General Discussion

Maedhros

(10,007 posts)

187. Oh yes, it's bullshit.

Wed May 6, 2015, 06:00 PM

May 2015

Especially the exclusivity clause, which happened to show up just now even though months ago candidates were assured that there would be NO such clause.

The DNC is clearly trying to tilt the playing field toward one candidate. What the Party doesn't get is that elections are about the voters choosing a candidate, not simply rubber-stamping one preselected by them.

This kind of shit is why I left the Democratic Party.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

205 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hillary rival accuses Democrats of manipulating debate schedule to protect her [View all] Bjorn Against May 2015 OP

'Business Insider' is a pro-corporation rag and no sources are cited in this crap article. onehandle May 2015 #1

Most major news sources are pro-corporate rags, but no one is denying the exclusivity clause exists Bjorn Against May 2015 #3

Then why didn't you start with those links? onehandle May 2015 #9

Sexist? Sorry but pointing out that the debate rules suck is not sexist. Bjorn Against May 2015 #10

And if you are going to accuse me of posting from a right-wing source... Bjorn Against May 2015 #13

I will say and it depends from editors sourcing policy JonLP24 May 2015 #26

I understand very well why a Democratic Presidential hopeful might not want to attach his name merrily May 2015 #59

Oh come on. There is nothing wrong with that photo. My opinion of it is that she has a serious totodeinhere May 2015 #47

Not to mention, it was a giant assumption about why Bjorn Against linked to Business Insider. merrily May 2015 #61

Agreed. totodeinhere May 2015 #169

I agree: I think she looks strong, healthy and deep in thought. Not a bad pic at all. C Moon May 2015 #70

Well this is not "sexist" mylye2222 May 2015 #82

God, how tedious. Marr May 2015 #83

That what some of us had said since long. mylye2222 May 2015 #84

Get ready for the next year and a half... Oktober May 2015 #108

Do you just keep the sexist attacks on copy and paste... Oktober May 2015 #107

Clinton signed the telecommunications act that encouraged and increased the JDPriestly May 2015 #46

The ONLY relevant issue: is the story false? merrily May 2015 #58

It's nonsense. The only relevant part in the article is this: stevenleser May 2015 #122

You really can't ignore the NEW "exclusivity requirement" can you? think May 2015 #135

Who said I was ignoring it? It's a non-issue that keeps it fair. stevenleser May 2015 #137

you certainly didn't mention it and said that one could ignore the rest of the article think May 2015 #138

Because you can. It's a non-issue. nt stevenleser May 2015 #139

"Because you can" what? think May 2015 #140

Ignore it. It's a non issue. nt stevenleser May 2015 #141

exclusivity, late scheduling and limited number may be a non-issue to you magical thyme May 2015 #177

LOL, no by all means, as I said downthread, lets have 50 debates and invite DUers to participate in stevenleser May 2015 #179

How is that clause going to hurt? Gothmog May 2015 #158

There were no fewer than 26 Democratic Primary Presidential Debates in 2008. 26 Debates. NYC_SKP May 2015 #203

Which Hillary rival is making this accusation? Thinkingabout May 2015 #2

Fair play for all the candidates needs to be protested? Bjorn Against May 2015 #6

Who are the rivals you are talking? Thinkingabout May 2015 #7

Webb, O'Malley, and Sanders Bjorn Against May 2015 #8

And anyone else who may run. It's also unfair to Democratic primary voters. merrily May 2015 #63

Hmmm...wonder what Hillary is afraid of? InAbLuEsTaTe May 2015 #155

Competition. Ikonoklast May 2015 #174

The DNC is meeting with the different groups and negotiating with each. Thinkingabout May 2015 #112

The people who are asking for more debates are clearly not afraid of debates Bjorn Against May 2015 #116

Does the DNC want to present a Clown Car primary or leave it to the GOP? Thinkingabout May 2015 #121

<sigh>. Debates are theater. Pure and simple. Adrahil May 2015 #100

I concur. Questionnaires are pretty useful, but debates seem to only be about putting on a show. N/T Chathamization May 2015 #146

HuffPost is reporting that it is an adviser to Martin O'Malley totodeinhere May 2015 #51

Irrelevant. The only relevant issue is whether it's true or not. merrily May 2015 #62

All of them need to get the message out there. Ads favor the wealthy, debates are equalizers. NYC_SKP May 2015 #202

If the candidate has what it takes then put it up, having fifty debates will not make your Thinkingabout May 2015 #205

This isn't about making Hillary happy, it's about being able to compete with the GOP and they okaawhatever May 2015 #4

If anyone remembers 2012 they will remember that the Rs had an awful lot of debates. So many jwirr May 2015 #22

That's a good question. I really wonder what the Democratic party is concerned about with okaawhatever May 2015 #25

The funny thing about debates JonLP24 May 2015 #28

Agreed. I don't see debates as the way Bernie will get his message out. He basically needs to okaawhatever May 2015 #32

And social media and word of mouth. I think the debates will unify the party behind being issue jwirr May 2015 #127

I think social media will help raise name awareness, but Bernie's positions IMHO will okaawhatever May 2015 #130

There is where you and I disagree. I see his stance on the issues as very much like those of FDR. jwirr May 2015 #132

But how many current American voters are familiar with the policies of FDR? Those of us on DU are okaawhatever May 2015 #134

Oh, they are familiar with him - they just don't know it. Social Security, Glass-Steagell, etc. jwirr May 2015 #142

And Hillary openly agreed. So I read that also. One think I am expecting the Democratic debates jwirr May 2015 #119

On Rachel tonight she was talking about how parties limit the number of candidates that can be on jwirr May 2015 #36

The RNC had 23 debates and there is an argument that these debates hurt Romney Gothmog May 2015 #104

i think it did too. i wonder if i was only aware af certain. cause i thought it only like 6 or 8 seabeyond May 2015 #125

Yes and if people aren't watching you'll have a hard time getting the media coverage you need to okaawhatever May 2015 #136

I think six is adequate given the number of candidates Gothmog May 2015 #197

The GOP debates made their candidates look like idiots because they *were* idiots. winter is coming May 2015 #180

i do remember and it was one of the things i liked that the democrats did. it seemed like 6 was seabeyond May 2015 #123

IIRC, the 3 debate forum for those who have the nomination, not for primaries. n/t freshwest May 2015 #191

Specifically, the 'rival:' elleng May 2015 #5

Nip this crap in the bud RobertEarl May 2015 #11

Good for O'Malley! merrily May 2015 #64

"Worked out with the Clinton campaign." AtomicKitten May 2015 #12

Expect a lot more shenanigans from the party BrotherIvan May 2015 #15

No doubt and it's bullshit. AtomicKitten May 2015 #40

Bernie ain't a Democrat, and O'Malley has not officially announced. Why would the DNC msanthrope May 2015 #34

Bernie is a declared candidate in the Democratic primary. AtomicKitten May 2015 #37

Really? Name the state he's registered in as a Democrat. Name the primary he's currently msanthrope May 2015 #39

He has declared that he is running for president as a Democrat. That's good enough for me. totodeinhere May 2015 #49

But apparently not legally sufficient in NH and some other states. msanthrope May 2015 #96

Well that is for his campaign to sort out. totodeinhere May 2015 #170

Seeing that Vermont does not have party registration... backscatter712 May 2015 #50

Which is great, theoretically. But not legally sufficient in say, NH. nt msanthrope May 2015 #97

You don't seriously think Sen. Sanders will be not be morningfog May 2015 #113

As of last week, the NH Secretary of State hasn't received the form msanthrope May 2015 #150

Gardner's I'll get back to you on Dean's run is hilarious. morningfog May 2015 #152

Gardner is always hilarious. msanthrope May 2015 #154

Then Walker won't be on the GOP ballet either forthemiddle May 2015 #144

Walker does look terrible in a tutu. FSogol May 2015 #172

He caucuses with Democrats in Congress. JDPriestly May 2015 #53

Not only does he caucus with Dems, Dems do not run anyone against him. merrily May 2015 #66

That's excellent info Flying Squirrel May 2015 #85

That's not really the point....Bernie can declare himself whatever he wants, but msanthrope May 2015 #98

The Democratic Party is more than fine with Bernie running as a Democrat. merrily May 2015 #68

That's not the point.....Bernie has to get on actual ballots. msanthrope May 2015 #99

So nice of you to worry about Sanders! merrily May 2015 #102

Oh....I'm not worried. I'm sure he's got someone who can figure out the msanthrope May 2015 #106

Name the state Obama is registered in. former9thward May 2015 #78

In 2008, and 2012, the President legally qualified on all ballots as a Democrat. msanthrope May 2015 #105

I was a resident of Chicago for 30 years and I don't need your FYI. former9thward May 2015 #145

You just said there's no party affiliation, but then described selecting a party ballot msanthrope May 2015 #149

I am not attacking anything. former9thward May 2015 #156

Cover your left eye, and read the line on the chart... brooklynite May 2015 #41

LOL Mountain meet mole hill. DURHAM D May 2015 #14

+100 nt okaawhatever May 2015 #33

6 debates are just fine. hrmjustin May 2015 #16

If you only want to see six then only watch six Bjorn Against May 2015 #18

This message was self-deleted by its author hrmjustin May 2015 #20

Ahem.....the 'rivals' thought they would have a "no gurls allowed" debate as a faux msanthrope May 2015 #29

This message was self-deleted by its author hrmjustin May 2015 #35

I have to admit I didn't read the article. hrmjustin May 2015 #38

What in the hell? TM99 May 2015 #65

If you are not a Hillary fan, you are sexist. That's self evident. Just accept it. merrily May 2015 #86

Puke it is for me! TM99 May 2015 #87

I just couldn't decide. merrily May 2015 #88

As I said in a thread in the Sander's group, TM99 May 2015 #89

The crap that has gone on at DU for years has nothing at all to do with Sanders. merrily May 2015 #90

Right....because using anonymous campaign sources to complain about HRC msanthrope May 2015 #101

An O'Malley spokesperson who wished to remain annoymous TM99 May 2015 #126

O'Malley doesn't have a campaign....and I have no problem with HRC fighting dirty. msanthrope May 2015 #153

Fight dirty with the Republicans, hell yes. TM99 May 2015 #185

O'Malley's adviser complained, but that doesn't mean his adviser is the anonymous source in that FSogol May 2015 #173

True. TM99 May 2015 #184

+1. Limiting the debates in this way doesn't serve voters' interests. n/t winter is coming May 2015 #23

+1. Exactly. Not Democratic primary voters, nor voters in the general. merrily May 2015 #69

+1 As if the number were the issue of the OP anyway. merrily May 2015 #67

for Hillary. There were 20 in 2008- no exclusivity SHIT cali May 2015 #92

They can push for more debates if they want more. hrmjustin May 2015 #133

I when to the link and this is what I found: Thinkingabout May 2015 #17

What right-wing opening words? This is a Democratic campaign adviser speaking, not a right-winger Bjorn Against May 2015 #21

Have you ever listened to Rush, Sean or other FOX reporters start a sentence with Thinkingabout May 2015 #24

WTF is this nonsense KMOD May 2015 #19

"One campaign advisor", huh... brooklynite May 2015 #27

See #29, above. msanthrope May 2015 #31

Psst! Anonymous whisper... n/t freshwest May 2015 #91

OOOHHHH. MY GODDDDD Evergreen Emerald May 2015 #30

Placing artificial limits on candidates' ability to communicate their platform Maedhros May 2015 #60

+1 Trouble recognizing problems and trouble admitting one recognizes a problem merrily May 2015 #71

Please. You are being led by propoganda. Evergreen Emerald May 2015 #129

The exclusivity clause is clearly bullshit. Maedhros May 2015 #162

Peddle your disinformation elsewhere. Maedhros May 2015 #164

Yes, because debates are the only place to communicate a platform Blue_Adept May 2015 #131

Bottom line: there is no good reason to limit the number of debates, Maedhros May 2015 #161

It's an attack of the... freshwest May 2015 #95

I love your bumpersticker Fresh. Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #110

It was made in Texas. Watch the GOPhers lose it! Every other word will be 'Communists!!!111!!' n/t freshwest May 2015 #192

Woah... Number23 May 2015 #195

What the hell is with that picture in the story? They did that on purpose and it was low. hrmjustin May 2015 #42

That is a bad picture. SoapBox May 2015 #43

That photo is exactly why this anti-Democratic Party spun piece was posted here. onehandle May 2015 #45

bs. Accusing a DUer of passing over other sources until he or she finds one with a bad photo merrily May 2015 #73

I don't even think it is a bad photo Bjorn Against May 2015 #79

Regardless, it's a bizarre accusation. This bs is beyond played out and needs to be called out. merrily May 2015 #81

+1... SidDithers May 2015 #109

Oligarchy desperately trying to control the election of their next puppet? L0oniX May 2015 #44

Why would we want fewer debates? So we have more time to watch attack ads? jalan48 May 2015 #48

We the people WOULDN'T want fewer debates. elleng May 2015 #52

I agree with that. It's a more open and educational process. jalan48 May 2015 #55

Money can't buy debate victories, but it can buy attack ads. Maedhros May 2015 #181

As Progressive Democrats is this where we call bullshit? jalan48 May 2015 #186

Oh yes, it's bullshit. Maedhros May 2015 #187

It's the kind of thing that will cost Hillary my vote if she's the party choice. jalan48 May 2015 #188

Hillary fans agree-- this is just fine and totally unbiased! Marr May 2015 #54

Who really needs a Democratic Party that's actually, you know, Democratic? merrily May 2015 #74

Kabuki in national politics? NEVER! merrily May 2015 #56

So an anonymous insider of an anonymous camaign claims the DNC is rigging the debate schedule? Agnosticsherbet May 2015 #57

OMG And THAT means every story in Business Insider is false? See also Reply 3. merrily May 2015 #76

The party doesn't get to pick the candidate AgingAmerican May 2015 #72

Sure seems to have been trying to do exactly that since 2012. merrily May 2015 #77

And the number of debates will take away your right to "pick the candidate"? Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #117

I've seen posters argue that: Maedhros May 2015 #182

Well, we wouldn't want public discourse interrupt the commercials paid for by lobbyists. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #75

how about pay per veiw debates ? olddots May 2015 #80

I strongly disagree with six debates davidpdx May 2015 #93

This "exclusivity" thing is pretty fishy. HappyMe May 2015 #94

The RNC has an exclusivity clause also Gothmog May 2015 #103

Let the conspiracies begin. If anyone's "protecting" HRC, it's because 81% of us...... Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #111

That number will keep getting lower, morningfog May 2015 #114

Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and say...I doubt it. But you keep plugging away anyhoo. Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #115

I guarantee it will get lower than 81% over the next morningfog May 2015 #118

So many predictions. You must be related to the Amazing Kreskin. Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #148

None of it requires any special power. morningfog May 2015 #151

Dkos: Who's the more 'serious' presidential candidate: Rand Paul or Bernie Sanders? Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #159

And your point? morningfog May 2015 #163

Oh, I think it's very meaningful. You just don't like what it means. Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #165

I have no problem with what it means. I just wonder why you feel the need to morningfog May 2015 #166

It was a national poll of "Democrats", by "Democrats", for "Democrats". And as for changing the.... Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #168

That photo is the appropriate response to the OP. Such nonsense deserves ridicule. greatlaurel May 2015 #120

!!! Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #157

I'm voting for the one on the right! But tin foil hats aren't good enough: freshwest May 2015 #190

LOL! That's perfect. Tarheel_Dem May 2015 #198

Safety first! n/t freshwest May 2015 #199

Another OP captures how ridiculous this is well stevenleser May 2015 #124

Well, that was special. I posted on it: freshwest May 2015 #196

Not enough debates, too many debates, they are not on the days that I like liberal N proud May 2015 #128

Negative campaigning works. NCTraveler May 2015 #143

The word "presumably" says everything anyone needs to know. cry baby May 2015 #147

Impossible - the Clintons would never take part in such machinations! polichick May 2015 #160

Hillary rivals demand a democratic clown car circus workinclasszero May 2015 #167

How many primary debates were there in 2008? I don't remember. But they were all good. freshwest May 2015 #200

There were no fewer than 26 Democratic Primary Presidential Debates in 2008. 26 Debates. NYC_SKP May 2015 #201

Who is this rival? Only one Democrat and one Socialist have announced geek tragedy May 2015 #171

The League of Women Voters can clear this up for you. bvar22 May 2015 #175

Oy vey...look at yet another thread of democrats screaming at each other NoJusticeNoPeace May 2015 #176

That headline is very dramatic. Raine1967 May 2015 #178

The exclusivity clause is also kind of a joke IMO, We're not having a debate, we are having a FSogol May 2015 #189

+1 good point. Raine1967 May 2015 #194

"Don't make me stop this damn car!" lpbk2713 May 2015 #183

So ... NanceGreggs May 2015 #193

K&R woo me with science May 2015 #204