HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Groups » Martin O'Malley (Group) » Martin O'Malley on Bernie...

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 10:28 AM

Martin O'Malley on Bernie, Hillary, the Democratic debate and what went wrong in 2016

If America wants a healthier democracy, we need better debates ó so says the ďother DemocratĒ who ran in 2016.

'Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley got a raw deal during the 2016 Democratic primaries. Most critics of the Democratic Party focus on how its eventual nominee, Hillary Clinton, may have had an unfair advantage over Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. They forget that there were other people running, at least at first: O'Malley, former Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia and former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee. Of those three, O'Malley was the one who stayed in the race by far the longest, even if he never developed much credibility as a pathway somewhere between Clinton and Sanders.

Logically speaking, O'Malley at the very least deserved attention (a point I made as far back as October 2015). That didn't happen: Clinton seemed more than willing to allow Sanders -- a candidate she was certain she could easily beat -- to be her principal opponent, the entire party seemed determined to marginalize O'Malley. He was brushed aside during the debates and even mocked on "Saturday Night Live" for having a candidacy at all.

Given that O'Malley had previously developed a reputation as one of America's more accomplished governors, this seemed not only unfair, but downright counterintuitive, at least to those who were genuinely interested in having the Democrats field their strongest possible presidential candidate. So I was interested in hearing O'Malley's thoughts about the future of the Democratic Party. during his recent visit to Salon Talks. This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. (You can watch a fuller version embedded below.

Before the camera started rolling, you and I were talking about the primary process. You were specifically discussing with me the way that ratings trump substantive discourse, and how that damages democracy. Would you be willing to elaborate?

I think right now in our country thereís a tremendous amount of anxiety about where weíre headed as a nation. The whole world is moving into what many call a third industrial revolution. Yet we seem, as a nation, to be stumbling backwards into this one instead of facing it square on. At the same time what weíve seen is a bit of a degeneration in our presidential politics, to put it mildly, where in the absence of any fairness doctrine, or strong parties that push back, ratings seem to have become king, rather than public discourse, in our parties' primary debates.

Before the camera started rolling, I brought this up as a compliment to you because youíre one of the very few journalists thatís written about that aspect. I mean, many people have talked about the corporations. People publicly finance elections. We have to somehow figure out how we conduct our presidential primaries in ways that give life to the public discourse instead of just lifting up the most agitational for the sake of ratings. The gentleman whoís the head of CBS was quoted during Donald Trumpís rise, while the Democratic Party was not debating and the Republicans were debating every other week in prime time.

We saw more and more how every question was being routed through Donald Trump and the wall-to-wall coverage of his rallies pulling up to the airport hangar. The head of CBS said, ďIn the old days, we wouldnít have been allowed to do this because of fairness doctrine. I know itís not good for the country but itís great for ratings. CBS is going to have a really good year. I say, go Donald, go.Ē

Just because it was good for CBS didnít mean that it was good for the country. I think he sensed that even as he said it. Itís a piece of what we need to recover as a nation if weíre going to come out of this rather aberrational presidency. . .

Had he joined us, we would have had more debates. Iíll leave it to you to imagine what might have happened differently if the Democratic Party were on the air answering Donald Trump during his rise in the Republican debates, rather than remaining silent. I think the common thread [in both parties] is that it really did become so much more driven by ratings than weíve ever had before.

If we continue down this road, thereís a real concern that our presidential debates, our primary debates ó I distinguish them from the general election debates where thereís a commission and thereís rules and thereís equal time ó are in danger of going down the road where they look more like the Jerry Springer show crossed with "Hollywood Squares" than a traditional presidential debate. I think among the issues that we have to tackle to restore the integrity and trust in our democracy, those presidential primary debates are certainly one of them.'

https://www.salon.com/2018/08/06/martin-omalley-on-bernie-hillary-the-democratic-debate-and-what-went-wrong-in-2016/

42 replies, 3384 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 42 replies Author Time Post
Reply Martin O'Malley on Bernie, Hillary, the Democratic debate and what went wrong in 2016 (Original post)
elleng Aug 2018 OP
irisblue Aug 2018 #1
elleng Aug 2018 #2
Wwcd Aug 2018 #8
Hortensis Aug 2018 #19
JHan Aug 2018 #21
Hortensis Aug 2018 #32
lunasun Aug 2018 #3
SharonClark Aug 2018 #4
elleng Aug 2018 #5
DavidDvorkin Aug 2018 #6
elleng Aug 2018 #7
Wwcd Aug 2018 #9
elleng Aug 2018 #10
Wwcd Aug 2018 #11
Me. Aug 2018 #13
heaven05 Aug 2018 #14
ehrnst Aug 2018 #31
heaven05 Aug 2018 #15
elleng Aug 2018 #16
Wwcd Aug 2018 #18
elleng Aug 2018 #25
ehrnst Aug 2018 #34
heaven05 Aug 2018 #35
ehrnst Aug 2018 #36
heaven05 Aug 2018 #37
ehrnst Aug 2018 #38
heaven05 Aug 2018 #40
ehrnst Aug 2018 #41
heaven05 Aug 2018 #42
Va Lefty Aug 2018 #26
Me. Aug 2018 #12
DoctorJoJo Aug 2018 #17
lapucelle Aug 2018 #20
JHan Aug 2018 #22
lapucelle Aug 2018 #23
elleng Aug 2018 #24
lapucelle Aug 2018 #28
elleng Aug 2018 #30
George II Aug 2018 #33
elleng Aug 2018 #39
newblewtoo Aug 2018 #27
elleng Aug 2018 #29

Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 10:29 AM

1. Thanks Ellen

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irisblue (Reply #1)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 10:37 AM

2. You're welcome, irisblue.

I hoped he'd have mentioned the 'agreement' the Dem party had with the networks to keep O'Malley's particiption in the 'debates' short, HRC and Sanders got XXX minutes each, and MO'M got XXX minus 3 or somesuch, astonishing and hugely unfair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #2)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 11:26 AM

8. I believe it was Sanders who was 'chosen' to run oppo to HRC.

 

Evidence we know now, proves this.
Ask TAD & PAUL why O'Malley was silenced in the early primary. As was HRC silenced throughout, except for MSM & bot-pushed negs.

O'Malley was a fair player.
That wasn't who they needed to run oppo on the Dem Party.
It still stands true today.

I would have liked to have heard more fom O'Malley.
He would have never let Trump go unchallenged.

He also would have backed up his criticisms with fact & a healthy record behind him.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #2)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 03:27 PM

19. Well, you're not, Elleng. MOM's failure was his OWN.

MOM was a weak public speaker who was blown away by a far more charismatic speaker, Bernie Sanders. Yes, MOM is an incredibly better man, and public speaking is Sanders' only gift among a package of huge flaws, but voters who wanted an alternative to Hillary went for Sanders.

If MOM wants to be president he can damned well learn to own a stage. He should have before he arrived for the first debate. Hillary did; she has no special talent, but she worked at it until she succeeded.

Btw, this tired old whining and blaming other Democrats for MOM's failure here again 3 MONTHS BEFORE THE MIDTERMS? Thousands of children are still being held in detention camps in the desert, and the Trump organization is victimizing more every single day as people who were here legally are deported.

And then there's the little matter that authoritarians, even fascist leaners, are within reach of getting the control of SCOTUS they've worked toward for decades.

I do not admire your priorities. To put it mildly.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #19)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 03:42 PM

21. ++++ exactly, this is tiresome.

both Sanders and Clinton outclassed O'Malley, 'better debates' would have had the same result.

O'Malley is also insinuating Clinton viewed him as a threat - is this a joke? And I don't say this as a Malley hater, I liked him a lot, and wanted him to be more competitive. I'd have rathered HRC vs Malley than HRC vs Sanders. But it was clear early on that wasn't going to happen, and a huge reason for that was Malley's own performance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JHan (Reply #21)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 06:20 PM

32. Yes. Even Putin seemingly hardly bothered to

try use to O'Malley, from what I've heard so far. From what the Mueller investigation has revealed, Sanders was and is the Kremlin's chosen weapon whose commitment to dissension justifies investment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 10:40 AM

3. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 10:51 AM

4. O'Malley couldn't attract attention with Sanders, Clinton, and Trump in the room.

Despite your tireless promotion of O'Malley on DU before the primary, he simply didn't catch fire with the public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SharonClark (Reply #4)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 10:58 AM

5. The networks and Dem party helped that along,

sorry to say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #5)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 11:12 AM

6. They did more than help that along

They created that narrative from the start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DavidDvorkin (Reply #6)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 11:13 AM

7. Yes. 'Thanks'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #5)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 11:33 AM

9. It wasn't the Dem Party. It was the TAD & PAUL Show, at work.

 

O'Malley would never have done for them what they were after.
He is far too fair a man.

Tad was already on his mission in 2014.
Plans to run oppo were already being laid out.
O'Malley wasn't their choice.
That's what happened

See?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wwcd (Reply #9)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 11:34 AM

10. It was surely the Dem Party,

+ others likely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #10)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 11:57 AM

11. Nope. You can blame the Party all day long. There were much greater & nefarious forces at play

 

Last edited Tue Aug 7, 2018, 12:30 PM - Edit history (1)

long before the candidates announced in 2015.

There is a big glaring reason beyond "the Dem Party", for O'Malley being in the position he ended up in.

And one half of that reason is on trial right now.
Agree that it should have been O'Malley in the primary against HRC.
Two worthy contenders with the best intentions for the D Party & America.

Who slipped in the middle of that elleng?

This is a pic of Rand Paul's visit with Russia.
The panel discussed Paul's desire to make RU our friends & Partners.

Make of it what you will
, but the Dem Party was the least of O'Malley's reasons for being shut out.
Ask TAD.

Not much to see here, it's just a pic of Paul on Russian State TV.
I really don't know what to make of it, but perhaps your beef isn't with the Dem Party. Perhaps its much deeper than that.
I don't want to explain this pic.
It is what it is.



Top Row: Dennis Kucinich, Dana Rohrbacher, Ron Paul
Bottom Row: Bernie Sanders, Gen Flynn & Rand Paul.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wwcd (Reply #11)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 01:00 PM

13. Totally Agree With You

that pic says it all

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wwcd (Reply #11)


Response to Wwcd (Reply #11)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 05:54 PM

31. Ok....

That's not gonna be in any "opposition research" in 2020...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #10)


Response to heaven05 (Reply #15)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 02:12 PM

16. I watched carefully what happened to Governor O'Malley,

and it was clear to me what was going on.

Anyone remember deb wasserman---?

Why Eric Swalwell Endorsed Martin O'Malley
https://www.democraticunderground.com/12816198

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #16)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 03:21 PM

18. Anyone remember Assange & Wikileaks? Wasserman wasn't O'Malley's problem

 

Ask TAD.
Ask ASSANGE what they were covering up by dropping a drama bomb about Wasserman?

What neg press had just hit the News as to Voter Data Theft?
Assange was ready to knock that bad press outta sight.

There was a whole lot more going on at that moment.
MONEY & MEDIA & Paul & Tad.

Did you know Tad sued Wikipedia to remove negative stories from BS's past history as to his penchant for dictators?

It was hardly as innocent as, "the Dem Party didn't like O'Malley".

We were dealing with the Russian Mob & the two global electioneers of their choice.

Right & Left. Paul & Tad.
That is what happened.








Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wwcd (Reply #18)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 04:23 PM

25. She sure was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to heaven05 (Reply #15)


Response to ehrnst (Reply #34)


Response to heaven05 (Reply #35)

Wed Aug 8, 2018, 09:35 AM

36. "Far from the truth" isn't a "lie?"

Nice evasion. Maybe that works on other people.

BTW "go find it yourself on Google" is the same thing I hear when I ask a Trump supporter to substantiate their claims of knowing "the truth."

"I state that unequivocally and without a doubt." But you can't back up your claims with any sources. Got it...



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #36)


Response to heaven05 (Reply #37)


Response to ehrnst (Reply #38)


Response to heaven05 (Reply #40)

Wed Aug 8, 2018, 10:47 AM

41. We are on the same side actually.

This is something that I think should be apparent, but I probably missed some things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #41)


Response to SharonClark (Reply #4)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 04:41 PM

26. He was not helped by the riots in Baltimore or Baltimore PD

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 12:59 PM

12. I Like O'Malley & Thinks He'd Be A Good Candidate

But could we please stop bashing and blaming the Dems for what others did?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 02:17 PM

17. I Was for Him Last Time, and I Will Be Again.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 03:38 PM

20. I think there might be some accidental edits in the OP.

Had he joined us, we would have had more debates. Iíll leave it to you to imagine what might have happened differently if the Democratic Party were on the air answering Donald Trump during his rise in the Republican debates, rather than remaining silent. I think the common thread [in both parties] is that it really did become so much more driven by ratings than weíve ever had before.


There's no antecedent for the pronoun "he". Who is O'Malley talking about there?

Here's the preceding paragraph. It seems to have been inadvertently omitted from the OP:

They didnít have that complaint when the debates were delayed, because it actually worked for both Sen. Sanders and Hillary Clinton to be the only two. They kinda liked it that way. We heard those complaints from Sen. Sanders only after the primary schedule started to roll out. Initially, I was unable -- though we asked [Sanders] and asked his campaign, to get him to join me in calling for an earlier debate schedule and more debates. Iím sure they made a tactical decision that it wasnít in their best interest to do that.

Had he joined us, we would have had more debates. Iíll leave it to you to imagine what might have happened differently if the Democratic Party were on the air answering Donald Trump during his rise in the Republican debates, rather than remaining silent.


https://www.salon.com/2018/08/06/martin-omalley-on-bernie-hillary-the-democratic-debate-and-what-went-wrong-in-2016/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #20)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 03:49 PM

22. Interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JHan (Reply #22)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 03:58 PM

23. Indeed.

"The networks and Dem party helped that along,
sorry to say."

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1281&pid=6311

"It was surely the Dem Party,
+ others likely."

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1281&pid=6316

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #20)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 04:22 PM

24. 'Let's pivot to the Democratic primaries in 2016. There were not as many debates held as normally

would have been the case. It seemed like Hillary Clinton because of her extensive career and name recognition and Bernie Sanders, because he was offering a message from outside the Democratic Party paradigm, sucked up all the attention in the room.

The scheduling was always such that viewership was going to be lower. It does tie into the complaint that a lot of Sanders supporters have, that on everything from how the debates were scheduled to various other arcane rules, it seemed to all be -- letís use the word "rigged" -- for Hillary Clinton. Did you feel that way?

They didnít have that complaint when the debates were delayed, because it actually worked for both Sen. Sanders and Hillary Clinton to be the only two. They kinda liked it that way. We heard those complaints from Sen. Sanders only after the primary schedule started to roll out. Initially, I was unable -- though we asked [Sanders] and asked his campaign, to get him to join me in calling for an earlier debate schedule and more debates. Iím sure they made a tactical decision that it wasnít in their best interest to do that.

Had he joined us, we would have had more debates. Iíll leave it to you to imagine what might have happened differently if the Democratic Party were on the air answering Donald Trump during his rise in the Republican debates, rather than remaining silent. I think the common thread [in both parties] is that it really did become so much more driven by ratings than weíve ever had before.

You think? That was my perception as well.

I think there are some parallels. Iíve become friendly with Gov. Jeb Bush -- only Donald Trump can do that to me! As we talked, unpacked our very different experiences in the last presidential race, we werenít shy at the time at kicking over the soup and saying it was very irresponsible of the Democratic Party not to be debating, not to telling the alternative story to the story that Donald Trump was spinning. Shame on us as we watched this Trump candidacy rise, becoming more and more overt in its scapegoating and other characteristics of strongman politics like weíve seen before, and we were silent. We didnít have our first debate until, I think, October. Iím not sure we ever really had a prime-time debate.

If we continue down this road, thereís a real concern that our presidential debates, our primary debates ó I distinguish them from the general election debates where thereís a commission and thereís rules and thereís equal time ó are in danger of going down the road where they look more like the Jerry Springer show crossed with "Hollywood Squares" than a traditional presidential debate. I think among the issues that we have to tackle to restore the integrity and trust in our democracy, those presidential primary debates are certainly one of them.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #24)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 05:02 PM

28. "Had he joined us, we would have had more debates."

"Initially, I was unable -- though we asked [Sanders] and asked his campaign, to get him to join me in calling for an earlier debate schedule and more debates. Iím sure they made a tactical decision that it wasnít in their best interest to do that."

MOM was making an important point in response to allegations by one side that the debate schedule was "rigged".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #28)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 05:10 PM

30. Thanks and right,

'they made a tactical decision that it wasnít in their best interest to do that."'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #24)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 11:14 PM

33. Why, in August 2018, are we re-fighting the 2016 primaries and....

....still blaming the Democratic Party?

As my now second favorite President used to say (surpassed only by Obama!), "that dog don't hunt."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #33)

Wed Aug 8, 2018, 10:41 AM

39. Not fighting, trying to learn somethings after relevant article published.

Martin O'Malley on Bernie, Hillary, the Democratic debate and what went wrong in 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Original post)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 05:00 PM

27. Reading some of the posts

I begin to question if MOM can walk and chew gum, let along be elected governor of Maryland and chairman of the Democratic Governor's Association.

Did he get a short shrift? I believe he did. Would he have presented a greater challenge to Hillary [than BS] had he been treated the same? I believe he would have. Can't we ever get beyond Step 5? I sure hope so or we may be doomed to the dust bin of history.

And now a word for walking and knocking Some of us can no longer physically do it. If you can, sign up and at least give it a try. You may find it an enjoyable way to spend some time and do some good.

Thanks for your conscientious posting for MOM elleng.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to newblewtoo (Reply #27)

Tue Aug 7, 2018, 05:08 PM

29. You're welcome and thanks, newblewtoo.

And welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread