saying that if any candidate participates in a debate outside the 6 national ones, they will be barred from participating in the national debates.

Six is the number and the number shall be six.

[oasis]

13. Hill says she's okay with six.

I don't see how much more could be accomplished by extending that number. There is only a handful of candidates.

[HerbChestnut]

16. There weren't many more late in 2007

And it was pretty clear who the front runners were long before that. Having only 6 debates (4 before the first couple of primaries/caucuses) is detrimental to the lesser known candidates, who up to this point have gotten little to no media attention. Just look at the polls. Besides Clinton and Biden, Bernie is the only candidate with better than 50% name recognition, and he's been stuck around 60-70% for a month. The others are somewhere in the 20s or below. Do you really think 4 debates, where the questions will undoubtedly be asked mostly to the front runners, are enough for each candidate to make their case?

[oasis]

18. It's not like Webb or Chaffee are suddenly going to become household

names if two or three more debates are added. Meanwhile, neither has done much to distinguish himself.

[HerbChestnut]

21. I don't think so either

But what does that say about the process? Why are those guys even running?

[MADem]

49. They are running for cabinet posts. nt

[Live and Learn]

41. Well, they should be. The fact that they aren't is a national and Democratic shame. nt

[Luminous Animal]

17. So, rank and file New Hampshire Democrats don't deserve a voice? They want a local

debate. New Hampshire Democrats want to host a debate. According to the 2015 DNC rules, if any of our candidates show up for that debate, they will be banned from participating in the national debates.

Does this sound democratic to you?


http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/09/19/new-hampshire-democrats-want-more-debates-for-presidential-contenders/

New Hampshire Democrats Want More Debates for Presidential Contenders

MANCHESTER, N.H.—New Hampshire Democrats meeting for their state convention on Saturday drowned out the Democratic Party’s national chairwoman with cries for more debates among the presidential contenders.

“More debates! More debates!” the crowd chanted as Debbie Wasserman Schultz, head of the Democratic National Committee, spoke to the New Hampshire Democratic Party state convention.

Ms. Wasserman Schultz is under fire for limiting the presidential candidates to six debates, with four of those coming before voting begins in the Iowa caucus on Feb. 1. Under DNC rules, candidates who participate in unsanctioned debates are not eligible for the official debates.

The push for more debates is being led by former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, who looks to the debates as a chance to break through in a race in which he has failed to gain traction. This month, two DNC vice chairs also called for debates to be added to the schedule and said the current plan was a mistake.

[oasis]

19. Debbie's in a tough spot.

Put yourself in her shoes. How would it look for the DNC chair to change the existing rules for Democratic primary debates when half of the candidates demanding a change could be considered by the Party as a pair of Johnny Come Latelys.

Mind you, l have no problem with either running on the Dem ticket and as far a Bernie's surge in national popularity is concerned, I will echo what Hillary said today "it's good for the Democratic Party."

[mythology]

24. If we're using that logic, why do we let Iowa and New Hampshire go first every time?

Don't you think voters in other states might like to go first? What's small d democratic about the same 2 states going first and having a significant number of candidates dropping out based on those results?

Likewise, wouldn't other states also have a claim to a debate if one is in New Hampshire? 50 or whatever the number is including Guam and Puerto Rico etc would be way too many debates.

[Luminous Animal]

25. New Hampshire is not the only state that wants to host a debate. Idaho Dems

want one,too. What? are they only small potatoes?

Every single Dem org in this United States should have an opportunity to call a debate. EVERY SINGLE ONE. The candidate's campaigns can work out how the debates can fit into their schedule.

The DNC shut down any opportunity to allow state orgs from hosting a debate.

[olddots]

28. why do we as Democrats allow there to be a DNC

if it's rules are un Democratic ?

[moobu2]

46. If Hillary comes in tired and off in the first debate and Bernie wins it

his supporters, the very ones on here talking about how unfair and undemocratic having so few is will be screaming to halt all the debates. that 1 was plenty.