Tom Perez has an interesting decision to make.

[Funtatlaguy]

Will the DNC go with one night or two in the October debate(s)?
Also, if they do go with two nights, will they continue to draw names for the nights, or go to what the GOP did in 2016 and put the higher polling candidates on the first night and others on night two.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/at-least-11-candidates-will-make-the-fourth-democratic-debate/

[OnDoutside]

1. Two nights, higher pollers on first night. It's moving time.

[Sherman A1]

2. I would prefer two with a random draw

10 people on stage is too much for them to get a fair amount of time to discuss ideas. I actually prefer the town hall format which gives each about 20-30 minutes.

[Tarc]

3. No more random draws. If we have to go two nights, then Top 6 1st, Bottom 5 2nd

We are way past due for a culling.

[Indykatie]

4. Why Are Still Having People on the Debate Stage That Are Polling 3% Or Less?

Would it be too aggressive to set the polling threshold at 4% at this stage? That would cull the field to 6.

[Funtatlaguy]

7. Culling sounds violent. How about limiting.

[Tarc]

8. ...

[femmocrat]

5. I thought the format of the third debate was good.

Limited to the top ten. It was 3 hours long, but it never dragged. I watched the entire thing. I did not miss the second tier candidates trying to get recognized.

[Funtatlaguy]

6. No, just the same qualifying rules.

Steyer didn’t qualify for September but he has for
October bringing the field to 11.

[Celerity]

9. Move the next round after Oct. to 4% 6 times (all from different polls too)& 260,000 discrete donors

Time to get serious. That will yield 5 or maybe 6 candidates more than likely, which is enough to have a real, in depth debate.