How many debates should we have?

[Andy823]

Both O'Malley and Sanders want more than 6. I don't know how the others feel about the debates, but there should be enough to actually hear how each and everyone of them plan on fixing the things that need to be fixed, the major issues facing us today, and in the future. I want to see "real" debates, not a few limited debates that won't tell us anything about those who want to be president of this country. I want to know exactly how they plan on running this country, and taking on the challenges that are ahead.

How many do you think we should have?

[Vincardog]

1. at least 1 a month till the election. Kindly call Debbie at 202-863-8000 and remind her!

[SonderWoman]

2. With only 5 candidates I would say about 10 debates.

[Evergreen Emerald]

3. One a day until the election

A topic would be presented during a commercial break on a popular show. Each candidate gets 05 minutes in length to speak about the specific topic.

[Andy823]

8. Sounds good

Who decides on the topics?

[Evergreen Emerald]

9. Hmmmm....good question--how about a lottery?

A spinning cage of questions that is picked nightly. The questions submitted by everyone and anyone, but they must be named and list their stake in the election.

[think]

4. In the past 35 years the fewest primary debates we've had is 9 in the 2000 election

Just in case people are wondering...

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/is-six-democratic-debates-too-few/

[Andy823]

6. Thaniks

I was wondering about that.

[still_one]

5. It would be nice to have a debate schedule for at least the six that are decided upon

[ibegurpard]

7. I don't know

But they need to start yesterday.

[artislife]

10. They do need to start now.

I like 10.

[Adrahil]

11. I don't really care. They serve almost no purpose anymore.

I think modern mass-media "debates" are useless, especially in the primaries. There is no real "debate," just packaged policy statements peppered with snipes at one's opponents.

I watch them for entertainment only, really, 'cause I like politics. But I think I watched, what maybe ONE primary debate in 2007-08.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. As many as the candidates want to participate in.

[Andy823]

14. I agree.

If enough candidates stand up and denounce the idea of only 6 debates, starting as late as October, they can change things. If the party says they will not be allowed to participate if they break the "rules", so be it. If the majority or candidates start their own debates, the media will be there, and those who don't want to show will have some explaining to do.

[whatchamacallit]

13. It really makes you wonder about the party we're expected to pledge unwavering fealty to

The new rules don't feel very democratic to me.

[kenfrequed]

15. It isn't just the raw number

It was adopting the republican rules for punishing candidates for participating in non-sanctioned debates. If the DNC wants to have only a limited number of "sanctioned debates" where they control format and question then so be it. Don't blame unions, public interest groups, non profits, and the media for wanting to sponsor additional debates.

It is also about letting the republicans have almost two months of time where their party can talk about their issues for free on prime time television and all the news cycles that go with it. Epic level bad strategy there.


If my candidate of choice were in the lead I would still be in favor of more debates as an opportunity to get more of the Democratic message out to the public mind. If my candidate was a bad debator or couldn't perform well in that arena then how the hell can I expect them to win in a general election???!!!

[whatchamacallit]

16. They're trying to slide Hillary under the Oval Office Door. n/t