The American people don't want to be bored stiff with endless debates. Enough already.

[RBInMaine]

Is ANYONE going to seriously argue that this small number of Democratic candidates can't make their cases to the American people is SIX, I say again, SIX full debate sessions? How many does it take? Ten, twelve, fifteen or more endless debates going over the same talking points again, and again, and again?

As I understand it, six was the number of debates the last time around when there were about this number of candidates. There wasn't any screeching then. Hmmm??

And there are other forums outside the purview of the DNC where they will be debating. My goodness. They also have ads all over tv and the internet, press conferences, interviews, speeches, websites, and on and on to get their points out.

The Republican debates are silly clown shows making people sick, and the American people don't want to be bored with these endless debates.

And this talk of six debates not being enough and being some plot to just help Hillary is a load of sheer paranoid nonsense. I'm not a big fan of Wasserman as DNC chair, but she isn't trying to rig the debates. It is the VERY SAME NUMBER OF DEBATES they have had in the past. Let's get real, and enough of the crazy conspiracy theories.

Six DNC sanctioned debates is plenty. More is just overkill.

[virtualobserver]

1. the American people are so sick of debates that CNN set a record for most viewers..... ever!

http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/17/media/cnn-republican-debate-ratings/

[Uncle Joe]

21. Don't let facts get in the way of a good non-fiction.

[Aerows]

32. How stupid does the DNC think

the American electorate is? It's pretty plain why they want to limit the number of debates, and frankly, that's not what Democracy looks like.

[Garrett78]

42. It amounts to massive free advertising.

Regardless of how many debates there are total, the Democratic candidates should have held a debate within a day or two of the most recent Republican debate so as to demonstrate the contrast in ideologies and behavior/maturity level, and hopefully (depending on the moderator) the seriousness of the questions asked (no questions about Secret Service code names, for instance). Instead, the Republicans control the media cycle and the first Dem debate is still weeks away.

"I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat." ~Will Rogers

[virtualobserver]

44. agreed....and Nancy Pelosi, and 2 of the 5 vice chairs of the DNC have called for more debates

it looks bad from almost every angle

[Garrett78]

47. The party establishment is inept.

The Republican field of candidates is off-the-charts crazy. Or, as Noam Chomsky put it when describing the 2012 field, "off the international spectrum of sane behavior."

And the Democratic Party is bypassing the opportunity to make that abundantly clear.

[Uncle Joe]

51. Inept implies this is accidental due to incompetence, I don't believe that's the case here.

This is a deliberate and cynical manipulation of the American Peoples' ability to hear critical, real time information; the candidates' positions and rebuttals needed to make their deliberations regarding the candidates they wish to support.

The number, scheduling, timing and threatened sanctions against the candidates are too compelling to argue otherwise.

[reformist2]

2. I'm actually fine with six. Six is more than enough for me... and I'm pro-Bernie!

[cali]

3. lol. who do you think you are to speak for the American people?

Speak for yourself. Don't come here and proclaim that the American people don't want more.debates.

Ugh

[Pope Sweet Jesus]

7. Eh, let them.

When Hillary gets Berned on October 13th, she's going to go straight to DWS and demand as many debates as possible to get herself out of a mess she is in.

[virtualobserver]

4. the American people are so sick of debates that CNN set a record for most viewers..... ever!

I wonder if they would like to see a Democratic debate?

http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/17/media/cnn-republican-debate-ratings/

[Persondem]

11. People like watching car accidents and hockey fights and NASCAR wrecks

GOP debate ratings don't mean all that much. It's entertainment courtesy of the Trumpster (rhymes with dumpster)

[Tom Rinaldo]

5. Nor with 2 identicle OP's. But seriously, are you serious?

People who don't want to watch debates simply don't. It's easy. But politics has become a big ratings draw, or haven't you noticed?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. Free advertising is usually considered a bargain.

If "...this small number of Democratic candidates can't make their cases to the American people is SIX I say again, SIX full debate sessions?"

How about SIX commercials? Do the American people enjoy being bored by commercials?

[cali]

8. Enough already with your almost identical junk ops

[Sheldon Cooper]

36. Jury results:

On Sun Sep 20, 2015, 02:53 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Enough already with your almost identical junk ops
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=606650

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Enough already with the rude personal attacks. People can post what and where they want.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Sep 20, 2015, 03:07 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't think this is hide-worthy at all.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[leveymg]

9. Gazuntheit.

Say something once, why say it again?

[BuelahWitch]

10. They will not be debating on "other forums."

DWS forbid that.

[Hortensis]

12. 6 DNC debates is enough. OPEN UP local debates to as many as locals

wish to put on and citizens wish to view.

As I pointed out before, even as it is, ALL CANDIDATES can appear at non-debate formats. Like sitting around a table chatting about agreed issues without a moderator asking questions.

Given how party-sanctioned "debates" have been degraded into air-time ops and reality-TV performances, degrading every candidate who has to participate and sending every viewer away at best uniformed, I'm absolutely in favor of anything but more of these disgusting performances.

[Duckhunter935]

13. Why the lie

They are not able to debate outside the six sanctioned debates. They would be punished if they do by the DNC.

[Android3.14]

14. You don't speak for this American

The text of this OP is pretentious self-deluded willfully ignorant bullshit.

[bigwillq]

15. I think six is more than enough.

But they should have planned it better, imo. Maybe have one a month (Sept-Oct-Nov-Dec-Jan-Feb) and then add more if need be.

I think debates are nothing more than a circus.

[leftofcool]

16. Finally! Maybe this will stop the whining!

[cali]

18. bwahaha. yeah, it's just whining. And let's pretend that repulsive little debbie

isn't rigging thing for her pal Hillary.

[elleng]

17. You are mistaken.

It appears you don't understand that We the People want to SEE and HEAR the candidates
in as many situations and discussions and debates as POSSIBLE.

Have YOU ever seen and heard Governor Martin O'Malley discussing and debating matters?

Six was NOT the number of debates last time around, there were many more, as I recall.

As to 'screeching,' dws caused florida to break the rules, resulting in florida losing some opportunities to participate. Although Obama led Clinton in delegates won through state contests in 2008, Clinton claimed that she had the popular vote lead as she had more actual votes from the state contests. However, this calculation could not include many states that had held caucuses, which Obama had dominated, and it did include Michigan and Florida, which neither Clinton nor Obama contested due to the Democratic National Committee's penalization of those states for violating party rules.

MORE, the 2008 Dem party kerfuffle: Disputed primaries
Main articles: Florida Democratic primary, 2008 and Michigan Democratic primary, 2008
In August 2006, the Democratic National Committee adopted a proposal by its Rules and Bylaws Committee stating that only the four states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina would be permitted to hold primaries or caucuses before February 5, 2008. In May 2007, the Florida Legislature passed a bill that moved the date of the state's primary to January 29, 2008, setting up a confrontation with the DNC. In response, the DNC ruled that Florida's 185 pledged delegates and 26 superdelegates would not be seated at the Democratic National Convention, or, if seated, would not be able to vote. In October 2007, Democrats from Florida's congressional delegation filed a federal lawsuit against the DNC to force a recognition of its delegates, but the suit was unsuccessful. The presidential candidates promised not to campaign in Florida.

Meanwhile, Michigan moved its primary to January 15, 2008, also in violation of party rules. In October 2007, Obama, Richardson, Biden, and Edwards withdrew their names from the Michigan primary ballot, under pressure from the DNC and voters in Iowa and New Hampshire. Kucinich unsuccessfully sought to remove his name from the ballot, whereas Clinton and Dodd opted to remain on the ballot. In December 2007, the DNC ruled that Michigan's 128 pledged delegates and 29 superdelegates would not count in the nominating contest unless it were held on a later date. The Michigan Democratic party responded with a press release noting that the primary would proceed with Clinton, Dodd, Gravel, and Kucinich on the ballot. Supporters of Biden, Edwards, Richardson, and Obama were urged to vote "uncommitted" instead of writing in their candidates' names because write-in votes for those candidates would not be counted.

None of the top candidates campaigned in Florida or Michigan. The events were described in the media as "beauty contests," and voter turnout in both states was relatively low when compared with record-high turnout in other states. Nevertheless, Clinton claimed wins in Florida and Michigan, and she flew to Fort Lauderdale on the night of the Florida election to thank supporters for what she called a "tremendous victory."

As the primaries continued, various groups tried to negotiate a resolution to the standoff between the DNC and the state parties. The Clinton campaign advocated first for the results to stand and then for a new round of voting to take place in Michigan and Florida, while the Obama campaign deferred the matter to the DNC, while expressing a wish that the delegations be seated in some form. On all sides, Democrats worried that a failure to resolve the problem could lead to a rules or credential fight at the convention and low Democratic turnout in the general election in November.

On May 31, 2008, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee voted unanimously (27-0) to restore half-votes to all the Florida delegates, including superdelegates. The Michigan delegates were also given half-votes, with 69 delegates pledged to Hillary Clinton and 59 to Barack Obama; this proposed change passing by 19-8.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008

[AgingAmerican]

19. That's not what Hillary said in 2008

Back in 2008, after 18 debates, Clinton stated that having no more debates would be 'Unamerican'. She then listed the reasons why more were necessary:

* for party-building in the states
* for national media exposure
* for policy and platform refinement
* to energize base voters
* to bring in new voters into the process
* to prepare for gotchas and strengthen debating chops

"For all these reasons, maximizing the number of Democratic primary debates is the best and most cost-efficient way to give voice to Democratic ideas, and to attempt to bring the media political discussion in balance. "

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/29/1416509/-Hillary-Clinton-Calls-for-More-Debates-Is-the-DNC-Listening#

[Lil Missy]

20. Those screaming for more debates are people that won't vote for her anyway.

Minds are made up. Six debates are plenty for all of them to make their case.

[cali]

23. your characterization of people arguing for more debates is revealing

And it's not just about more debates, it's about the lousy scheduling and the exclusionary rule. Furthermore, your claim that people advocating for more debates won't vote for her, is pure bullshit.

[Aerows]

29. I cannot imagine a supporter of any candidate

thinking it is a positive that their candidate get *less* opportunity to state their policies, their platform and their overall vision they have for the office for which they are running.

Unless, of course, they are concerned by what their candidate's might accidentally say.

[Lil Missy]

46. six are enough to get all of that across. but I see,

You want more debates she has more opportunities to fuck. up? That cuts both ways.

And why should I be afraid of what she says?? She's doing just fine so far, and is in fact WAY ahead.

[Aerows]

48. I want enough visibility for ALL of our Democratic candidates

to discuss their views and policies, debate them publicly, which is the CLEAR way to contrast our party and our candidates.

Who on earth would be scared to hear more from their candidate?

Maybe you aren't, but the optics look bad to a lot of Democratic voters.

[oasis]

22. Exactamundo <nt>

[pa28]

24. Will six debates still be enough if Hillary falls behind in the polls?

I suspect we'll end up with additional debates added to the schedule before this is over.

[leftofcool]

28. Yes, it will still be enough

[restorefreedom]

25. why are there two identical threads? nt

[Aerows]

26. I'm really tired of politicians that assume

that the electorate is abysmally stupid.

Did DWS think that voters wouldn't be aware of how she's stacking the deck in favor of Hillary?

Hillary has a hard time answering questions forthrightly. The DNC wants Hillary answering as few questions as possible, which gives her less chance to either misspeak, appear to be shamelessly dodging the question or flubbing an answer that will cause her to sink in the polls.

It's not really a big secret that Hillary has issues with extemporaneous speaking. She has plenty of experience which is a plus, but debates are where she could get hamstrung if she is asked a question she doesn't have an answer pre-planned for.

[fredamae]

27. I am an "American People" and I

disagree, as does my husband, my kids and my voting aged grandkids.

We Decide-Not the Establishment Dems. Period. If they don't decide to co-operate and keep that Stubbornness up...We'll go under them, around them, over them-through them. Period.

[leftofcool]

30. Good, let the boyz go out on their own.

[SonderWoman]

31. Why did you post it twice?

[djean111]

33. That is not for you to say. And say. And say. And say.

You do not speak for the American people. You don't want to watch? Don't watch. There. I fixed it.

[magical thyme]

34. nobody's forcing 'murkins to watch them. nobody's forcing dnc to host them.

just don't lock the candidates out of other debate forums. Because some of us actually care about democracy. Some of us actually want the ability and option to compare and contrast the candidates before choosing. And some of us want to level the playing field at least a little bit, instead of handing all media exposure over to the candidate with all the moolah.

And don't tell me that scheduling one on the Saturday before Christmas and another on the day of a Big Game isn't an overt attempt to limit the debates that are noticed by anybody except the political junkies to 4.

[Uncle Joe]

37. + all that exists. n/t

[Indepatriot]

35. I do believe HRC was all for as much debate as possible when she was behind in 08'.....

I think at leas 12 would be better. We're ceding the media to the GOP, and, as foolish as they look, no one is hearing the Democratic case for the Presidency. No bueno.

[99Forever]

38. I'm an American people, and I sure as fuck don't recollect...

... ever asking for or suggesting that you speak for me. If you're "bored stiff with endless debates," turn your fucking TV off and quit whining to those of us that actually give a damn about the future of this Nation. Or is someone holding a gun to your head and forcing you to watch?

Enough phony excuses and juvenile whining.

[Warren Stupidity]

39. You are marching in step. Good for you!

When the orders change: About Face!

[cherokeeprogressive]

40. Pretty arrogant to presume to speak for the whole of "The American people".

[Jappleseed]

41. Ignorance is strength

Information weakness. I believe Hillary and her supporters don't like democracy so much.

[randome]

43. I agree. Six debates for 3 candidates? That's plenty.

And for those who want to see more, more, MORE debates, how many is 'more'? Some have said as 'much as possible'. Does that mean thirty-eight debates? Forty-nine? What?

Geeze, it's not as if anyone's mind is going to be made up by more debates. Especially on DU.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[TheKentuckian]

49. Based on what? Is there some formula around somewhere that dictates this or did you pull it out of

Turd Way Deb's ass?

I don't remember six being some magic number in 2008 but I do remember the current front runner calling for more after like 20.

[Ichigo Kurosaki]

54. Six debates for 3 candidates? That's plenty.

Did I miss something? I thought we had 5 candidates.

BTW, I personally think that 6 is not enough and the dates they are scheduled really suck.

[Autumn]

45. People with a short attention span may be bored

but they don't pay attention anyway. Those are personality voters and don't delve further into a candidates stand than 2 sentences or 30 second sound bite.

[FSogol]

50. Unrec.

[jwirr]

52. No one is forcing anyone to watch. And there were

28 debates in 2008.

I want the exclusivity rule ended. It is undemocratic. We have never had such a rule before and we adopted it from the Rs. That alone should be enough to tell us we do not want it.

[Smarmie Doofus]

53. Then they don't have to watch them.

*More* is better on the DEM side because Sanders will air heretofore taboo ideas re. our economic arrangements. (What a drag!)

Ironically.... Trump's beat him to the punch: asserting flatly that the cookie-cutter clones on the dais with him were/are basically puppets of their donors.

No more; no less.

Alas. The same is true of the DEM crew.

Except for one.

[restorefreedom]

55. exactly.

as much as many people loathe this comparison, Trump is appealing to a type of populism and financial independence from the system that Bernie also speaks to, minus the sexism racism and birtherism of course. But there might be some people who feel like trump is the real populist because his messages is not being challenged on a national stage. By the time O'Mally and Bernie get to speak on this some people may have already committed to Trump as crazy as that sounds. But I have no doubt that little Debbie would rather see Trump in the White House than Bernie or O'Malley. For them it's Hillary or bust

[elleng]

56. RIGHT, we don't want to be bored. WRONG

to suggest that we would be bored by more than 6 debates among our intelligent and articulate candidates.

[PoliticAverse]

57. In 2008 at least one of the candidates thought 21 debates wasn't enough even.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/26/obama.debate/index.html?iref=hpmostpop

[GeorgeGist]

58. Please show your work that ...

6= enough.