2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary's 1st broken promise; a debate in Ca.
The debate saga so far:
1) The DNC originally schedules 6 debates.
2) Sanders, OMalley, and others demand more debates but DWS refuses.
3) Then as the New Hampshire primary approaches and Clinton is behind in the polls, she suddenly wants an additional debate in New Hampshire.
4) Sanders agrees to an additional debate in New Hampshire provided that Clinton agrees to another 3 debates, one each in March, April, and May (before the California primary).
5) Clinton agrees to Sander's conditions and the additional New Hampshire debate is held.
6) Clinton refuses to debate in California because it is not in her interest to do so. This is despite the fact that Clinton is a superb debater and will probably be the nominee in any case.
Can someone explain to me why I should trust Clinton to keep her major promises when she will not keep such a small and simple promise?
TheCowsCameHome
(40,161 posts)Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)I can hear it now...so Bernie when did you and Jesus walk on water...take your time...Hillary lets talks about...how you are unqualified and despised...30 seconds ... enough time woman (only they didn't say woman).
JudyM
(29,122 posts)for which she has no justifiable position.
apcalc
(4,461 posts)Tarc
(10,472 posts)There's no point in holding a debate when the election is a foregone conclusion.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)Call me crazy, but I would prefer that the eventual Democratic nominee -- whoever it is -- avoid doing things that are not in his/her interest.
catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)Avoid lying. And there is no other way to characterize her behavior. Character counts.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)I see in the OP she apparently agreed to do a debate in May.
I still don't think she should be doing anything that might hurt her in the general election.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)Skinner
(63,645 posts)She has a general election to win.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)Or by saying "in this case" do you mean that you are good with her winning by whatever means she chooses?
Skinner
(63,645 posts)I support Hillary Clinton pivoting to the General Election. Defeating Donald Trump is more important than letting Fox News dictate Hillary Clinton's schedule.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)Regardless of the news agency, she made a deal for a Cali debate in order to get the NH debate.
She did not offer to do the debate on another network. She flat out refused to honor her word.
She is going to have to debate tRump anyway. He is going to bring worse to the table than Bernie is. The fact that things are looking worse for her now (polling vs tRump, polling on favorability, DOJ stating that her use of the server is actively being investigated - as much as you hate to hear that) is all the MORE reason, IMO, it's in the best interests of our party to air these things now. Avoiding a debate with Sanders is only going to help her get the nom - it is not going to help the party. Just my view.
Skinner
(63,645 posts)Sanders wants Hillary Clinton to beat Trump as much as anyone. He understands why Hillary is pivoting to the general, and will provide her with the room she needs in order to do so.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)So which one is it: Hoping for indictment? Or hoping for superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters?
hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)If that's the case, she will risk nothing by making good on her promise. If she can't keep a promise when she has nothing to lose, why would we trust her to keep her promises when they're difficult to keep?
She promises to reign in this campaign finance system she's currently benefiting from. Will she?
jg10003
(974 posts)Response to Skinner (Reply #4)
NowSam This message was self-deleted by its author.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)Exilednight
(9,359 posts)FSogol
(45,355 posts)tabasco
(22,974 posts)JudyM
(29,122 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)That makes no sense whatsoever.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)Seems the Clintonites don't think having integrity in your word matters.
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)Serious question.
jg10003
(974 posts)I don't want any more f****** boring ass debates - there's nothing I haven't seen 100x already.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)has not.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)panader0
(25,816 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)She already kept her promise.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)TwilightZone
(25,342 posts)It's cute that you think she did, though.
You should probably be more upset that Fox News is using your candidate for ratings and attention, and he's going along with it.
LisaM
(27,758 posts)I think it's rather typical Sanders behavior to agree to something that is pretty ridiculous on its face and then try to put Hillary in the wrong.
jg10003
(974 posts)boomer55
(592 posts)The_Casual_Observer
(27,742 posts)was foolish enough tho along with it.
Of course he has nothing to lose.
jg10003
(974 posts)BlueStateLib
(937 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)She'll even make new promises and break those too.
And she'll be cheered on for doing it.
procon
(15,805 posts)Little kids say the same thing when they don't get the candy they wanted. The contest is over, and Sanders doesn't get his free publicity and now he's angry that he lost and there is no do overs.
You're right, Hillary is a superb debater, and it is not in her interest to share a stage with the losing candidate as if they were on equal footing and he was still competitive and had some chance of winning. The optics alone would increase his standing, but it would diminish what she has already gained. Since Hillary will be the nominee in any case, she must stay focused on her real opponent, Trump. From now on she should only be concerned with punching upward, hitting Trump and winning the election.