Yeah... I Know... It's A Conservative Paper... But I Have To Agree Here:

[WillyT]

Protecting Hillary: All over but the shouting
EDITORIAL - New Hampshire Union Leader
September 21. 2015 8:38PM

In 2008, Democratic presidential primary voters defied the party establishment and picked an inspiring young candidate over the one anointed by party elders. This time, the establishment is not taking any chances. Democratic voters should feel used.

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has strictly limited the number of officially sanctioned presidential primary debates to six and written the participation rules so tightly as to all but guarantee there will be no alternatives such as the New Hampshire Union Leader’s Voters First Forum for Republican presidential candidates this past summer.

The DNC has scheduled only four presidential debates before the Iowa caucuses, and only one debate in New Hampshire, that one on Dec. 19, just six days before Christmas.

When DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz spoke at the state Democratic Convention in Manchester on Saturday, she was heckled so loudly her speech was drowned out at times. The hecklers shouted her down with demands of more debates. Their anger and frustration are understandable.

On the Republican side, primary voters have 16 candidate options and 11 debates to help them decide. Six of those debates are scheduled before the Feb. 1 Iowa caucuses. The Democratic primary voters are being muffled — on purpose — by a party elite that wants no one to disrupt Hillary Clinton’s path to the nomination.

If an establishment Republican is to win the presidential nomination in 2016, he is going to have to earn it. The same is not true on the Democratic side. From the debate schedule to the early endorsements from figures such as U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and Gov. Maggie Hassan, the fix is in for Clinton. Democratic voters might ask themselves why the establishment feels the need to go to such lengths to protect its candidate from the voters’ judgment.

Link: http://www.unionleader.com/Protecting_Hillary:_All_over_but_the_shouting_

[Skwmom]

1. I think we'll get more debates b/c they've had enough time to figure out

how they will package Clinton and go after her opponents. Then people will feel like they are really getting something. Otherwise, Daily Kos never would have joined in to demand more debates.

[marym625]

4. Fred, you're an intelligent person.

Regardless of link, do you really believe that there's any other reason for the few number of debates, the ridiculous schedule and the unprecedented rule that candidates are not allowed to participate in any other debate but the DNC?

If so, please explain.

[Human101948]

13. Man! Those crickets are deafening!

Fred? Helllooooo Fred!

[mythology]

38. You do realize that having a post in this thread

Means he can't respond right?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

55. That was a pretty innocuous post to have hidden.

eom

[progressoid]

64. "messengers deserve to be shot on sight"

That's innocuous?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. It was a metaphor. If you believe he was being literal you should contact your local constabulary.

eom

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

67. That's a clever way to cover one's very angry ass

Sorry, but that poster is quite often over the line in directing vitriol towards other DUers.

And I speak as someone who just yesterday strongly objected to an anti-Hillary cartoon by a right-wing nut cartoonist that was being trumpeted here (and was alerted on and hidden rightfully).

[progressoid]

74. A metaphor. Riiiiight.

Does that also apply to "Some messengers deserve to go fuck themselves" or "Some messengers should eat shit and die"?

No need to answer. We have juries for that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

75. "Shooting the messenger" is a common metaphor and not to be taken literally.

eom

[WillyT]

70. It's Perfect... Shoot The Messenger...

Ignore the message.

Again... it was DEMOCRATS that shouted DWS down... NOT conservatives.

[Bobbie Jo]

71. Your "messenger" has issues.

Doesn't matter anymore, really. The last remaining standard here has been officially obliterated.

Have at it...

[WillyT]

73. So... How Is It That We Are Supposed To Support Democrats, When Other Democrats Prevent

That From Happeneing ???

O'Malley objects... Sanders objects... Don't know about the others...

What are they afraid of ???

[Bobbie Jo]

92. Objecting

wasn't what I objected to, now was it?



Co-opting RW sources is the issue.

As I said, the last remaining standard here...is just gone.

[workinclasszero]

81. Agreed

But that's the norm around here unfortunately.

[marym625]

89. yep.

[Capn Sunshine]

68. It was a generally accepted idea at the time during the DNC Conference calls

The conversations never had the context "Hillary needs protecting". In fact, when the decisions were made, Bernie Sanders was not really on anyone's radar.

The general opinion that prevailed was "It seems like the American people, with the exception of the wonks, get sick of our candidates and tune out of the process with continued debates. We should really cut the number down to a number large enough to maintain continuity but small enough to guarantee interest"

DWS wasn't gleefully rubbing her hands together like Mr. Burns, going "Exxxxxcelent".

If anyone was happy it was people like me, who hated the debates and the ultimate result of candidate fatigue they created on the voting American public.

[druidity33]

88. yes, but

the SCHEDULE wasn't divined until August. And what about that damn exclusivity clause?

[marym625]

90. big difference

Between "being saturated" and this schedule.

Yeah, I think she probably was thrilled. Absolutely this debate schedule, the limit and the exclusivity was an agenda in favor of Clinton

[frylock]

16. If this is an attack on Clinton, then it's a tacit admission that the DNC is in the tank for her..

you have just admitted that the debate schedule and exclusivity clause were set up specifically to favor and protect Clinton.

[AlbertCat]

18. ALL the attacks on Clinton at DU quote conservative and even ultra-con websites.

That's funny!

ALL!


More ridiculous hyperbole from the Hillary supporters.... that is clearly not true.

Why would anyone listen to this mush? Why this need to lie?


What next? The hecklers at the state Democratic Convention in Manchester on Saturday were GOP plants?

[demwing]

24. Thank you

my thoughts exactly, and I'm sure we're not alone on this.

[AlbertCat]

60. "You NEVER do ANYTHING I ask you to do."

My mother yelled that at me until sometime when I was like 12 or something I said:

"OK, you got it! I will from now on NEVER, that's NEVER do ANYTHING.... anything at all... you ask me to do."



My red flags go off every time I hear unnecessary superlatives.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

42. I expect them next to claim Bernie is a GOP plant.

[randys1]

28. I dont need to go to ANY rightwing board to find out what the TP attacks are

for the day.

If you want to hear the BASH and HATE Hillary info, just be at DU cuz you will get it here FIRST...

Remember what is at stake.

If the American Taliban can take over the WH and maintain the House and Senate, we will become a sharia/christianish law state where Women, Gays, Latinos, Blacks, Muslims and Jewish citizens lives will be in danger.

So dont be confused for one minute, this is about life and death of real people.

[Rilgin]

53. All you are saying is true so WHY

back a damaged candidate (HRC) who will have problems winning the general election. She has unfavorable ratings even in the state that she won her only election that virtually make that a certainty.

Just lose your bias and recent history and examine her without a name or gender. Accept that the candidate has some good qualities then consider that the following. The candidate has extremely high unfavorables, has lost elections in the recent past including the last presidential race that the candidate was favored to win, has had votes or is associated with bills that are fundamentally disagreed with by the candidate's base including: war votes, bankruptcy votes, criminal justice votes, and welfare reform votes. The candidate is very well known so views on this candidate will be very hard to change. The candidate has a reputation some deserved and some purely from Right Wing attacks for being secretive, triangulating rather than direct, and not telling the truth for which the RW will be able to produce videos of the candidate lying about being under fire to support this reputation.

Then ask yourself if you RandyS1 want to risk all the dire predictions in your post about the American Taliban if this candidate wins the primary and loses the general. Understand, it does not matter whether democrats voice their problems with HRC or dont. Her reputation, standing and support is baked in now. The only confusing part is why you RandyS1 would take the risk of supporting a candidate who has such weaknesses in a general election.

[randys1]

54. I guess you missed the 289 times I said I am a Bernie supporter.

[Rilgin]

56. I have seen your recent posts

However, in this post you express a great fear of losing the general election then call the people on this site who are trying to avoid losing the General Election with a failed candidate by discussing this candidate during the primaries (emphasis added) right wing.

She is a very risky candidate. One could only hope she would have recognized this or could recognize this now but that really is not her history. In 2008 she continued attacks on candidate Obama after she mathematically had lost the primaries. Our only real hope is that her weaknesses become more obvious in the polls to the point it is obvious.

I have some concerns over Bernie's electability as well although he may have some advantages in this current political environment and he does excite the base. If he is the candidate we will really have a polarized general election (a real one and not triangulated). This maybe a good thing.

However, I would really have liked more choices. If HRC had not taken the air out of the democratic community over the last few years we might have had more candidates to choose from. We all know she is the establishment candidate. She locked up pre-endorsements and money early. It would have been crazy for other establishment politicians to buck this process. The only one willing to run was an outsider who originally seemed to run only to bring certain issues (the important ones) into the debate. Bernie has said he is totally surprised by his own support. Really it shows that the electorate is not happy with an establishment candidate. Bush and Clinton were the candidates of this establishment, both are in trouble. This is not coming from the RW, this is coming from the democratic base. She needs to be derailed so we actually have a good chance in the General.

[randys1]

57. Your first paragraph makes no sense to me. Unless you are spreading the rightwing meme

that Hillary isnt electable, because of course the candidate the right KNOWS they cant beat, is Hillary.

That has been obvious for years, it is why they work so hard to destroy her.

Bernie may not be electable either.

What matters to me is the GOP not winning. That is all that really matters to me at the moment.

[Rilgin]

61. It is your allegation

Yes exactly what I said. You allege that any democrat that is concerned over HRC electability is a right wing troll or a conduit for right wing meme. You do not look at her just blame the RW and attack anyone who looks at her issues on their face. Rather slippery of you.

With regard to my first paragraph it would have been better said by using the word "flawed" rather than "failed". One of her flaws is its already been proved in 2008 that she does not excite the base and can lose an election that she was considered a lock to win. In this way she is a failed candidate but "flawed" is a better word.

I ask you again to forget her name and gender and look at her history, positions and unfavorability. She has big problems in the democratic base. How obvious does that be to have you acknowledge this. The rise of Bernie from unknown to front runner in the first two states should tell you everything.

There are serious issues from the democratic side over her electability. You trying to say everyone who tries to point this out on a democratic site during the primaries is echoing right wing memes does not change the facts.

If your main issue is avoiding a republican win, you should be doing everything you can to avoid HRC continuing to run and win the primary.

[sabrina 1]

91. No one is 'electable' until they are elected. Sanders has been elected over and over again

so to make that claim is simply ridiculous. In fact Sanders has never lost a Presidential Election, but Hillary has even with all the advantages HE won't have, such as the huge donations, 'war chest' she had, the backing of the Establishment part, huge name recognition against a politician who, like Bernie, at the time was virtually unknown.

She lost THEN because of ISSUES. So anyone saying she is 'more electable' than Sanders, has completely forgotten what happened last time she ran for the WH.

And now it's probably even less likely that she will win in the GE because voters have been through so much devastation personally due to policies she is known to have supported.

Voters decide who is 'electable' and who is not. They've done it umpteen times after 'pundits and experts' declared otherwise.

It is probably the most inane claim against a candidate one can think of. Especially one who has already proven their electability over and over again, for Mayor, against all odds, for Congress multiple times and for the Senate with overwhelming majorities.

[marym625]

3. K&R!

This debate schedule is a joke. The rule that keep a candidate from debating outside of the DNC debates is just unbelievable. This is supposed to be a democratic process. Where does Debbie get off stifling the candidates to this degree?

Debbie does third-way







#FeelTheBern

[WillyT]

14. LOL !!! - You Bad...

[marym625]

15. LOL!

Well, someone had to say it

[d_legendary1]

45. Thanks for the visual

[marym625]

48. no problem

[JoePhilly]

5. Well ... the conservative ...

... water isn't just going to carry itself ... that's for sure.

[WillyT]

6. It Wasn't Conservatives Shouting Down DWS... Was It ???

Those would be fellow Democrats.

[Bobbie Jo]

7. Ayep

All hands on deck.

[zappaman]

21. I love the premature apology though.

It's like when someone says "I'm not ____, but..."

[DisgustipatedinCA]

76. So both of you believe Willy T is a Republican plant.

That's pretty damned stupid on its face, but it's good to know that all of your opinions can be safely discarded if that the level you're working at. Also, work up the courage to say what you mean next time. If you believe he's been a Republican plant here for years, have the guts and the strength of character to say so. Sure, I'll still laugh at the ludicrousness of the claim, but at least you'll have stood by your claim.

[zappaman]

82. Do you often put words into people's mouths?

Or is this a one time thing?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

86. I have no intention of acting like a submoron in order to fit your narrative

Words have meaning. You typed words. Do you care to offer an alternate explanation about what was clear to anyone who read it? This isn't some site where people who can't manage to complete a sentence argue about the meaning of well-established words and phrases. If you're into dysfunction and saying things that you can later claim meant nothing at all if things go south on you, take heart: there are websites for people who enjoy that sort of thing. But this is not one of them. This is a site for reasonable people to come together and discuss and argue politics. People who cannot back their claims or don't have what it takes to stand by their words are generally not too happy at DU. There is a small ante required to sit at this table, and the coins of this realm are language, logic, and the willingness to display the courage of one's convictions.

[zappaman]

93. So you do like to put words into people's mouths.

Thanks for admitting it!

[DisgustipatedinCA]

94. I don't do low functioning discourse. Bye.

[zappaman]

97. Bye.

Come back when you have a better understanding of the words people write.
I'll be here, but I'm not sure your new friend, NAME REMOVED, will be...

[jalan48]

8. Maybe the conservative Democrats don't like being challenged.

Why open up their little club to those liberal/socialist outsiders? Better to keep the club exclusive. There's money to be made by playing ball with the corporate interests.

[Ed Suspicious]

25. It's a big little tent the party lives in.

[SidDithers]

11. Welcome to DU...

Sid

[bahrbearian]

19. Who are you voting for in the Primaries Sid

[morningfog]

40. He refuses to commit to vote for the Democratic nominee.

[zappaman]

22. Again...

[certainot]

12. that sounds a lot like the new limbaugh appealing to the teabagger 'masses'

vs the 'establishment' he fell out with- until the establishment give him enough money

[obnoxiousdrunk]

36. Welcome back !

[treestar]

62. Never knew her middle name before

Diane, interesting.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

77. There are two people accusing you of being a banned member who has returned.

I don't know if you were previously a member here and you were banned. But if this is your first time here, please consider writing a post in the group called Ask the Administrators. Ask them to get your IP address and other login details. And if you feel,so inclined, let them know that members SidDithers and zappaman, in their leadership positions at DU, have singled you out and accused you of being a troll. Again, I have no idea what past you may have at DU, if any. But it did occur to me that if this truly is your first time here, you were not given a very warm welcome.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

79. Up to you. I'm going to begin calling these things out when I see them.

There's a crowd who makes that accusation here EVERY SINGLE DAY. they may be right on occasion, but they certainly have no proof, unless they have admin rights to the site. I can't imagine they're always right, and if they are, they're guessing. Ergo, these accusations need to stop.

[zappaman]

84. Lol!

[DisgustipatedinCA]

85. I meant what I said. If you have inside information, let's ask the admins why you do.

If you don't have inside information, you're trolling the site and engaging in personal attacks.

Yeah, this guy got sent in his way, but it certainly wasn't for the post I'm responding to. And of course, the question remains: what makes you so special that you're permitted to make accusations of trollery when this is forbidden by the site? I know you are, or were, a host. Does that give you the right to do what no one else here can do? I'll be finding out by and by.

[zappaman]

95. Sid is my father.

Skinner is Sid.
I am the walrus.

Coo coo ka choo.

[zappaman]

83. Lol!

[certainot]

10. actually, what gets republicans thru primaries are the talk radio gods, with

limbaugh leading the way. limbaugh is why we got palin- otherwise the gop convention would be a disaster with limbaugh still not on board with mccain.

today trump is in the lead because talk radio gods like limbaugh and savage lead tens of millions of authoritarian dupes with mind numbing choruses of hypocritical amoral denial and rationalization.

that's why walker is out- he was directly competing with limbaugh's chosen. the others all have their own appeal. one is a woman. one is black and loony religious. the rest get the 'establishment' label and brush off from limbaugh.

he's talking about it now as a matter of fact. talking about carson as a man of steel, excusing his muslim for president comment etc, trying to get in good with the evangelicals and pretend he's not a grand vizir of the kkk.

look at it the other way, when he turns on trump cause some collection of billionaires paid more than trump, he's done.

could be as easy as that. not sure what it will take to get him to back bush after being rather cold about it- one of the 'establishment' candidates - from the ultimate establishment mouthpiece pretending to be one with the teabag masses.

[saidsimplesimon]

17. The zombies are on their way to the grave.

We, on the side of light and love, will celebrate life.

[Keep-Left]

20. how many debates do you really need?

4 is enough.

[Laser102]

34. More than enough. After two, people's eyes glaze over.

The same questions over and over again. The same tired media going over every nuance and analyzing every word that was said. I really like how the media inserts itself into the debates. Oh, talking head, you were brilliant for asking that question. And isn't he or she smart? This is CNN with breaking news. Keep your breaking news, I'm watching Walking Dead reruns after two debates.

[NewJeffCT]

39. The Republicans got a lot of free publicity

from each of their two debates so far. By the time the next debate rolls around in late October, we'll get some ups and downs in the polls and maybe somebody else rising, and maybe another dropout or two... maybe in December and January, people will pay less attention, but then we're into caucus and primary season right after that.

[WillyT]

26. No... It's Not All I Have...

Link: http://tinyurl.com/nhflr4u

I just thought it was succinct.

[Wankle Ronnie]

41. The link directs me to here

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=democratic+debates&tbm=nws

[marym625]

50. I'll be happy to link you to articles that Dems

Want more debates. Here's a guardian article to start. Would a local New Hampshire news, showing New Hampshire dems want more debates be acceptable? Just let me know what you will accept

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/20/democratic-presidential-candidates-demand-more-debate-time

[A Simple Game]

98. Don't bother, they want the right wing sources.

They have to shoot the messenger because they can't shoot the message.

[marym625]

99. +1

[Faux pas]

27. Like I've said before

if you can't beat 'em CHEAT 'em. The more this shit goes on, the less respect I have for the whole hrc machine.

[Tommy2Tone]

30. Bernie fans Seem would be pals with the devil if the devil was against Hillary.

To Bernie fans every endorsement is bought and paid for. Every Hillary supporter is clueless Neo-Democrat. Polls show Hillary is way ahead on a national basis but to you guys the polls are wrong because Bernie generates big crowds. Unions are endorsing Hillary but they are in on the fix as well.

This is not the first time a hate piece from the right is parroted here and I suspect it won't be the last.

[SheilaT]

31. If Bernie keeps on going around the country and

gaining supporters, the number of debates isn't going to matter that much.

It's my personal opinion that they don't matter very much to begin with, but that's based on the fact that I personally don't pay attention to them, and I may be highly unusual in this regard. Maybe 90% of the voters out there haven't a clue who they want to vote for until they watch a whole lot of debates.

[BlueJazz]

32. WillyT. I certainly don't mind hearing from the Conservative side of things. I (like most here) can

... separate facts from fiction. Matter of fact, I LIKE to hear their side of things...Know thine enemy and all that.

[WillyT]

33. Thanks BlueJazz... There Are Many People On This Site Who Like To Stay Informed...

If you don't hear the other side, then you're just talkin to yourself.

[gregcrawford]

37. Glad to hear you say that, Willy...

... I got my ass tossed in the chipper last week for suggesting that very thing when defending an OP that had a link to a dirtbag site. Even survived a hide.

Sigh... I guess mindless malice is not always the exclusive domain of the Dark Side. Must be a mutated form of road rage. Thread rage?

[BlueJazz]

44. Very true. I'll state this: I LIKE cats. They're cute. Having said that..If I can put up with 172 ..

...cat/kitten/kidith/mouser/feline threads each day, people can damn well put-up with those of us who like to hear about the other side of the coin once in awhile.

[gregcrawford]

59. We have two Siamese cats...

... and ya can't get any cattier than that! Ya nailed it, Blue!

[BlueJazz]

63. I've one cat, 2 rabbits, one Golden retreiver, 3 rats, and a chinchila. They all get along with..

..each other. They usually sleep during the day and raise hell at night. (Play-chasing each other around the house)
I've always been surprised at the cat. The rats will "Attack" him...then run...hoping he'll chase. He looks at them as if to say:
"I don't do chase and stalk..talk to the dog"

[gregcrawford]

66. Quite a menagerie!

In addition to the cats, we have two shi tzus, a miniature pinscher, and a mess of fish. We used to have some cockatiels, and our first bird we named Beethoven. We started to get suspicious when he began laying eggs!

[staggerleem]

35. Can we really call those TV shows featuring Republican candidates "debates"?

Did they discuss anything of real substance, anything that would improve the life of average Americans? Did they substantially disagree on ANYTHING? At any time, was the same question posed to each candidate, to show the public how their opinions differ on that issue?

Nope - none of the above. What we saw was, essentially a beauty pageant - or perhaps it should be called an ugly pageant.

So, if the Democrats have REAL debates, then the 6 they have will actually be MORE debates than the Republicans have, cuz what they've been doin' so far ain't really a debate!

[GitRDun]

43. It would be nice to not see these kind of "much ado about nothing threads"

This is how politics works. The wailing and gnashing of teeth over this is just rich.

Hillary has a big lead. More debates can do nothing but hurt her.

Her friend wants to help her along so she is....big deal. It's not like its any different on the Republican side, with establishment people like Walker requesting others drop out so a unified establishment can try to stop Trump.

This post and the many others like it just sound like sour grapes because Bernie has to overcome something as old as politics itself.

If he builds his cred with a big block of diverse voters, six debates is all he'll need....especially if he's half as great as many here think he is.

The pre-apology makes it even more awkward.

Do like Bernie does and just focus on the issues.

[MineralMan]

47. Oddly enough, all of the arguments seem to assume that

Hillary Clinton will do poorly in debates, while other candidates, specifically Bernie Sanders will somehow benefit. The reality is that all of the three candidates whose names we're hearing will give a good account of themselves in the debates, and the differences between them are actually pretty minor, really.

Clinton will do just fine in such debates. So will Bernie. So will Biden, if he does decide to run. They'll all speak about issues that are important to Democrats. They may differ in the details of their ideas, but not in the fundamentals. Bernie will call for single-payer healthcare, while Hillary will praise Obamacare and say that she wants to expand it to help even more people. All will talk about a higher wage for our lowest-paid workers, call for social justice improvements, and immigration reform. The details may vary slightly, but all will be calling for similar things.

All will call for big money to be removed from the political process, and all will declare that Citizens United was a bad decision, one which will be affected by their Supreme Court nominees. None will directly attack the others, but there will be mentions of past votes and positions, all of which are pretty familiar to most voters.

Bottom line is that these debates will probably not materially affect voter response, which will be based on general opinions and feelings about the candidates. Probably the candidate who will get the biggest boost will be Martin O'Malley, since he has the poorest name recognition right now. Bernie's getting press, so his name recognition has improved. Biden is an unknown, since he won't have declared until just before the first debate.

Six debates will just about be all the Democratic voting public will care about. They'll all be much the same, and pretty bland, overall. There's just not enough difference between the candidates for the debates to be all that interesting. I doubt they'll get anything like the GOP clown show debates. In fact, I doubt they'll change anything much, really.

We'll see. The first one's coming up fairly soon. It will be interesting to see how the candidates handle it. The rest will just be echoes of the first one. The debates will not swing the primary elections, though, in my opinion.

[CharlotteVale]

49. K&R

[Catherina]

51. Dump the DNC. Let Chris Hayes, Women's League or someone host REAL debates

and let Hillary debate empty chairs. Who cares about their lists and their money? We'll walk door-to-door, be everywhere and keep building this grassroots.

The DNC would rather see the election go to Trump than let down it's corporate backers.

It's about time we took our democracy back.

[WillyT]

52. + 1,000,000,000 What You Said !!!

[olddots]

58. the DNC will eventually hang themselves

with their own velvet rope .

[Capn Sunshine]

69. Since it's a conservative paper the conclusion should be obvious

Taking another swipe at the nominee they least want to see in the general.

Things being as they are, this might not really be a good strategy

[arely staircase]

72. of

course

[McCamy Taylor]

87. WTF? "Union Leader"??? Anyone here remember what the Union Leader did in 1972 to Muskie?

[SoapBox]

96. Yes...the fix is in for Ms. Inevitable.

And it couldn't be any more blatant.

That debate schedule joke...one small example of how bad the December debate date is...in Portland (Oregon) there will be a two day (Dec 18 & 19) college basketball tournament at the Moda Center. It is the return of the Far West Classic...every basketball far will be excited and the last thing they will do is stay home for some debate.

That weekend will be incredibly busy, nationwide with holiday parties and activities.

The placing of a debate on that weekend could not have been more coordinated, to keep Camp Weathervane from being seen.

Every time she is exposed to the masses, they will be reminded of why they do not like her.

It's called Hillary burnout...and it's BIG.