The debates will get NO coverage in the news tomorrow

[hill2016]

at most there will be a 30 second clip of who would have the most aggressive response to the attacks

[Purveyor]

1. Hell there is/was little coverage of the debate scheduled for the sunday talks even before this.

See here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027340920

[askew]

2. Yep, Debbie's plan is working perfectly. Limit # of debates, put them at obscure times and

hope other news overshadows debates.

There is an opportunity for a real distinction between Hillary and Sanders/O'Malley though. Both Sanders and O'Malley had the good judgment to know what a mistake the Iraq War was because it would destabilize the Middle East. Hillary didn't care or lacked the foreign policy judgment to make the right decision. It should be a huge part of the debate, but I am not sure that the moderators will allow that conversation to take place as media is ginning up for a new war. I am also not sure if O'Malley or Sanders will feel like they can criticize Hillary on foreign policy in the debate or if they'll just cede this to her.

[NobodyHere]

3. Out of curiosity

Do you know of any Martin O Malley quotes against the Iraq War circa 2003?

[askew]

9. I've been asked this before and dug up a couple of quotes but it was tough.

I can't find my post now. But, Raine1967 posted two links to speeches he gave with opposition to Iraq War:

http://www.c-span.org/video/?182719-1/democratic-national-convention-day-3-afternoon (3 hours 18 minutes in)

His response to SOTU in 2003 - http://www.c-span.org/video/?174794-1/democratic-radio-response

Interestingly enough, James Fallows at the Atlantic had a great interview with O'Malley about 6 months or so ago and discussed their conversation on the Iraq War right before invasion and how O'Malley was one of the few Dems to be opposed to it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1281128

In Baltimore Sun, they referred to him as a longtime critic of Iraq War.

The issues page have him listed as opposed to Iraq War for years.

[NobodyHere]

14. Good to know

[Divernan]

4. Congrats - Your post survived the alert

And as an aside, the alerter could not even spell the word "ridiculous". And is the latest meme that any criticism of Debbie is "crap" and a conspiracy theory?

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Conspiracy swill. DWS did not "hope other news" would overshadow the debates, who could have predicted these horrible attacks? This is a rediculous post, the conspiracy theories are flying and we need to hide crap like this.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Nov 14, 2015, 02:28 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Meh!!
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with the alerter. This post is conspiracy theory tripe. As an aside, the DNC held six debates for the presidential elections in both 2004 and 2008, so let's stop with the DWS is trying to undermine Sanders and/or O'Malley malarkey. HIDE IT.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: CT crap doesn't belong on DU. We seen too much of it already.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The objected to post was actually quite astute. DWS setting a debate for a Saturday night was clearly meant to minimize the audience because other activities would "overshadow the debates". The poster did not claim Debbie predicted this particular development or posit any "conspiracy theory".
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Like it or not it is just opinion ,nothing more. Rediculous, perhaps so but opinion none the less.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[leftofcool]

8. M'OM was in the Senate in 2003?

[askew]

10. You don't have been in the Senate to have an opinion on the Iraq War in 2003.

O'Malley (like Obama and Sanders) was smart enough to oppose it. Hillary supported it.

[AgingAmerican]

5. Americans are sick of 'Aggressive responses'

To other countries problems, that lead to perpetual war and dead civilians.

[hill2016]

6. This question WILL be asked:

"Candidate, if these attacks happened in the US, what would your response be?"

I'm guessing whichever candidate talks about negotiations and discussions will be labelled as an appeaser.

[winter is coming]

7. That question will be asked no matter when the next debate is held.

And maybe it's not the best idea to give terrorists the idea that our political process will grind to a halt every time one of these attacks happens.

[askew]

13. Excellent point.

[askew]

11. This is the kind of thinking that led Hillary to embrace her hawkishness in the primary in 2007

and lose to Obama. Democrats don't think like that. The media does. Dem voters don't.

[winter is coming]

12. Paradoxically, it may get more coverage.

If there aren't a lot of fresh developments in France, the MSM will be looking for ways to remind us what's going on in France without saying the same thing over and over. Since there will doubtless be questions about ISIS and the events in Paris tonight, the candidates' answers are fresh fodder.