General Discussion

bunnies

(15,859 posts)

156. This was my first thought as well.

Reply to Exilednight (Reply #25)

Wed May 6, 2015, 12:54 PM

May 2015

To hell with their bullshit.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

190 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Did You Guys Catch The "Exclusivity Clause" For The 2016 Democratic Debates ??? [View all] WillyT May 2015 OP

Nothing like 'monopoly.' elleng May 2015 #1

So am I Andy823 May 2015 #8

Me Too !!! WillyT May 2015 #18

As if $2B isn't enough. delrem May 2015 #2

The Goal... 2.5 Billion $$$... And Yeah... You'd Think That Would Be More Than Enough WillyT May 2015 #20

I hate giving clicks to HufPo hootinholler May 2015 #3

Hint: "disadvantageous to candidates who have relatively low name-recognition" arcane1 May 2015 #7

She has Spoken: Jackpine Radical May 2015 #41

I'm glad I was sitting down when I read this unexpected news. arcane1 May 2015 #52

Yes, I really should have broken it more gently. Jackpine Radical May 2015 #56

LOL Hissyspit May 2015 #180

I think a few people will understand why I won't vote for her. JDPriestly May 2015 #95

Or, the DNC was on board with her plan. Either way... merrily May 2015 #101

Yep MissDeeds May 2015 #40

I don't agree that this benefits one candidate. Agschmid May 2015 #63

Of course it does. Jim Lane May 2015 #103

Good!!! Thespian2 May 2015 #172

I am hoping that someone other than corp-media gets to put on a debate. Maybe Democracy Now rhett o rick May 2015 #105

Racked your brain and can't think if a single reason AtomicKitten May 2015 #123

Well, if you're a person with good ideas, christx30 May 2015 #161

Who knows? What business sulphurdunn May 2015 #181

I know. They think I'm clicking for side boob pics. Spitfire of ATJ May 2015 #190

This is absolute bullshit and needs to be challenged Bjorn Against May 2015 #4

Agreed !!! WillyT May 2015 #17

Challenged! I agree. Enthusiast May 2015 #132

Not very democratic. PowerToThePeople May 2015 #5

I don't think there's anything curious about the timing. The GOP post mortem for the 2012 okaawhatever May 2015 #6

Oh please. cui bono May 2015 #9

Oh, so you support going so far left you're unelectable in the general? Great idea. Can't think of a okaawhatever May 2015 #10

No, I support going left enough to get the people excited about voting again. cui bono May 2015 #12

+ 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! WillyT May 2015 #15

Exactly what I've been thinking. This "contract" is dangerous BS AikidoSoul May 2015 #174

Wait, are you really saying hootinholler May 2015 #57

No, what I'm saying is to adopt policies that are popular with the majority of the voting okaawhatever May 2015 #58

Sanders supporters are not the "rabid ultra left base". cui bono May 2015 #182

Well, Andy823 May 2015 #11

according to TRMS.... Sheepshank May 2015 #147

The Timing... Who Knows... The Amount Of Debates And The Number Of Candidates... WillyT May 2015 #13

I don't think the timing and number of debates is the only important point. The participants GoneFishin May 2015 #39

The Republicans want to limit debates because they need to limit exposure jeff47 May 2015 #30

because read that sentence about name recognition again, that's why.. Volaris May 2015 #79

, 2banon May 2015 #50

Me too. Agschmid May 2015 #64

Come off it. It's very obvious what this is. Marr May 2015 #89

Yeah, I guess they realize she's not up to the challenge. n/t winter is coming May 2015 #141

Now someone's finally making sense. Six debates is plenty. No sane voter pnwmom May 2015 #110

Did you watch all 26 Democratic debates in 2008? jeff47 May 2015 #137

exactly, Rachel Maddow covered this in great detail last evening. nt La Lioness Priyanka May 2015 #159

"exclusivity does no one any favors" panader0 May 2015 #14

If A "Non-Sanctioned" Debate Were To Erupt During The Campaig Trail... WillyT May 2015 #16

I get that. panader0 May 2015 #19

Totally Agree... WillyT May 2015 #22

The DNC would have the authority to refuse to let a candidate into a DNC debate jeff47 May 2015 #26

The participants negotiate the terms of the Dem debates. This can mean limiting certain types GoneFishin May 2015 #49

Do you mean a conversation between candidates... Agschmid May 2015 #65

How many organized conversations aspirant May 2015 #160

Oh hey! Agschmid May 2015 #165

Odd or even,which is better? aspirant May 2015 #167

Well, let's say the Des Moines Register wants to hold a debate jeff47 May 2015 #24

Great Point !!! WillyT May 2015 #28

I can't understand why the DNC would want sanctions panader0 May 2015 #31

Well, scared of something is the only reason I can think of. (nt) jeff47 May 2015 #32

You'd almost think they were trying to limit the amount of time candidates spend together winter is coming May 2015 #140

The DNC doesn't want exposure given to lesser-known candidates arcane1 May 2015 #157

Who would want to limit the venues, voices, and opportunities for questions & substantive discussion? Warren DeMontague May 2015 #21

One Would Think... WillyT May 2015 #23

Right. hay rick May 2015 #76

The only way to get around it it is to stay away from Exilednight May 2015 #25

Interesting... And Diabolical... WillyT May 2015 #27

Interesting idea. Jackpine Radical May 2015 #43

This is exactly what should happen. nt woo me with science May 2015 #60

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #61

I think it is time to shake the two parties up by hosting web debates that the two parties liberal_at_heart May 2015 #69

Excellent idea dreamnightwind May 2015 #113

Over 40% of this country druidity33 May 2015 #173

Or for everyone to participate in te same unsanctioned debate Renew Deal May 2015 #133

This was my first thought as well. bunnies May 2015 #156

Unfortunately, that would play right into their hands. Jim Lane May 2015 #179

guess the party's doubling down on acting like the MPAA? MisterP May 2015 #29

The RNC has a similar clause Gothmog May 2015 #33

Because we want fewer people to hear about our candidates? (nt) jeff47 May 2015 #34

Explain, please? SusanCalvin May 2015 #36

The RNC revised its rules so that candidates have to participate only in RNC sanctioned debates Gothmog May 2015 #42

But with few SusanCalvin May 2015 #45

What a bunch of bull SusanCalvin May 2015 #35

Pfft. You'd just vote wrong. jeff47 May 2015 #37

OMG! hootinholler May 2015 #59

Sorry, I just now got it. SusanCalvin May 2015 #175

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #38

Any word on who's writing the questions? LOL. n/t cherokeeprogressive May 2015 #44

Written exactly like a corporate non-compete agreement. Oh wait... whereisjustice May 2015 #46

Ouch MissDeeds May 2015 #47

+ 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! WillyT May 2015 #54

exactly! liberal_at_heart May 2015 #70

So true. Such controlling obnoxiousness. nt stillwaiting May 2015 #135

What BS. What are they scared of? 7962 May 2015 #48

You wanna run as a Democrat, you play by their sandbox rules. msanthrope May 2015 #51

And when the DNC tries to add rules that obviously favor one candidate? (nt) jeff47 May 2015 #138

This avoids the "so and so didn't show up" posturing jberryhill May 2015 #53

Yes I did and I wonder what is going on with that. lovemydog May 2015 #55

Didn't Mean To Take Over Your Post... Anger Got The Better Of Me... WillyT May 2015 #62

Not at all WillyT. This deserves its own thread. lovemydog May 2015 #66

Word... WillyT May 2015 #67

I just looked up that quote. lovemydog May 2015 #71

It's a good quote. We do need more democracy. We need politicians who represent the people, liberal_at_heart May 2015 #106

Most definitely liberal_at_heart. lovemydog May 2015 #116

and yet some DUers will claim it is the voters fault for staying home. liberal_at_heart May 2015 #68

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #74

I was excited about watching the debates for once until now. Now they can forget it. liberal_at_heart May 2015 #77

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #81

The 1% will not give up their power without a fight that is for sure. liberal_at_heart May 2015 #82

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #86

There were more slaves on plantations than owners, yet they stay enslaved for decades. jtuck004 May 2015 #163

This pic nails it dreamnightwind May 2015 #119

yes it does. liberal_at_heart May 2015 #122

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #126

This is the kind of thing that would convince me not to vote for the "nominee". /nt Marr May 2015 #104

So, the arguments in favor of this so far appear to be: delrem May 2015 #72

I know whatchamacallit May 2015 #108

That's the DNC for you RoccoR5955 May 2015 #73

Absolute power corrupts absolutely! liberal_at_heart May 2015 #75

So they have ever done Bugenhagen May 2015 #85

For all the whining is its the Democrats that are hosting the debates... Historic NY May 2015 #78

and isn't it lovely how the party gets to control the process. liberal_at_heart May 2015 #80

Sorry perhaps he should run as an independant if he feels so strongly... Historic NY May 2015 #83

He was trying not to hurt the party by pulling votes away from the party but if this is the way the liberal_at_heart May 2015 #87

Well no independent has garnered more than 6.6 % of the popular vote... Historic NY May 2015 #90

You know what? The 40% that don't vote don't care that you think they gave the election to the liberal_at_heart May 2015 #91

I know that why this palce has disolved into KOAS.. Historic NY May 2015 #94

welcome to my ignore list. liberal_at_heart May 2015 #98

funny....... Historic NY May 2015 #100

It isn't debates hosted by third political parties (i.e. the Green party), Ms. Toad May 2015 #114

Bingo SusanCalvin May 2015 #177

Boy, you did a great job torching that strawman!!! jeff47 May 2015 #139

Really look at the list of debates from 2008....... Historic NY May 2015 #186

Yes, strawman. jeff47 May 2015 #188

Every other candidate should attend third party debates then. Let Hillary do a sad little monologue Marr May 2015 #84

yep. A coronation is what the party wants. liberal_at_heart May 2015 #88

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #92

The DNC would love that dreamnightwind May 2015 #125

Well, we're back to 1960s-like riots in cities. It's time to repeat the 1968 convention. (nt) jeff47 May 2015 #142

That clause is just disgusting. JDPriestly May 2015 #93

must agree to do so exclusiveley, making them ineligible to participate in any debates organized by DJ13 May 2015 #96

That should be part of a no lobbying law anyway let alone for debates. liberal_at_heart May 2015 #97

I think that's the Nader Rule WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2015 #99

Nope. Nader was already excluded by not running for the Democratic nomination. (nt) jeff47 May 2015 #143

Super delegates, coronation attempts, disadvantaging candidates with lower name recognition, merrily May 2015 #102

It should be no different than 2008 (or Republicans in 2012) IMO. phleshdef May 2015 #107

How many non-crazy people are going to watch more than 6 primary debates anyway? pnwmom May 2015 #109

Or, only have the opportunity to watch one or two CanadaexPat May 2015 #127

Or, only be interested in seeing them a few weeks before your state's primary. winter is coming May 2015 #145

Why would I watch an Iowa-centered debate? jeff47 May 2015 #144

Maybe, if O'Malley's worried he's an unknown, he should get the hell into the race pnwmom May 2015 #111

Democracy. The will of The People. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #112

It's more like the will of the media conglomerate and party leaders. I am so tired of liberal_at_heart May 2015 #115

Posted G_j May 2015 #117

The media may not get away with not reporting these protests this time around. The young liberal_at_heart May 2015 #118

I voted for her in 2012 Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #120

Thanks. I didn't know that. I almost voted for her in the last Presidential general election. liberal_at_heart May 2015 #121

She is very good G_j May 2015 #124

I did as well.[n/t] Maedhros May 2015 #164

So - Will We See Hillary Debate Herself - That Should Prove Amusing cantbeserious May 2015 #128

Huge K&R. Corrupt. woo me with science May 2015 #129

Typical neolibs trying to control access to information. 99Forever May 2015 #130

THIS SUCKS! Of course Hillary is on board with the DNC plan. Enthusiast May 2015 #131

What top-down, authoritarian, managed bullshit. Freedom! stillwaiting May 2015 #134

Rule 22: Ms. Clinton's podium must be at least three feet taller than the other podiums, Buns_of_Fire May 2015 #136

Some more jeff47 May 2015 #149

Flames added electronically by channel frylock May 2015 #170

FoxNews grabbed the exclusive broadcas rights (to BOTH party's debates) last time--has that changed? librechik May 2015 #146

Debate organized br corporate butt sniffers. JEB May 2015 #148

DNC = Beowulf42 May 2015 #150

O'Malley is right, plain & simple. K & R nt mother earth May 2015 #151

KnR nt chknltl May 2015 #152

"Controlled debates"...yeah, controlled by the DNC Left coast liberal May 2015 #153

This stinks to high heaven tularetom May 2015 #154

The operative word here is "controlled" nt fadedrose May 2015 #155

i think both parties made the exclusivity announcements, as per the Rachel Maddow from last night La Lioness Priyanka May 2015 #158

Third-Wayers keeping the republic Republican. nt valerief May 2015 #162

Yup, very true. BeanMusical May 2015 #166

O'Malley, Sanders, Webb and Chafee should contact the League of Women Voters. ieoeja May 2015 #168

It's now a Chicago-style machine, angling to gloss over weaknesses closeupready May 2015 #169

Good grief. Talk about restricting freedom of speech. This is ridiculous. DebJ May 2015 #171

And who would this help ??? orpupilofnature57 May 2015 #176

Of course Clinton is on board with the DNC plan aintitfunny May 2015 #178

Let the DLC play their games. They will just grease the skids for Bernie NorthCarolina May 2015 #183

WTF is the DNC up to now? blackspade May 2015 #184

Uhm so the DNC is anti free speech? Wow. L0oniX May 2015 #185

Huge K&R, and see this response by Dragonfli to this issue: woo me with science May 2015 #187

Why not have aspirant May 2015 #189