So, if the Democratic candidates participate in this new debate

[CoffeeCat]

that is happening right before the NH primary, will there be repercussions?

DWS has stated repeatedly, that if candidates appear in debates that are unsanctioned by the DNC, that those candidates will be barred from appearing in future debates.

DWS has repeatedly stated that the Democrats will have six debates. She's been very firm.

"We're going to have six debates. Period." --Debbie Wasserman Schultz
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/democratic-primary-debates-six-debbie-wasserman-schultz-2016-213489

So, what will she do? Will she flip flop on her month's long insistence that six debates is enough. She gave plenty of reasons for keeping it at six, which she laid out in multiple interviews.

Or, will she not sanction this debate?

Kind of a pickle.

[NowSam]

1. Villains

They keep trying to outsmart the hero. But Bernie has them outclassed and that is why it keeps backfiring.

[napi21]

2. So what's DWS going to do? Hold a debate without any candidates?

I don't see how there could be any repercussions. I can't think of anything she could do because it's ALL THREE Candidates! I think she believed Sanders would opt for unauthorized debates & she'd be able to eliminate him from the stage. Looks like another of her "brilliant" ideas bombed.

[TheBlackAdder]

13. It's a ploy to cancel the two remaining ones. Then, no mandatory debates before South Carolina!

.


It's funny how the people supposedly agreeing to DNC rules now want to all of a sudden betray their word.


If HRC, MOM and SBS want sanctioned debates, what's the DNC's problem?


Actually, since the DNC is rules as an authoritarian organization, this all comes down to DWS.


.

[napi21]

20. I don't see a problem with that. Some newspaper or network I'm sure would gladly sponsor

one or more! Let DWS cry in her own beer.

MAYBE, if we're lucky, she won't win her OWN reelection. I know if I were in her district, I wouldn't vote for her.

[TheBlackAdder]

24. That's a fantasy thought. No obligation for candidates to engage in debates. nt

[napi21]

27. I know the candidates don't HAVE to participate, but I THOUGHT they all wanted them.

At least that's what they all said. And why wouldn't they? It's free exposure of their ideas.

[TheBlackAdder]

28. NOW that ALL want SANCTIONED debates, after the last holdout is not doing well!

.



Again, it's funny how there is a sudden demand to request SANCTIONED debates by HRC.


She was a silent voice up until, today!


She kept quiet after months of complaints about a rigged DNC debate structure.



Gee, what changed her mind? Hmmm.



.

[napi21]

29. I suspect it's because she either heard or knew that was the reason Bernie wouldn't agree to the NH

debate. I suspect she knows it wouldn't look good for her if she ignored that point.

[NorthCarolina]

3. DWS and Hillary did this to themselves. If they want a debate then sanction it.

The world will immediately know that the party is actively working for the benefit of the establishment candidate, in opposition to voter sentiments, but that's the bed they made for themselves. Hoisted by their own petard.

[Renew Deal]

4. She can't do anything if all 3 show up.

That's always been the case.

[Luminous Animal]

5. Do you have a copy of the agreement that the campaigns signed?

Because, Wasserman-Shultz' language describing the exclusivity clause does not make that clear.

[Renew Deal]

9. I'm not talking about the agreement

I'm talking about practicality. She will not cancel the remaining debates.

[Luminous Animal]

10. She must think she has some power to "punish" participants. She has flat out

stated today that the DNC will NOT sanction a debate prior to the New Hampshire primary.

"We have no plans to sanction any further debates before the upcoming First in the Nation caucuses and primary, but will reconvene with our campaigns after those two contests to review our schedule," Wasserman Schultz said in a statement, referring to early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire. "Our three major candidates are already scheduled to appear on the same stage next week for the New Hampshire Democratic Party dinner on February 5th."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511076533

[AgingAmerican]

14. HILLARY SAYS SHE WILL PARTICIPATE IF THE DNC SANCTIONS IT

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/brian-fallon-sanders-holdout-unsanctioned-debate

[CoffeeCat]

16. But theoretically she could cancel the remaining debates

She has said in more than one interview, that if Democrats participate in unsanctioned debates, that they will be banned from further debates.

If I were Sanders, I would say that I would love to join the debate in NH, but only if it is sanctioned by the DNC--so he (and the other candidates) can participate in the remaining debates.

Sanders needs public assurances on this.

He knows what they're doing. I'm sure he's "got this."

[Cheese Sandwich]

8. It could void the agreement, giving HRC the power to dictate future debate schedule

It would give the Clinton campaign the power to force future debates on short notice at times when it helps them the most, since Clinton is the front-runner and also the favorite of the news corporations.

So it would leave Sanders in a vulnerable position in regards to future debate scheduling.

Which is of course the goal.

[Renew Deal]

11. You're saying that they would cancel the remaining debates?

I don't think so.

[Cheese Sandwich]

15. I'm saying it could void the agreement, giving the Hillary-DNC-MSNBC team the power to dictate

an ad hoc debate schedule on a rolling basis.

They could call future debates any time it would help Clinton or hurt Sanders.

[Renew Deal]

18. They tried that in 2008. Obama only agreed to 1 or 2 new debates

Candidates wouldn't be obligated to agree.

[Cheese Sandwich]

21. He wouldn't be legally obligated to agree but he would be politically obligated to appear.

If Clinton and Malley both show up for a last-minute debate somewhere down the road, and Sanders podium is empty, that would damage him politically. There would be glaring headlines everywhere and intense media pressure to participate in Clinton-dictated debates. As we see happening right now.

If all three candidates agree then the DNC should have no problem revising the agreement.

There should be some agreement and not a totally ad hoc schedule. The ad hoc scheduling would be a huge advantage to Clinton.

I think they should add another South Carolina debate.

[Ferd Berfel]

6. Bernie has said he won't participate in that debate

So what will DWS do when Bernie is the only one honoring her edict?

Rock-hard place......

[Cheese Sandwich]

7. Breaking the rules could void the agreement, giving HRC the power to dictate future debate schedule

The Hillary campaign and DNC are clearly coordinating.

This latest move to force an extra NH debate is trying to change the rules in the middle of the game, because they don't like where things are headed.

They want to be able to add new debates and appearances and any time when they feel it is most convenient, coordinating together for to schedule debates whenever it would help Clinton and hurt Sanders.

Debate schedule should be agreed to by all the candidates and the schedule should be known by everyone in advance. It shouldn't be scheduled on a rolling basis as it moves along whenever it helps Clinton.

[restorefreedom]

25. yup. live by te sword, die by the sword.

dws clung to that schedule when it benefitted clinton. now that she is tanking, they are stuck with it.

[AgingAmerican]

12. Hillary has said she would participate IF THE DEBATE WAS SANCTIONED by the DNC

It's another desperate dirty trick.

[CoffeeCat]

17. If the NH debate is sanctioned by the DNC

Then that needs to be made clear in writing. There should be a new agreement drawn up.

Yes, it is clear what they are doing.

At this point, they look like desperate game players whose hubris boxed them into a situation that is counter to what they want now.

They really are idiots.

[AgingAmerican]

19. The DNC has already stated they wont. It's a moot point and dirty trick

And I agree with you completely.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/brian-fallon-sanders-holdout-unsanctioned-debate

[CoffeeCat]

22. Then Sanders should tell them to take a hike

and if O'Malley is the man I think he is, he will do the same.

The DNC set up this limited-debate schedule to favor Clinton.

They made their shortsighted bed, now they can lie in it.

They're acting like keystone politicians at this point. They look really, really dumb and unprofessional.

[CharlotteVale]

23. Exactly - it's a dirty trick but typical of the DNC antics.

[ViseGrip]

26. A pickle that the Hillary side, places the 'onus' on Sanders, instead of the party they play with.

[FlatBaroque]

30. The only good thing about this situation

is that Debbie Downer has been exposed for the pathetic hack that she has always been.