Why wouldn't you want Bloomberg on the debate stage?

[cynatnite]

I see a lot of complaining about the DNC changing the rules.

Hell, I'm glad they did. Bloomberg should be on that stage and he should have to face the rest of the candidates.

We should see how he holds up and what he's going to say. There will be a lot of attacks coming his way and we have the right to see and hear his responses.

[juxtaposed]

1. b/c no one voted for him, except he paid ppl. to be there.

[cynatnite]

2. So, he should stay off a debate stage...

not answer for all the shit that's out there about him and all that.

He can just keep campaigning, spending money without having to face one single Dem candidate.

You're okay with that?

[juxtaposed]

11. yes, if i had a billion dollars would you want to hear from me?

[juxtaposed]

14. does he have right to be there?

[cynatnite]

32. So you don't think he should be questioned on live TV?

Have to face the other candidates?

I want him there. I want him to answer the things that's been said about him, about his past policies. I want to see what he has to say on live TV with all eyes on him.

I would think anyone would want that.

I sure as hell don't want him leapfrogging to the nomination without having set foot on a debate stage. That's more wrong to me than anything else.

[sheshe2]

6. Every candidate made the debate stage before one vote was cast. nt

[LongtimeAZDem]

9. Exactly right

[sheshe2]

10. Thank You!

[juxtaposed]

15. how did bloomberg do in iowa

[sheshe2]

19. All I know is BS lost. nt

[juxtaposed]

20. how much did he lose by?

[sheshe2]

21. He lost. nt

[juxtaposed]

22. you're not sure buy how much then.

[sheshe2]

23. I know exactly how he lost.

You don't? Look it up. Rules are rules.

[juxtaposed]

24. How much did sanders loose by? A lot or a few votes? It seems important to you

that he looses a lot. Maybe next week will be better for you?

[sheshe2]

26. I will say again.

I know exactly what and how he lost.

Rules are rules and he helped draw those rules.

juxtaposed
24. How much did sanders loose by? A lot or a few votes? It seems important to you

that he looses a lot.

Actually since you are the one following me on this thread, I think it means much more to you than to me.

Nite.

[LongtimeAZDem]

27. He got 13 pledged delegates less than the winner, out of 4051 total for the primaries

So it hardly matters.

[herding cats]

12. For good or bad he's polling well.

Too well, actually. He's needs some dressing down before his ads overcome everything else.

He needs to be poked and prodded by our other candidates. I'm fine with people currently supporting him getting a chance to figure out who he might actually be when confronted by other Democrats.

We need this moment, and I'm pretty sure our candidates are up to handling him.

[Renew Deal]

13. That doesn't make sense

And at this point, someone has voted for him.

[Blue_true]

3. Because.

If he is not there, they like someone did on DU, can claim that he turned down the chance. Either way, he is made out to look bad. The only way is to have him on stage so that voters can make up their own minds, apparently some of the candidates don't want that.

[customerserviceguy]

4. I'm glad

that he'll be the pinata at the party tomorrow night, but it is sad to think of the candidates that had to drop out because they couldn't make the debate stage with the old rules.

It's like the old saying about the Golden Rule: He who has the gold, rules.

[CentralMass]

5. Because he has circumvented the months of vetting, competition and even being on the ballot of any

the states so far. He has no votes, no delegates and has used his nassive wealth to buy his way into the contest and the one metric, his polling numbers, that got him into this debate are a result of him using his wealth to saturate the air waves with a $344 million dollar ad blitz.
The validity of those polling numbers are unvalidated by contest

[cynatnite]

7. So, he shouldn't have to face one candidate at all?

He should just keep doing what he's doing, no debates?

What if he gets the nomination without having to go to a single debate? Is that how it should be done?

If someone wants to compete at that level, they need to do it alongside everyone else...to test their mettle and all that. Bloomberg has a lot to answer for, IMO, and getting him on a debate stage, facing the other candidates and reporters, is the way to do that.

I don't know about you, but I'm not comfortable with anyone not going to a debate and being given the nomination.

The rule change forces Bloomberg to debate. He knows what would happen to his candidacy if he declines.

[Squinch]

37. Yes. He didn't ask for the rule change. Probably would have been just

as happy if it wasn't changed.

[emmaverybo]

8. Important facts to consider.

[Renew Deal]

16. Circumvented?

How was he obligated to start running "months" ago? Did you know that RFK in March of 1968? That was 4 days before NH.

He has 4,777 in NH. You should correct your post. Polling numbers (and money) got all of the candidates into all of the debates.

[BusyBeingBest]

18. He's got at least some votes, thru early voting, where he's on

the ballot. They just haven't been counted yet.

[cynatnite]

33. And he should be put on the spot for that and a host of other baggage...

I'll put it to you this way. I sure as hell don't want to see him leapfrogging to the nomination because of campaign ad buys.

No candidate should be the nominee without going through at least a few debates.

I want to see how he handles all this baggage being thrown at him at the debate. A debate could sink him if he comes across badly and this is the best chance of stopping him in his tracks.

[CentralMass]

34. The point that you and others are making here makes sense. However,

the setup if the debate and the questions asked don't always serve the the purpose of askkng the candidate revealing question or allowing the ither candidates to challenge one another. In somee cases the opportunity just gives them a microphonr to sell their pitch.

[cynatnite]

35. Bloomberg should still be on that stage regardless...

Every candidate wants their one liner to get the most attention/applause.

It doesn't mean that Bloomberg should not be on that stage.

[Squinch]

36. He didn't ask for the rules to be changed. He would have just

chugged along if they weren't. And yes. He has avoided the dog fight of the first few primaries where everyone rips each other apart and spends millions for only a few dozen delegates out of thousands.

Wasn't that a smart idea!

[juxtaposed]

17. Oh Look! a shinny object.

[Squinch]

38. More shins than usual?

[democrattotheend]

25. I agree with you

I am not in favor of Bloomberg as the nominee, but I think he should be on the debate stage so people can ask him questions. I would be very concerned about the prospect of letting someone bypass free media (and the scrutiny that comes with it) altogether and rely solely on paid media that the candidate controls. That seems like a dangerous precedent, so I would much rather have Bloomberg in the debates.

[democratisphere]

29. Bloomberg is a candidate. We should hear what he has to say.

Joe Biden will ultimately be our Presidential candidate.

[cynatnite]

31. Would you rather he get the nomination without setting foot on a debate stage?

Think about it for a sec. His poll numbers have jumped considerably since he announced. He's not been held under any real scrutiny.

If he's going to be stopped, the debates are really the best opportunities. Nothing else has slowed him down.

Regardless of what you or anyone else thinks of him, he should have to face the other candidates and reporters. They can put the issues to him right there on the spot in front of a live audience.

Welcome to DU.

[radius777]

39. He's a top tier candidate and should be there.

In many national polls he's 2nd or 3rd.

He probably just as well would've avoided it.

It's to the benefit of voters to see him on stage.