Democrats Set Qualifications for Presidential Debates

[babylonsister]

https://politicalwire.com/2019/02/14/democrats-set-qualifications-for-presidential-debates/

Democrats Set Qualifications for Presidential Debates
February 14, 2019 at 6:09 pm EST By Taegan Goddard

“As many as 20 Democratic presidential candidates will be invited to the party’s first sanctioned debates this summer if they can meet new polling or grass-roots fundraising thresholds to qualify,” the Washington Post reports.

“Candidates can qualify either by attracting campaign donations from at least 65,000 people, including at least 200 people from at least 20 states, or by registering at least 1 percent in three state or national polls from a list of surveys approved by the party.”

[empedocles]

1. Rac hel last night went into detail about the 2016 'con 17 candidate quagmire.

The awkwardness of all those podiums, the subset of lesser candidates - the implications of that mess were apparent.

The Dems will try to learn from the lessons of that awful history.

[babylonsister]

2. Yes, I saw that.

I just hope lesser known but worthy people can meet their criteria, like Pete Buttigieg.

[empedocles]

3. However, the large field is what made trump possible.

We need a candidate with crossover appeal.

[OnDoutside]

5. Yes, but Trump exposed that they had nothing. I'm hopeful that the 2020 Dems will have powerful

and engaging arguments.

[empedocles]

6. I'm for a powerful, big win, which would enable a major undoing of trump toxic decisions.

[babylonsister]

7. Buttigieg might have that but

we'll never know if he doesn't get a shot at this.

[doompatrol39]

9. Conversely....

...Trump turned out their base despite turning off crossover voters . So maybe a case could also be made that we need a candidate that will do that?

[Deb]

4. Wish they had included a high level security clearance but these are good changes

[George II]

8. I certainly hope those 65,000 people are going to be documented, not just a clump of mythical...

..."small" donations.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

10. Seems like a reasonable, fair, and objective way to manage the debates...

This way, no one can accuse anyone of undue influence over who gets in and who stays out.

[watoos]

11. What does it mean that we need crossover voters?

We just won a blue wave election by pushing for issues that the M$M considers leftist when in fact they were the real centrist issues. A move to the center-right will be a big mistake. We have traitors in the GOP/Trump party and I don't care to seek common ground with traitors.

We need the strongest candidate, the nastiest candidate. (in a nice way)

We need a tough as nails candidate, so far I am impressed with 2.

Kamala Harris - former prosecutor, former A.G.
Tulsi Gabbard - military veteran.

Wish Howard Dean was around running the show.