The Hill: Clinton feels no pressure to debate Sanders

[DCBob]

“There’s nothing to debate,” said one longtime ally and confidante. “There’s nothing new. You can run these debates on loop. The attacks are all the same. And we cannot tolerate his tired, old attacks that continue to disunite the party at a time when it’s supposed to be united.”

A former Clinton aide said Sanders should be allowed to finish campaigning in the primary but he should also give Clinton the space she needs to focus on the general without creating “more friction.”

“It’s basically over,” the former aide said. “He needs to work on uniting the party, not scheduling another debate.”

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/280754-clinton-feels-no-pressure-to-debate-sanders

=============

Of course Fox and the Republicans would love to force Hillary and Bernie into more confrontation. I say don't do it.

[apcalc]

1. Agree....no purpose

Except to serve Fox News and the R's, stirring the pot.

[rock]

37. Correct

He's irrelevant; the debate is irrelevant.

[Dem2]

50. The last debate was quite boring

Rehashing the same b******* doesn't appeal to me.

[Renew Deal]

2. “He needs to work on uniting the party"

That's the truth.

[MrMickeysMom]

5. Said the person who can't see, has a low post count, and...

Has no reference.

(Hey, what reference do you need?) Derp...

[grossproffit]

6. She's an excellent debater.

[grossproffit]

4. At this point, he's both a loose cannon and a liability.

[Surya Gayatri]

12. Loose cannon, indeed. And, sailing in very heavy seas...

[grossproffit]

13. Great find! LOL!

[Barack_America]

7. Just her prior agreement she would do so.

But that's okay, we all know Hillary well.

She's not a woman of her word; on debates, climate change, the public option, a $15 minimum wage, etc.

That's fine. I'm sure Sanders would be fine with a solo town hall format.

[Surya Gayatri]

15. The "agreement" was NOT engraved in stone. Situations change.

She now needs to invest the bulk of her resources in the GE.

[SwampG8r]

19. Her word is worthless unless.carved in stone?

[Surya Gayatri]

21. Contracts, especially informal ones, can always be revisited.

[Vattel]

23. I guess we need to get everything she says in writing

[Surya Gayatri]

25. Written contracts and agreements are renegotiated all the time.

[Vattel]

26. So now in Hillary world broken agreements are morally unproblematic?

[Surya Gayatri]

30. .../...

negotiate
verb ne·go·ti·ate ni-ˈgō-shē-ˌāt, ÷-sē-



: to discuss something formally in order to make an agreement

: to agree on (something) by formally discussing it

: to get over, through, or around (something) successfully

[Vattel]

31. Congrats on having a dictionary. But what is your point?

Has Clinton and Sanders renegotiated something? Have they come to a new agreement about a debate in California? Has Sanders released Clinton from her obligation to keep her word by having a debate?

[Surya Gayatri]

32. Given his weak negotiating stance, he'll come round.

[Vattel]

47. To call his negotiating stance or his bargaining position weak is an understatement.

So while Clinton's word is worthless, there is nothing Bernie can do about it in this situation.

[riversedge]

8. No need to debate Sanders anymore. Hillary needs to focus on Trump--and we all

be focusing on making sure Donald gets no where near the Oval office.

[polly7]

9. Didn't she say she was going to?? nt.

[Surya Gayatri]

10. A-frigging-men.

“There’s nothing to debate,” said one longtime ally and confidante. “There’s nothing new. You can run these debates on loop. The attacks are all the same.

We can all repeat his tattered stump speech verbatim. Why waste the time and resources.

I hope she continues to stiff-arm him.

[SamKnause]

11. If she refuses, it just adds to the 'myth' that she is untrustworthy.

[DCBob]

16. I think most will see another debate as meaningless and waste of time.

Just like doing the exit polls for the remainder of the primaries.

[SamKnause]

18. I respectfully disagree about the debate.

[Surya Gayatri]

22. Exactly...

Just like doing the exit polls for the remainder of the primaries.

[Time for change]

35. Everything is meaningless to you and them

except that the long pre-planned arrangement for their coronation, disguised as an election, go ahead without anymore friction.

My only response to that is that they can go to hell.

[DCBob]

36. "they can go to hell"

Nice talk from a supposed Democrat.

[SamKnause]

14. If Hillary does not want anymore debates,

I would like to see Bernie and Trump debate.

Bernie would have absolutely nothing to lose and

he would not be breaking any DNC 'rules'.

[DCBob]

17. That would be a fun debate!

[SamKnause]

20. I wouldn't describe it as fun.

I think it would definitely be interesting and must see TV.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. She should agree to a debate if Trump is included, and it's not of FAUX.

It would be interesting to see who BS attacks more.

[Mike Nelson]

27. What a stupid...

...idea. FOX, no less...

[merrily]

28. I am so delighted that she refused.

[CrowCityDem]

29. Bernie wanted free tv time. That's pretty much all this comes down to.

[NJCher]

33. rewrite! rewrite!

"There's nothing to debate," said one longtime ally and confidante, "because what he wants to debate is not what we want to debate. Besides, our candidate runs on a loop, and has never been able to answer his points. And we cannot tolerate our old, tired responses that continue to cause us great angst because he keeps winning states. It was supposed to be our parade. He's the rain."

A former Clinton aide said Sanders should be allowed fo finish campaigning in the primary but he should STFU about any issues of genuine concern to people.

"I wish it was over," the former aide said. "He could unify the party."



Cher

[winter is coming]

42. "He could unify the party."

That's the nominee's job.

[Time for change]

34. So many people have said so many times

in attempts to defend the Democratic Party's abuses of power in favoring Clinton and doing everything they can to block Sanders' chances of winning the nomination (for example, purging independent voters who registered as Dems before the stated deadlines to vote n closed primaries) that there is no need for them to be accountable to American citizens because they are a "private" organization and they can do anything they want.

So why on earth should anyone feel any obligation to unite behind their chosen nominee? They are anti-democratic and corrupt to the core. They are bound to the wealthy sources from which they obtain their money. They don't care. They are relying on people to vote for them as the lesser of two evils.

[DCBob]

41. I can guarantee that most Hillary supporters do not see this as a "lesser of two evils" choice.

She is an amazing and incredibly qualified candidate. Trump is essentially the opposite. His only hope is tapping into voter anger with lies and distortions. I am confident most voters will see through that eventually.

[ljm2002]

38. Yeah, never mind the agreement they made...

...to hold a debate in California. There's no need to keep one's word, especially when it is inconvenient to do so.

[DCBob]

39. That "agreement" was made when the final result was somewhat in doubt.

The Dem primary is for all practical purposes over. Time to move on to the general.

[ljm2002]

43. Sometimes people just give themselves away...

...as you just did, when you called their agreement an "agreement". As though it was not a "real" agreement. As though the agreement was made contingent on who was leading at the time.

And that is exactly why Clinton is not considered trustworthy. Because, when she finds an agreement to be inconvenient, it becomes for her and her followers, an "agreement" that can be broken. Because something.

[DCBob]

44. I put it in quotes to indicate that an agreement like that is not firm.

Everyone should have known that. Campaigns are extremely fluid. Things get canceled and rescheduled all the time.

[ljm2002]

46. Sure, sure...

...whatever you say.

The fact is, they made an agreement, not an "agreement", and Hillary is reneging on it. Which just illustrates her trustworthiness... or lack of same.

[kstewart33]

40. No more debates.

At this point, it only helps Trump.

[frustrated_lefty]

45. Where are the transcripts?

[polly7]

48. Anytime, anywhere.

Full video:

"In a Wednesday afternoon statement, Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver said the Vermont senator has accepted an invitation from Fox News to debate "with the understanding that we can reach mutual agreement on the debate moderators, the format and other details.”

Weaver said both campaigns in January agreed to hold a debate in May in California, adding that the Clinton campaign has “balked at keeping that pledge.”

“More than half way through the month of May, we hope Secretary Clinton will soon make good on her campaign’s commitment and agree to a time and pace for a debate,” Weaver said in the statement.

“There are issues of enormous importance facing the people of California and our nation and the people of our largest state deserve to hear the Democratic candidates [sic] opinions."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/280405-sanders-pushes-clinton-for-debate-in-california

(bbm)

[joshcryer]

49. I still believe it happens.

May 30?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

52. Coward.

[silvershadow]

53. He shouldn't. I wouldn't. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

54. Of course not, Hillary should just pivot to the general and campaign in Mississippi.

She doesn't need California... or any west coast state, for that matter.