What If Martin O'Malley or Bernie Sanders Disobeys the DNC on Debates?

[Purveyor]

Aug 14, 2015 4:59 AM EDT

When the Democratic National Committee first announced in May it would sanction six primary debates in 2016 and punish candidates who went to unsanctioned events, the party said the schedule was “consistent with the precedent set by the DNC during the 2004 and 2008 cycles.”

In both of those cycles, the DNC also only sanctioned six debates. But those elections were filled with dozens of unsanctioned debates, too, that started at least six months earlier than the DNC plans to kick off its debate season this year, on Oct. 13.

That frenzy is what the committee is trying to prevent from happening this year, and it's what lower-ranking candidates, who would benefit from more chances to appear in nationally televised debates on the same stage as front-runner Hillary Clinton, are rebelling against. Senator Bernie Sanders said he’s “disappointed” with the schedule, while former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley called it “unprecedented” and “outrageous.”

“The DNC may threaten to keep somebody out of a future debate, but it isn’t their invitation.”
Alan Schroeder, a journalism professor at Northeastern University

Maybe the solution for lower-polling candidates isn’t to push the DNC to sanction more debates, says Kathleen Jamieson, a University of Pennsylvania professor of communications who has studied and written about presidential debates and political rhetoric. “O’Malley’s attacking the wrong villain,” Jamieson said. “If anyone wants to stand up and sponsor a debate and the candidates want to go to it, you’ll have a debate that the DNC hasn’t sanctioned.”

For example, if a Spanish-language television network said it was going to host two debates, one for Democrats and one for Republicans, Jamieson says it is likely the candidates would ignore the rules set by their committees. “They would accept and go, regardless of whether the RNC and DNC said yes or no, because they want to reach the Hispanic vote,” she said.

more...

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-08-14/what-if-martin-o-malley-or-bernie-sanders-disobey-the-dnc-on-debates-

[Peacetrain]

1. I don't know to tell you the truth.. but we need more debates

I am just all for that..

[redstateblues]

2. More debates? Why?

Unless Trump is up there the viewership will be very limited. How many people watch MSNBC besides me? In the scale of things it's not very many. If we can't get a good picture of the candidates' views from six debates we never will.

[99th_Monkey]

3. DNC debate start-time of Oct. 13th was needed

in order to see if DNC-candidate-Hillary will be able to address & survive the
email 'scandal'; so that Joe Biden (or Al Gore) could jump into the race in time
for the first debate.

This ^ isn't the only reason, but I think it was a major factor, in addition to delaying
debates hoping-against-hope that Bernie's campaign would get derailed and/or
'plateau" and just go away before Oct 13.

[ljm2002]

4. It doesn't do them that much good to debate each other...

...they need to debate the front-runner. If they do defy the DNC then the DNC can deny them participation in the important debates.

Of course if they all do it, then Clinton would be left with no one to debate which wouldn't do her much good either.

A lot of angles to consider.

[mmonk]

5. They put this in hoping someone will take the bait.