DNC Chair In Hot Water for REFUSING to allow Sanders and Clinton to debate

[evanrick]

I respect congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, running the DNC is a important task and shes endangering Democrats in 2016 for trying to protect Hillary from 'debate exposure'.

I believe it may have more to do with the email 'scandal', and peoples perception that a debate may not bode well for Hillary if questioned on a debate stage. That seems to speak more to Clinton's "weakness" as a candidate than the validity of the email scandal itself. I know if I were Hillary I would be angry about the email question, and for some reason she doesnt seem angry enough to inspire people the way Bernie does.

Everyone knows there are not enough debates between the democrats candidates, 5 of them, Sanders Clinton O'Malley Webb Chafee and possibly Lessig, as there is only 4 scheduled debates between now and the beginning of next year. and then 2 more 'after the primaries' debates which would only help Clinton since she will have more money to get herself on TV's without the help of debates.

Republicans are having 9 debates, Joe Biden is on the road running his own primary, and all the other democrats are waiting to see when all the democrats will finally show up to counter republican extremism.

Chairwoman when told that 25 million people saw the republican debate didnt seem concerned that democrats were being drown out by this, why the hell is the DNC allowing the republicans so much time by themselves?
Another factor for everyone wanting these debates is to test Hillarys liberal credentials, as she doesnt seem as willing to go the extra mile for progressive ideas.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/dnc-chair-heckled-over-democratic-primary-debates

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/19/politics/debbie-wasserman-schultz-democrats-debates/index.html

 

[Kyanimal]

...
Chairwoman when told that 25 million people saw the republican debate didnt seem concerned that democrats were being drown out by this, why the hell is the DNC allowing the republicans so much time by themselves?

I'm thinking congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is much shrewder than we're giving her credit for. In spite of the "Heft" that the media is trying to artificially churn up, this is still the initial stages, and so much can happen before it actually starts getting serious.

The Republican'ts have a much larger field of [STRIKE]17[/STRIKE] 16 candidates, and letting them slug it out, while attacking, and making fools of, each other, in front of millions of viewers, is a very smart move on the DNC's part.

It's called giving them enough rope.

 

[star-warrior]

I see the whole thing like Xmas. The longer you have the stuff in the shops, the more boring it gets.

Look at the republicans. It's like a fricking freak show, with all these self important types bitching it out and making a vile spectacle of themselves. Disgusting people making crude offensive remarks and whats more is they're outdoing each other with their extremism. They're not converting anyone but their equally sick and depraved bunch of supporters.

 

[rareboy]

I think the Republicans aren't doing themselves or the American voters any favours by running the worst reality elimination show in history over a year before the elections.

It is exposing all their candidates as idiotic, racist, misogynist boobs who are rankly unqualified to be leader.

It is better to listen to candidates like Sanders and Clinton articulate their positions without behaving like power mad buffoons and to have them attacking the real problem, ie the Republicons...than to be attacking one another.

We don't need Democratic debates until next spring.

 

[T-Rexx]

I believe it may have more to do with the email 'scandal', and peoples perception that a debate may not bode well for Hillary if questioned on a debate stage. That seems to speak more to Clinton's "weakness" as a candidate than the validity of the email scandal itself. I know if I were Hillary I would be angry about the email question, and for some reason she doesnt seem angry enough to inspire people the way Bernie does.

So far, the only "scandal" that has come out of the Clinton emails is the State Department's observation that John Boehner is constantly drunk.

Look at the republicans. It's like a fricking freak show, with all these self important types bitching it out and making a vile spectacle of themselves. Disgusting people making crude offensive remarks and whats more is they're outdoing each other with their extremism. They're not converting anyone but their equally sick and depraved bunch of supporters.

I think the Republicans aren't doing themselves or the American voters any favours by running the worst reality elimination show in history over a year before the elections.

It is exposing all their candidates as idiotic, racist, misogynist boobs who are rankly unqualified to be leader.

The Republican Party is in a state of collapse at the moment.

No, it isn't going away. But it is coming to the realization that its xenophobia, racism, misogyny, Islamophobia, and homophobia - on which it has depended to win elections for decades - no longer works. It is now perceived as the party of hate and the party of "no." Its platform is nothing more than trying to stop Democrats from doing whatever they think might be helpful for America. Moreover, its economic philosophy of feudalism has proven too disastrous to consider again for national implementation. It is a party of ideas that have failed miserably. The party needs to reinvent itself completely. It needs to support and encourage people, not attack them. And it needs to come up with new economic ideas that don't destroy free enterprise completely.

 

[jbrown329]

Bring back Dean!

 

[smokeshadow]

^^ Do you mean this one?

 

[jbrown329]

Is his first name Howard?

 

[thewiz]

Again the news media tries to give us our reports in 30 second sound bites which fit well to their 24-hour regurgitation cycle but do little to actually discuss problems.

The big issue in Debbie Wasserman-Schultz's limitations is not limiting to six debates; it's the exclusivity rule. Prior to 2008, Democrats always limited the number of major national debates but allowed a multitude of other debates -- usually state by state based -- that appealed to the New Hampshire Women's Bridge Association or the Iowa Beef Eaters Association, etc, etc. In 2008, the rule was changed and if Democratic candidates participated in those endless local debates, they would be excluded (potentially) from the large national debates. The effect has been an isolation of these local groups to the exclusivity of the CNN's, FOX, and others.

Personally, I don't need more than six national debates to make my choice (I can read and I usually get a chance to personally meet each candidate anyway). The Republicans might better go to "naked and alone" on an island to winnow their candidate field because it might at least expose some positive (although right now only Rubio) aspect of their clown car. I have watched the Republican debates mostly as a comedy hour but the last one ran longer than the hour.

The only ones that are helped by the national debates are the candidates who are polling so poorly that they don't have the funds to advertise or do much of anything else. The national debates at least give them some air time to remain viable (perhaps so they can sell books or become a paid consultant at one of the "news" stations).

I do look forward to Bernie and Hillary engaging, if for no other reason than to ensure that both of their policies are cross-pollinated and vetted prior to engaging the crazy Republican who will ultimately emerge from fire island (and not the gay, fun one).

 

[smokeshadow]

Is his first name Howard?

Don't you recognize a sexy James Dean when you see him?