This is what happens when you set the bar for your debate at just 5% in the polls: David Duke

[ehrnst]

Ex-KKK Leader David Duke Takes Part In The Most Surreal Debate Of 2016

U.S. Senate hopefuls in Louisiana attacked fellow candidate, former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke, in a heated ― and at times, utterly surreal — debate Wednesday at a historically black university in New Orleans.

The debate showed just how far the political climate surrounding Republican presidential contender Donald Trump has shifted to embolden white nationalist rhetoric: It included a moderator question about Duke’s references to the “CNN Jews,” a Duke rant about Jewish people controlling banking, and a lengthy shouting match.

Democrat Caroline Fayard, one of six leading candidates at the event, kicked it off by pointing to the elephant in the room — that Duke, an anti-Semite who qualified for the debate after receiving 5 percent of the vote in a statewide poll, was there at all.

.........................................................................................................................

At times, Duke’s language — which included attacking the Black Lives Matter movement — seemed to echo Trump’s. “I’m the bad guy because I defend the people of this country that made this country great,” he said at one point.

Trump, whose campaign has repeatedly shared content from white nationalists on social media, failed in February to immediately denounce Duke’s support. He has since done so, and his campaign called a recent endorsement by the KKK’s newspaper “repulsive” and said “their views do not represent the tens of millions of Americans who are uniting behind our campaign.”

................................................................................

In perhaps the most bizarre moment of the debate, the moderator asked Duke why his website made repeated references to “CNN Jews.” Duke went on an anti-Semitic rant about how “there is a problem in America with a very strong, powerful tribal group that dominates our media and dominates our international banking.” He added, “I’m not opposed to all Jews.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/david-duke-debate_us_581a9d33e4b01a82df64c149

[Hortensis]

2. The other thing that happens is democracy.

Introducing to the electorate ALL the choices who step forward and gather enough support and/or money depending on state laws to become official candidates. The Democratic Party didn't just have 5, we had 14; anyone able to name the hidden 9? The many thousands who supported them can.

Big NO to having our choices edited for political expediency and any ideological reason other than inimical to the core beliefs of the party. If the KKK's are not sufficiently in accord with the Republican Party, that's for them to say.

[ehrnst]

3. How does a candidate not qualifying for a specific debate "edit" our choices?

If they got 5000 signatures, and paid the fee, then sat doing their nails until the debates, that would work for you? That's the only thing you think should qualify someone as an actual candidate? Who may simply want the debate as a platform for their own business or particular issue - such as Duke.



Yes, please do list these "hidden 9" Democratic party candidates that you speak of. I know of Lessig, Chaffee, Webb, O'Malley, Sanders and Clinton.

What does it say about a candidate that they withdrew before the primaries? Perhaps they saw that they weren't going to make it?

[Hortensis]

4. All official candidates should be introduced to the electorate

in the first debate. Our parties owe that to their membership as a whole, as well as to all those who donated and worked to get their candidate officially recognized. After that introduction the sifting out--by the electorate--can take place.

Anything else is blocking the will of the membership by those who have the power to do just that. Btw, people who believe in the primacy of the party apparatus instead of the primacy of the membership really should not complain about a party not giving "equal" treatment to those candidates the leadership allow to survive the cut.

[ehrnst]

7. If the first debate is November 2, then that's pretty late to start.

I think that the candidates sifting themselves prior to the debates, and the primaries is a pretty efficient way of doing things.

And those outliers like Duke can be sifted out before they get a chance to derail the debate - which was pretty much rendered useless because the other candidates had to react, rather than proceed with actually telling people about their ideas.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/david-dukes-inclusion-derails-louisiana-senate-race-debate-43261549

Still waiting on that list.

And who are you referring to with this statement: "people who believe in the primacy of the party apparatus instead of the primacy of the membership really should not complain about a party not giving "equal" treatment to those candidates the leadership allow to survive the cut."

[TrekLuver]

6. Oh he's not opposed to ALL Jews, just some... OY VEY