Whoop... There It Is... Ladies And Gentlemen... Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Today)

[WillyT]

“The purpose of it is so we can make sure that the Democratic Party’s debate process doesn’t get out of control,” she said

WHOSE CONTROL, Debbie ???

***************************************************************

The case for more Democratic debates
Greg Sargent - WaPo
September 10 at 3:12 PM

<snip>

With calls for more Democratic presidential primary debates mounting, Democratic National Committee chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz today brought the hammer down: There will be six debates and not a single one more!

“We’re having six debates — period,” the Florida congresswoman said today, per Jennifer Epstein’s report. “We’re having six debates and the candidates will be uninvited from any subsequent debates if they accept an invitation to a debate outside the six DNC-sanctioned debates.”

Wasserman Schultz added that six debates was just the right amount for voters to see a lot of interaction between the candidates without constraining their campaign schedules. “The purpose of it is so we can make sure that the Democratic Party’s debate process doesn’t get out of control,” she said, dismissing charges that the schedule is designed to rig the process for Hillary Clinton by limiting exposure of challengers Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley.

Yet the arguments against Wasserman Schultz continue to gain traction. If there is a good counter-argument to the case being made by those who want more debates, I haven’t heard it yet.

One key argument for more debates making the rounds among Dems is that the current schedule may result in too few Dem primary voters tuning in, at exactly the moment when it would be most useful for Democrats to be drawing a sharp contrast with Republicans. Four of the six Dem debates are currently scheduled, for October 13, November 14, December 19, and January 17th (two more are set for February or March but are not scheduled yet).

“Three of the four scheduled debates are on weekends,” Deb Kozikowski, the northeast vice president of the Association of State Democratic Chairs, tells me. “One is the weekend between Hannukah and Christmas; the other falls on Martin Luther King Day weekend. You can’t expect that we’re going to generate a whole lot of excitement and interest in these candidates.”

The Hillary campaign has said it hopes to wrap up the nomination by March 1st or March 15th...

<snip>

More: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/09/10/the-case-for-more-democratic-debates/

[cantbeserious]

1. Translation - Out Of Spin Control For The HRC Campaign

eom

[Autumn]

2. Let me fix this for ya Debs

“The purpose of it is so we can make sure that the Democratic Party’s debate process doesn’t get out of control,"

“The purpose of it is so we can make sure that Hillary's nomination doesn't slip away,”

Now see how easy it is to come clean and speak the truth Debs?

[WillyT]

5. And I LOVE This Excuse...

Wasserman Schultz added that six debates was just the right amount for voters to see a lot of interaction between the candidates without constraining their campaign schedules.

From OP.

Hey Debbie... there's this thing... called a JET AIRPLANE !!!

You can be anywhere in the Continental United States in a matter of hours... or less.

[MrMickeysMom]

67. And failing THAT….

Joe Biden, who's a good pinch hitter.

Naw…. Can't let American democratic process and the issues get control of who stands up for us, Debbie.

[hifiguy]

73. This.

[dorkzilla]

3. Great, logical argument for more debates...

...from the article:

“My concern is that not enough people will see the Democrats, while on the other side of the aisle, they’re putting on the Greatest Show on Earth,” Kozikowski of the Association of State Democratic Chairs tells me. “That just wipes us off the map. It doesn’t make any sense to let the opposition own the airwaves. The majority of my colleagues don’t feel much differently. We are advocating a full and complete discussion of issues among our candidates, whom we believe are far superior to the Greatest Show on Earth.”

DWS better stop acting like Leona Helmsley.

[Agschmid]

4. The number of debates does not bug me, the schedule does.

[WillyT]

7. Right !!! - I Don't Know What The Number SHOULD Be... But This Is Stupid On Top Of Stupid...

[cherokeeprogressive]

8. Let the DNC limit THEIR debates to six. Drop the exclusivity rule. Let NOW and the AFL-CIO have

debates as well.

[WillyT]

19. Great Idea... League Of Women Voters, Too...

Would like to see them in again.

[cherokeeprogressive]

23. All it would take is dropping the exclusivity rule.

I go in a big circle every time I try to figure this out and always come back to the fact that DWS was the co-chair of Hillary's failed presidential bid.

It's like she's trying to make up for her failure. Either that or she's convinced they can get Hillary in and then she can count on a job like Ambassador to the UN or something.

[WillyT]

24. Yep... And I Wonder...

DULink: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251582185

I mean... they could REALLY stir the shit doing this, but would it be worth it ?

[cherokeeprogressive]

28. It would most certainly be worth it. It would wrest control of the debates from Debbie.

After that she'd HAVE to drop the rule unless she wanted to sit Hillary on a stage all by herself and ask the questions... which would actually be less of a charade than what's going on at the moment.

[WillyT]

29. Exactly !!!

[Marie Marie]

57. I agree Willy

Bring back the League of Women Voters to handle the debates. They did an excellent job of handling them for years.

[daleanime]

104. +1

[tblue37]

102. I think ALL the other candidates should do a bunch of debates, with HRC invited, too, of course.

Then if DWS wants to exclde ALL of the other Dem candidates from the DNC debates, fine. Let Hillary stand alone on stage to answer moderator questions.

Seriously. The other Dem candidates can do this if they agree among themselves to debate as frequently as they wish to.

[cherokeeprogressive]

107. My point exactly. n/t

[BuelahWitch]

9. Me too. Move 'em up!

Holiday weekends are going to be a bust. Whoever made this schedule should have to go work at Walmart for the eternity.

[SMC22307]

35. The one between Hannukah and Christmas is a real winner.

[appalachiablue]

13. The December debate is set for the Saturday before Christmas. That'll really draw crowds!

Keep up the pressure on Undemocratic Debbie!

~ If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace. ~ Thomas Paine.

[frylock]

38. The Jets and the Cowboys also play that night..

8:25 est. Wonder what people will be tuning into?

[Ed Suspicious]

41. Wow. I probably won't even be watching then and I'm a bit of a junkie. Are they trying to lose?

I loves me my bread and circuses in the form of NFL football.

[frylock]

44. I can't help but believe that it was deliberately scheduled to conflict with the game.

I'm sure I'll be watching the game too.

[beltanefauve]

95. The last weekend of shopping before Chistmas

and also the biggest weekend for holiday parties.

[appalachiablue]

100. It is. The Jan. debate falls on the weekend before MLK Day I think. Is Debbie careless

or deliberate. In either case she's stubborn, and won't change or leave it seems. Another OP here raises how can she be removed, and that in 2014 under her we lost massively, and will again in 2016. What a thought, and what to do. The Dem. Pres. is the decider per some here.

[druidity33]

58. The exclusivity clause bothers me most. nt.

[tularetom]

6. "The Hillary campaign has said it hopes to wrap up the nomination by March 1st or March 15th... "

Yeah, all this pretense of being a liberal is stressing her out and she wants to hurry up and get back to who she really is. Once she gets that nomination, forget all this silly ass pandering to minorities, pretending to give a rats ass about working families, giving token support to Obama's foreign policy, she can revert to what she wants to do, appealing to "hard working white Americans" and being a neocon.

I think her "bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" speech at that neocon think tank yesterday was kind of a rude awakening to some of her more naive supporters. But it gave us a preview of what to expect if we were dumb enough to actually elect her.

[cherokeeprogressive]

10. Truer words are seldom posted here. n/t

[WillyT]

14. + 1,000,000,000 - What You Said !!!

[hifiguy]

21. +1000

[cantbeserious]

62. I Am Not That Stupid - Go Bernie Go

eom

[daleanime]

106. Hell yes....

[djean111]

11. I live in Florida, and am REALLY looking forward to not voting for Debbie, next time she

runs for anything at all.

[arcane1]

53. She'll have pro-Clinton Super-PAC cash to run with, guaranteed n/t

[djean111]

55. Sure she will. And if she is running for anything I can vote for, she will not get

my vote. And for those who bray about not voting Dem- Little Debbie has gone so far as to not support Dems who were running against her GOP buddies, and actually campaigning for her GOP buddies. So I have no problem not voting for her. IMO she is not a Democrat. I am not voting for DINOs any damn more.

[procon]

12. She's not making any sense.

If candidates will be disinvited from any subsequent debates and the last one is in Feb or March, then why can't they have all the debates they can find broadcasters for, after that? Even with her weak threat, if a couple of candidates announced a separate debate on TV -- and most networks would love the added viewers -- all the others would be clamoring for a spot on the stage to take advantage of the free advertising exposure. There's nothing Wasserman Schultz can do to prevent the candidates from striking out on their own.

[frylock]

40. Team Clinton is looking to have it all wrapped up by then.

The Hillary campaign has said it hopes to wrap up the nomination by March 1st or March 15th

[oasis]

64. The name of the game is to beat the GOP money machine in the GE.

Edelman and the Koch Bros. are going all out to control the airwaves and overload it with propaganda like they're doing on the "Deal" with Iran.

Hillary needs to be freed up to raise as much money as she can, while she can.

The Citizens United ruling forces our party to take questionable, but necessary measures in order to win the White House.

Bernie is a compassionate and honorable man but his ability to raise the funds needed is very much in doubt.

[WillyT]

68. Well... At Least Your Honest About The Faustian Bargain...

"It became necessary to destroy the town to save it."

[oasis]

70. Winning now will justify the process. By 2020 you'll see.

We can gradually work in the more "feel good" stuff with the coming years.

It would be a major setback should the GOP prevail. All progress would come to a halt.

[peacebird]

78. Nope. All DWS will manage is to split the party further. She is clearly NOT unbiased as chair.

[oasis]

80. The party is not going to split over this.

Too much at stake.

[peacebird]

81. There is too much at stake, which is why it will split if she keeps playing partisanfor Hillary

instead of acting as unbiased DNC chair.

2014 was her fiasco. She keeps this up, stacking the deck so blatantly and alienating progressives and 2016 will rupture the party and we will lose

[oasis]

83. If someone asked you 2 years ago what you thought Bernie's

chances were of reaching the WH in 2016, what would you have said?

[peacebird]

85. Interesting. Switch it up on you, two years ago I would have said no way HRC could win '16

I was rooting for Warren. But Bernie is the real deal, and NOW I believe he can win in'16.
I still do not think Hillary can

[oasis]

86. You can view Bernie as paving the way for a Warren type Dem

Somewhere down the road. It's a gradual process.

Meanwhile , a GOP victory means the appointment of two more Scalias to the Supreme Court.

[peacebird]

87. I view Bernie as the only candidate running who will take on the 1%.

I view Hillary as someone who will continue the DLC/DNC/third way push to the center right policies that are destroying our middle class. Plus, not really sure we can handle another war and she sure seems anxious to get her war on with Iran.

So no thank you on your kind offer of my being able to vote for a candidate who represents my beliefs in 2020. I will vote Bernie in 2016.

[saturnsring]

101. And as potus he'll be able to do that so effectively

[LondonReign2]

90. Ethics, pfftttt. Who needs'em, am I right?

[oasis]

91. The Big Picture.

Relax for a minute and let your vision take over.

[LondonReign2]

92. That's OK, I'd prefer not to take ethical advice from someone that can justify the Iraq war

because their candidate voted for it.

[oasis]

109. Then this: God grant me the serenity to accept the things I

cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

The sentiment falls along the same lines and I'm not the author.

For the record, I never justified the Iraq War itself. I did come to understand the various reasons why some Democrats voted for the IWR. It was no easy thing for any of them to do. But what they did is on them. Not me. Being a Christian, I can't hold resentments against people for making mistakes.

Anyway, have a nice evening.

[LondonReign2]

111. I imagine it is rather easier to "forgive" such a "mistake" when

1) It aligns with your preferred candidates interests, and
2) You weren't the one blown up and killed

[hifiguy]

15. Someone throw that shill an anchor.

Please.

[WillyT]

16. LOL !!! - You Bad...

[Octafish]

17. Wouldn't more debates get the Democratic message in front of more people?

No offense Ms. Wasserman Schultz, but from what I know I'd like to know more, not less.

Besides, wouldn't more debates just be plain old more Democratic? You know -- more opportunities to learn about the candidates?

[WillyT]

18. Yes !!! - And I've Been Wondering:

DULink: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251582185

[MisterP]

20. that'd mean a campaign that has a message

instead of threats and promises it admits are empty

there policy's been "who else do you have to go to?"

[jeff47]

47. Yep. Imagine if they did this:

About 10 days after every Republican debate, hold a Democratic debate.

Give the voters a lovely contrast between the parties. Over and over and over again. While allowing time for any explosions from the Republican debate to run their course.

[peacebird]

79. Yes. That would be a great compare & contrast. Instead little Debbie is handing over the airwaves

To all GOP all the time.

Instead of letting our candidates voices and ideas be heardd in a debate, she is letting the GOP frame everything. Great move there, little Debbie. Not. If this election goes down in flames with the GOP winning, we have only the very biased, very pro Hillary DNClinton chair Debbie to thank.

[CharlotteVale]

22. She is simply insufferable.

[Mr. Evil]

36. Whenever you think Debbie Wasserman Schultz...

Think midterm election results in 2014.

[CharlotteVale]

56. Oh, believe me, I do. I also believe she got the results she wanted.

[navarth]

25. Whatever respect and trust I still had for her

..just swished down into the toilet.

[Mr. Evil]

37. And in one of those public restrooms that seem to use sandpaper instead of real toilet paper. n/t

[gcomeau]

26. Anyone else get a mental image...

“We’re having six debates and the candidates will be uninvited from any subsequent debates if they accept an invitation to a debate outside the six DNC-sanctioned debates.”

...of Hillary standing on a stage alone debating herself?What are the odds they actually let that happen considering how freaking ridiculous it would make her look if they held primary "debates" and disinvited all the other candidates?

[Ed Suspicious]

43. They'd put Jim Webb and Link up for her to smack around.

[99th_Monkey]

49. Don't forget Lessig, the opportunist, hawking his new book. He'd be happy to be there. nt

[retrowire]

27. I often don't insult people directly but...

Debbie Wasserman Schultz, you are a fraud and an idiot.

[cherokeeprogressive]

30. How the hell does she justify PUNISHING candidates for debating without her permission?

Blow me down.

[dflprincess]

31. So....imagine the League of Women Voters decides to hold a debate

and all the Democratic candidates show up - or all but one shows up - DSW is going to disinvite them - or disinvite all but one? She winds up with an empty stage or only one candidate on it.

Could she at least pretend to be unbiased the way the DNC chair is supposed to be until there is a nominee?

[WillyT]

32. Funny You Should Say That:

DULink: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251582185

[dflprincess]

54. Must be a case of great minds WillyT

But your post was much more thoughtful. I'm sorry I missed it yesterday.

[PowerToThePeople]

33. I truly think she is a Republican operative. n/t

[restorefreedom]

34. this also helps the gop big time

but hillary wasserman schultz doesn't care about the ge, the country, or democracy itself.

interesting how some hrc supporters complain that bernie isn't a "real" dem, yet is he is waaaaay more of a dem than either the protected one or her scheming goons.

[frylock]

39. The Hillary campaign has said it hopes to wrap up the nomination by March 1st or March 15th..

I expect to see a lot of 1000-yard stares over in Camp Clinton when this date passes and they're not cracking Champagne.

[Rainbowdy]

110. By then they'll be wondering where all this people came from

Clinton gets much less than expected delegates from each states..... and Bernie's leading in every state. By then, Clinton's poll numbers will meet or match O'Malley's numbers.

[Babel_17]

42. "Greg Sargent" - that name carries some weight

DWS's continued stance on this is going to become untenable. Not sure who will go the mat to back her on her position. Maybe she has lots of support in private, but the calls for her ouster look to be on the increase. Very hard position to defend, no matter how you look at it.

"Who doesn't want more debates, raise your hand."

That's the issue she's going to endlessly face as the media starts to focus on our debate schedule. Who will be the first talking head to play the O'Malley video while having her on?

[smiley]

45. I think 6 debates is more than enough for Bernie to get his msg across

But the timing of those 6 debates is a finely orchestrated dance with one goal in mind. Keep the voters uneducated.

[peacebird]

88. Dec 19... I'm sure little Debbie picked that date for a reason.....

[kacekwl]

46. The other candidates should tell her to shove it

Would be awesome to see a debate with one participant.

[Fred Sanders]

48. Democrats will have actual debates, no carnivals. The folks that want carnivals are Republicans and the

enemy media. Conflating debates with what the Republicans and the media have collaborated on, to convert politics into a repetitively broadcast personality nakedly marketed as pure entertainment, is anti-intellectual.

If any candidate believes they can not get fair coverage and a chance to carry their message because of "only" 6 actual debates, no carnivals, may not be carrying the right message.

And another post distorting a quote and ignoring the context is no longer very special.

There it isn't.

[peacebird]

96. The timing of the debates is questonable at best. dec 19? Holiday parties, low viewership?

mLK weekend, a long weekend where families tend to get together to enjoy each other, not watch politics?

It is really pretty blatant partisanship FOR Hillary on DNClinton chair DSW's part

[DrBulldog]

50. That's an improvement for Hillary ... I guess ...

Back in 2007, Hillary said it would be wrapped up by December - before the primaries even started! So she's being a little more cautious this time?

[Dont call me Shirley]

51. Resign Debbie. She's trying to render the Democrats losers already.

[Major Hogwash]

52. It doesn't matter if they even hook up a live mic for Bernie, he has my vote.

Hillary can't run away from the speech she gave at the Brookings Institute yesterday.
There isn't enough time.

In just 1 month's time -- 32 days from now -- at the very first debate, Bernie will bring up what she said in that speech, and it will all go downhill from there for her.

The movie "Doctor Strangelove" was broadcast on tv last night.
How apropos!

[oasis]

59. Hill won't dodge a single word of that speech.

When it comes to who can best defend America, it's a debate she'll welcome.

[WillyT]

69. Uh... Yeah...

[oasis]

71. Do you think capitalism will be called into question during the debates?

Trust me, Hill will have none of that.

[peacebird]

98. Yet another reason I will vote Bernie. In the primary AND the general

[peacebird]

97. It's not defending America, it's about providing profit for the war machine. Just like Cheney did.

[LWolf]

60. Hillary hopes to wrap up the nomination

2 months before my state even gets to vote.

Fuck that.

[Uncle Joe]

61. It isn't the debate process that Schultz is so worried about controlling, it's the electorate.

Thanks for the thread, WillyT.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

63. "The Hillary campaign has said it hopes to wrap up the nomination by March 1st or March 15th..."

What if Bernie says no?

[DirkGently]

65. Smells like a barrel

...of week-old fish.

And everyone knows it.

[Scuba]

66. Looks to me like she's trying to throw the GE to the Republicans.

[rhett o rick]

75. I wouldn't go that far. But I do think she (and Goldman-Sachs) are willing to risk

losing the general to prevent a progressive winning the primary. She will lose a lot of Democratic votes for Clinton if she continues these shenanigans.

[peacebird]

99. The ceo of GoldmanSux is on record saying either Hillary or Jeb for pres is fine by him....

That should tell you how much difference there is between them really.....

[rhett o rick]

105. And I think he speaks for the Oligarchy and has DWS on speed-dial.

We need change from this corruption.

[JEB]

72. We don't need no stinkin' control.

Let's air out the issues and give the candidates chances to state their positions on those issues.

[MoonchildCA]

74. Without constraint there campaign schedules?

Seriously! She's going to use that for an argument.

I think spending an evening reaching millions of Americans on national television is a bit more important to a campaign schedule than an evening spent, possibly, at a rally in front of a few thousand supporters.

[randys1]

76. Debates are free advertising for all participants, so of course Debbie wants to limit

Bernie's exposure to the public by doing this and it makes me mad as hell.

[peacebird]

77. A debate scheduled Dec 19 is as cynical a sleazy move as possible. "let's plan for when everyone is

at a holiday party!'

Eff that Debbie. I think we need to have holiday debate viewing parties that night, and tweet/ reddit/facebook and LTTE the ever loving crap out of it!

[Babel_17]

82. The schedule: "There’s no point in acting surprised about it." and "Beware of the Leopard"

"... been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now."

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker's_Guide_to_the_Galaxy

"But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."

"Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."

"But the plans were on display ..."

"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

"That's the display department."

"With a flashlight."

"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

"So had the stairs."

"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."

http://www.planetclaire.org/quotes/hitchhikers/

[emsimon33]

84. Wasserman Schultz needs to be removed as chair

2014 should have been enough to get her canned. Now she wants to lose 2016. What a waste of a human soul...if this puppet has one.

[Babel_17]

89. Given she opposed the treaty with Iran, ...

Given she opposed the treaty with Iran, that being decidedly in our rear-view mirror might be the diplomatic time for our party's leadership to decide it's best she goes back to performing her duties as a Congressperson. We want to avoid even the appearance of looking petty over a vote that important.

[sabrina 1]

94. So regardless of the wishes of millions of voters AND candidates themselves, DWS

is the BOSS of all of them? Really?

Okay then Debbie, lift the Exclusionary Rule, let the CANDIDATES decide if debates are going to interfere with their campaign schedule, and you just stick with your own six little debates while the rest of us Democrats follow a Democratic process.

She really is revealing herself now for all the world to see.


This party so badly needs to be returned to the PEOPLE, out of the hands of Corporate powers. And people wonder WHY so many people are so disgusted with the whole mess!

[99Forever]

103. The establishment is scared shitless.

They know their chosen candidate can't keep up. It's called pure and simply, rigging the primary process for a second rate candidate that can't cut the mustard.

[WillyT]

108. Yep... 'Things Fall Apart; The Centre Cannot Hold'...

[L0oniX]

112. Get out of whose control?