MSNBC To Host Democratic Debate Ahead Of New Hampshire Primary

[StrictlyRockers]

Source: CNN

MSNBC announced Sunday that it will hold a Democratic presidential debate Thursday, Feb. 4, in New Hampshire ahead of the first-in-the-nation primary.

The debate will take place at the University of New Hampshire in Durham at 9 p.m. Eastern and be moderated by Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow. All three Democratic presidential candidates, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley are expected to attend.

The Democratic National Committee, which has been under pressure from voters and candidates to add more debates to the primary schedule, has said the debate will be sanctioned and is moving towards sanctioning additional debates with the agreement of the candidates.

UPDATE: Via CNN: Dem candidates to attend New Hampshire town hall:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/31/politics/cnn-town-hall-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-martin-omalley/

The Democratic presidential hopefuls will make closing arguments to New Hampshire voters Wednesday during a prime-time CNN town hall in Derry -- less than one week before votes are cast in the New Hampshire primary.

Read more: http://crooksandliars.com/2016/01/msnbc-host-democratic-debate-ahead-new

---

Good news. The more debates, the better.

[Kurska]

1. Okay so whose predicted that if Clinton was behind in NH

That the DNC would schedule an "emergency" debate?

[BillZBubb]

3. No surprise there.

If Clinton needed it, DWS was going to supply it.

[FarPoint]

17. Democrats do support Democrats....

Hillary has been a staunch, solid Democrat.... Makes perfect sense to me.

[ypsfonos]

4. most of us.... nt

[StrictlyRockers]

19. I'm shocked!

Shocked, I tell you!!

[Ruby the Liberal]

2. So Bernie played a game of chicken with the DNC

and Debbie blinked. I love it.

[BillZBubb]

6. Hillary told DWS she needed a NH debate.

DWS got her one. Bernie did get additional later debates out of the deal, but DWS didn't blink because of Bernie, she blinked because Hillary needed her to.

[Ruby the Liberal]

12. Agree, somewhat.

Hillary and O'Malley both agreed to the debate. Bernie said "no, it isn't sanctioned by the DNC" which threw down the gauntlet. He won.

Besides, Hillary has been cratering in NH for months. That didn't just happen last week causing the need to invoke a last minute change.

[SoapBox]

13. Agreed.

Camp Weathervane is panicked...they certainly didn't agree to more debates, just for the fun of it.

Let's see if she "evolves" some more or if she just stands there yelling about, well, take your pick.

[global1]

16. Hillary's Internal Polling Must Be Awful Scary - Why Else....

would the 'presumptive' nominee - one that is leading - want additional debates? Very interesting.

[RobertEarl]

5. Poor planning

Of course the DNC is feeling the Bern, so DWS and H both decided they needed a new plan in an attempt to piss on the fire consuming the inevitability of H winning it all.

People, see? We are already having an impact on the powers that be. They are succumbing to us already. Feelin' that Bern, they are.

[jalan48]

7. This approach will mean more viewers.

Suddenly, the debates are important.

[awake]

8. Hillary is now in full panic mode

She has just agreed to give a big boost to Bernie by getting him more prime time coverage, she is thinking that she will out debate him and cut into his NH lead but instead she has just drawn more attention to Bernie and as we know the more people hear from him the more they like him.

[Mike Nelson]

9. Only normal to have more debates...

Hillary needed one before NH, where she's expected to lose; and Bernie needed them after, where he's expect to drop support. We win!

[hoosierlib]

10. Only because HRC is desperate...

After losing Iowa again, she needs an opportunity to attack Bernie.

Maybe she'll cry again...

Won't matter, she'll get spanked by 20+ points...

[Kip Humphrey]

11. DWS, meet your crow.

good eating!

[ViseGrip]

14. Right on! DWS has now proven she cannot lead!

[Gregorian]

15. Yep, Bernie is pulling this primary to the left. Represent, and let the people decide.

I've got my Bern back. Haha.

[Duval]

18. Great news. We NEED more debates.

I'm just a bit surprised, though. I'm wondering how this came about. The DNC has been phoning asking for donations, and when I answered the first and last time, I voiced my concern about limited debates. I'm wondering if others here did the same and they finally got the message.

[JDPriestly]

20. They want to push Bernie on whether he supports "small" government or wants "big"

government.

If I were Bernie, I would answer that what we need is the right size of government.

My personal opinion.

When we have the BP spill, the Aliso Canyon gas leak and other similar crises like the Flint lead in the water, the Exxon Valdez and yet our government cannot act to protect us, we need a bigger and at the same time a more efficient government.

When our government cannot act to identify and protect us from environmental and other dangers to our communities from which we cannot protect ourselves, when corporations put their interests before those of American citizens and our government does not restrain them, then our government is too small. Here, I am thinking of Enron.

Since Reagan and during the Clinton and Bush administrations, our government was purposely shrunk in certain respects. It was made impotent in the face of the greed of corporations and a few very wealthy people. At the same time, the size of the surveillance arms of our government, the agencies of our government that oversee us as individuals as we exercise our constitutional rights was increased. Makes no sense to me.

I am not in favor of government that is bigger than we need. But the government we now have, while it protects us from foreign threats and has a previously unseen capacity to collect personal information about each of us, does not protect us well enough at home.

We need a government that has the power and the information to make sure that people who should not have guns cannot get them and that citizens understand why the government needs that authority. We do not need a government that records and maintains the records of our personal e-mails to each other and of the political views we express on the internet, on the telephone and when in each other's presence.

We need a government that has the means and the authority to insure the safety of our environment and of our communities.

We need government that is measured to our time, to our needs in the present and not to what we needed in the past.

[hopemountain]

21. +++^^^ nt

[left-of-center2012]

22. Prime time on a week night?

So unlike Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
What was she thinking?
Oh - give Hillary more exposure.