Dem Party Chair Changes 2020 Rules 'Midstream' After Saying 'We Can't Change'

[Stellar]

[calguy]

1. Would you rather not see Bloomberg debating the issues live next to Bernie?

What are you afraid of?

[Autumn]

8. I want your guy on the debate stage. He won't be debating Trump. He's going to have to debate Dems

and that's what he can't do,

[TDale313]

2. If Bloomberg is gonna be a factor in this race

(Which he clearly is, whether they included him in the debates or not) then I’d rather see him have to face questions and the other candidates. He’s already getting the media exposure and being treated like a legit candidate. More chance to vet him if he’s in the debates.

[Zolorp]

3. So you would rather drive voters to a martyr than have that candidate in a debate?

I'm all in for you trying to convince them not to let him in the debates.

PLEASE, DO IT!

Bloomberg will crush every other candidate if you do that.

Literally crush them. He can afford to buy up all the air time on every channel that does not air the debates and talk straight through the entire debate.

And he'll spend the entire time trashing Trump and won't mention a single one of his opponents in the primary.

PLEASE, DO IT!

[thesquanderer]

4. There's been NO rules change, since no other rules for the upcoming debates had EVER been announced!

When some people were asking for rules changes in the past to help keep the range of candidates more inclusive, that would have required changes to rules that had already been announced for those debates. No rules had ever been announced for the upcoming debates before these "new" rules were announced. They are "new" only by virtue of being different from the rules for previous debates... and the DNC has been making such changes all along, since the thresholds were recalibrated as the process played out. The exact polling thresholds and requirements for the later debates were not announced or known from the start, they were developed as those debates got closer, there were always changes. The DNC has simply continued to do the same.

As kind of pointed out in the clip, using polling alone at the beginning would have prevented lesser known candidates from being able to compete, so they added a metric to be able to get in by grassroots support. That metric really is not so important anymore, because even if they kept it in, we would not be seeing any new lesser candidate entering the race at this point... realistically, it's too late for anyone else to get into the race that way. Plus we have a new metric available to us that didn't exist until this month... actually getting delegates. That's a new way of measuring support that simply wasn't available before now, so couldn't have been used as a criteria in previous debates, and I think it was perfectly reasonable to say that anyone who gets a delegate at this point should be assured a spot.

If the goal is to inform the public, then I have to agree with the DNC that anyone who meets the 10%/12% threshold in multiple states is viable enough that the public deserves an opportunity to see them on the debate stage. I don't see where the country or the party is served by keeping them out. This is a case where I think the DNC did the right thing. I suppose they could also have maintained a grass roots contributions qualifier (increasingly higher over previous ones, as they have done before), but realistically, I don't think that would have gotten anyone else onto the debate stage anyway.

And on a conceptual note, debate qualifications should not be discussed in terms of being rules of a game, as they are in that clip. They should be discussed on the basis of whether they are serving the public. This isn't a game. This is more important, with real consequences. So from that perspective, I find the entire argument disturbing. Would we really want to create a system that could give us a candidate who was never permitted on to the debate stage? That could well have happened if the DNC had stuck to earlier rules for later debates. Bloomberg's polling success proves that sticking with the old criteria would not have worked in terms of actually serving the public.

[lapucelle]

5. The headline is misleading, as well as an anti-Democratic Party talking point.

The Democratic National Committee has made it progressively harder to qualify for debates, narrowing the field of candidates invited onstage.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/us/politics/democratic-debate-lineup.html

*****************************************************************************************

First debate and second debates (June and July 2019)
Qualification
To qualify for the first debates, entrants had to, at a minimum, achieve one of the two criteria listed. If this had resulted in more than 20 qualified candidates, the two criteria would have been evaluated in combination per an outlined set of tiebreaking rules, but since 20 candidates qualified, no tiebreaker was necessary. The deadline for candidates to meet either of the below criteria was June 12

snip===================================================================

Third debate (September 2019)
Qualification
The third debate took place at the Health and Physical Education Arena on the campus of Texas Southern University in Houston, Texas. For participation in the third debate, candidates were required to meet both polling and fundraising criteria by August 28 (in comparison to the first and second debates, where only one criterion was necessary). Qualifying polls had to be released between June 28 and August 28. Five candidates (Gravel, Hickenlooper, Inslee, Moulton, and Gillibrand) suspended their campaigns between the second and third debates.

snip===================================================================

Fourth debate (October 2019)
Qualification
A memo released by the DNC on August 5 indicated that the qualification period for the fourth debate in October started on June 28, which was the same day that qualification began for the third debate (in effect allowing all candidates who qualified for the third debate to automatically qualify for the fourth debate). This gave candidates who did not qualify for the September debate more time to qualify for the October debate. Biden, Booker, Buttigieg, Castro, Harris, Klobuchar, O'Rourke, Sanders, Warren, and Yang qualified before August 22, while Steyer and Gabbard qualified on September 8 and September 24 respectively. The qualification deadline for the fourth debate was October 1, 2019. One candidate (de Blasio) suspended his campaign between the third and fourth debates.

snip==================================================================

Fifth debate (November 2019)
Qualification
A memo released by the DNC on September 23 indicated that the qualification period for the November debate started on September 13, and ended on November 13. To qualify in terms of polling, candidates needed to reach three percent or more in four polls approved by the DNC. Alternatively, reaching five percent or more in two DNC-approved polls conducted in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina was also accepted as meeting the polling threshold. To qualify in terms of donors, candidates needed to receive donations from 165,000 unique donors with 600 unique donors in 20 different states, territories or the District of Columbia.

snip===================================================================

Sixth debate (December 2019)
Qualification
A memo released by the DNC on October 25 indicated that the qualification period for the December debate started on October 16, and ended on December 12. To qualify in terms of polling, candidates had to reach four percent or more in four polls approved by the DNC. Alternatively, reaching six percent or more in two DNC-approved polls conducted in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, or South Carolina was also accepted as meeting the polling threshold. To qualify in terms of donors, candidates had to receive donations from 200,000 unique donors with 800 unique donors in 20 different states, territories or the District of Columbia.

snip===================================================================

Seventh debate (January 2020)
Qualification
A memo released by the DNC on December 20 indicated that the qualification period for the January debate started on November 14, 2019, and ended on January 10, 2020. A candidate needed to meet both polling and donor criteria. Candidates had to reach 5% or more in four polls approved by the DNC, or 7% or more in two DNC-approved polls conducted in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, or South Carolina. In addition, candidates must have received donations from 225,000 unique donors, including 1,000 unique donors in 20 different states, territories or the District of Columbia. The candidates who qualified were Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Sanders, Steyer and Warren. This debate stage featured all of the candidates from the sixth debate except for Yang. Steyer qualified with 2 early-state polls on the penultimate day to qualify, while the other five all qualified much earlier. Yang and Booker met the fundraising criterion but failed to meet the polling criteria. Bloomberg met polling criteria but not the fundraising criterion, as he is not currently asking for donations. Three candidates (Castro, Williamson and Booker) suspended their campaigns between the sixth and seventh debates, with Booker dropping out two days after the qualifying candidates were announced.

snip===================================================================

Eighth debate (February 7, 2020)
Qualification
The qualifications for the eighth debate were similar to those for the January debate (5% nationally/early states, or 7% in early states, this time excluding Iowa) except for the added provision that all candidates who gained at least one pledged delegate in the Iowa caucus (which is expected to apply only to candidates supported by at least 15% of the final votes statewide or in a district) would also automatically qualify for the debate. Candidates had until February 6 to qualify.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Democratic_Party_presidential_debates#Qualification

*****************************************************************************************

The February 19 Debate
To score an invite, candidates have to meet one of two polling requirements:
- two polls at 12 percent or more in Nevada and/or South Carolina; or
- four polls at 10 percent or more in those states or in national surveys.

Only polls released between Jan. 15 and Feb. 18 will count.

Candidates can also qualify by earning at least one delegate in the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 3 or in the New Hampshire primary on Feb. 11.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/us/politics/democratic-debate-lineup.html

[Laelth]

6. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Times change. The rules need to change with the times. The rules were written before Bloomberg's entry into the race. Bloomberg's entry into the race is meaningful and should not be ignored by the Democratic Party. Therefore, it makes sense to change the rules to accommodate this unforeseen and significant change in the dynamics of this important race.

-Laelth

[squirecam]

7. Bloomberg hasn't accepted the CNN town hall the night after yet

He might not debate, even if invited.