Democrats Have 20 Spots in the First Debate. There Are Now 21 Candidates.

[Jose Garcia]

During the 2016 presidential primary, leaders of the Democratic National Committee were frequently accused of showing favoritism toward Hillary Clinton over Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Perhaps as a result, party officials have tried to make the 2020 primary process appear more inclusive and transparent.

The first Democratic presidential debate showcases that effort: Candidates can gain access to the stage through grass-roots fund-raising, and in anticipation of a “historically large primary field,” officials decided to split the event across two nights in late June, so that as many as 20 candidates could take part.

But as of Thursday morning, when Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado announced his candidacy for president, those efforts at inclusion have been placed under strain. Mr. Bennet’s entrance ticks the number of Democratic candidates in the field up to 21, and additional candidates may still join, making it a real possibility that some will be left off the debate stage.

Only 17 candidates have so far qualified for the first debate, so cuts are not guaranteed. But with nearly two months to go, more candidates could very well meet the requirements.

More: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/us/politics/democratic-debates-candidates.html#click=https://t.co/cPuJmSP4Iu

[3catwoman3]

1. Gilibrand can drop out any time.

That would take it back down to 20.

[NewJeffCT]

2. Unless the debate is over 6 hours

nobody is going to get much quality airtime.

Better to break it up into 3 debates with 7 candidates per debate, and just use a random draw to select them.

Have it like Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday in one week.

[StevieM]

3. That is the obvious thing to do, especially since the smaller format worked so well in 2016.

But we have to pretend that the DNC was in Hillary's corner and that the 2016 debates were a disaster. Any plan that gets in the way of us doing that is off the table.

[elleng]

5. Yes

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

6. Makes sense to me.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Funtatlaguy]

4. I'd bet that both Messam & Gravel won't meet criterion.

[DownriverDem]

7. Too many running

I sure hope we don't have a clown car like the repubs did in 2016.

[Hortensis]

8. Not the first time who'll be included is a question.

The DNC arranged to have only 5 of 14 candidates qualify for the 2016 debates. The DNC's job is to get a Democrat elected president, its only job, and that was what they felt best. But in the process, they sabotaged 9 Democratic candidates, not all viable but most of whom had come from their home states with votes and donations from enthusiastic followers. One of them of course was kicked specifically to make room for I-Sanders.

I mention that last because this article gratuitously repeats the massive lie as truth, in the first paragraph no less, that that was sooo unfair -- not to the 9 and not to the voters! -- but to Sanders, who trumpeted his mostly imaginary grievances but never mentioned how fortunate he was to be one of 5 instead of competing against 13.

Sanders is only indirectly one of the reasons the process is so much more inclusive this time.
We never had a chance to look at the other candidates, and that did genuine injury to our voters and to those candidates. And perhaps to the nation. So we're doing better this time.

[redstatebluegirl]

9. We need this field to get smaller quickly.

Otherwise we have a cluster.... like the one they republicans had in 2016. My guess is at least 4 of them will be almost out of money by fall of 2019. it takes a ton of money to run a national campaign like this and there are a lot of them that are not raising much money right now. The sooner we have a smaller field the better for us.