Why Bernie should be very careful about O'Malley's proposal to hold Debates himself.

[sabrina 1]

First, the DNC does NOT want Sanders in any debate with Hillary. The contrast on Issues is bound to harm THEIR preferred candidate.

The DNC has set it up so that 'anyone who participates in debates outside their approved schedule, will be banned from THEIR debates.

IF Bernie participates in O'Malley's proposed debates outside the six scheduled by the DNC, he will be banned from the DNC Debates.

The ONLY way he should do so is if both Webb and Chafee also participate in O'Malley's proposed debates.

The best thing that could happen for the DNC is to hold the debates with ONLY Chafee, Webb and Hillary.

So, let's start pressuring Webb and Chafee who have, supposedly, nothing to lose by joining O'Malley and if they won't, then neither should Bernie.

Just my opinion, but I'm beginning to see this as a possible trap for Bernie.

If he refuses O'Malley's invitation, they will accuse him of not really wanting debates.

If he accepts it, he will not be in the DNC debates.

So now is the time to make this a huge issue.

First with Hillary, Webb and Chafee.

AND MOSTLY force the DNC to lift that ban!

Use this to HIGHLIGHT the ridiculous anti-democratic demands of the DNC regarding debates.

Bernie should start talking about it now everywhere he goes. Tell people he will not be tricked out of the DNC debates, however he would like to join O'Malley so long as Hillary, Webb and Chafee do so also and ask people to contact them asking them to join him and O'Malley.

I'm getting a bad feeling about this. Hopefully I am wrong.

29 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Participate in O'Malley's debates?
	0 (0%)
	Not participate in O'Malley's?
	0 (0%)
	Yes, participate but ONLY IF Hillary, Webb and Chafee do so also and/or if the DNC lifts their ban.
	28 (97%)
	No, should agree to participate in the DNC debates regardless of everything else.
	1 (3%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[virtualobserver]

1. DNC is behaving badly, but defying the DNC would be a horrible idea

and Bernie would never do that.

I'm glad that O'Malley is doing this. I have a suspicion that the DNC would back down on exclusion, if O'Malley makes a big enough deal about it. It is a smart move on his part, he has nothing to lose.

[sabrina 1]

2. And he has a lot to gain.

THAT is what is bothering me.

Watch Hillary supporters go after Bernie if he doesn't participate in O'Malley's debates.

I will change my mind ONLY if Chafee and Webb agree.

[virtualobserver]

8. They will go after him either way

If he participates he is defying the DNC so he isn't a Democrat.

If he doesn't.....Bernie says he wants debates, then he won't debate.

The Hillary spin.....always twirling, twirling.

[sabrina 1]

22. Yes, they will. However, we don't know what O'Malley has in mind, how many

voters will be watching his debates. So Bernie has to weigh the odds of defying the DNC, which ALL of them, IF they really are 'for the people' should be doing, including Hillary.

Which is why Bernie's campaign needs to get out in front of this, let people KNOW what the DNC has done with the debates, sign the petitions that are circulating demanding more debates etc and turn the tables on this, IF it is not what it appears to be right from the beginning. Challenge HILLARY to join O'Malley and put HER on the defensive.

We will know IF this is not in any way connected to the DNC IF Hillary's campaign doesn't go after ONLY BERNIE if Chafee, Webb and Hillary along with Bernie all opt out of O'Malley's debates.

But if they ONLY go after Bernie, then we know, and should slam them constantly for 'dirty tricks' re trying to avoid debates etc.

[virtualobserver]

30. I don't think that Bernie should have anything to do with the O'Malley debates

Bernie will be fine if he just does the DNC debates. Defying the DNC would play into Hillary's hands.
Better to wait until Oct to debate Hillary, then have a debate with O'Malley that no one will watch.

Hillary would love an excuse not to debate at all.

I think that Bernie should acknowledge the unfairness, but say that going around the DNC isn't a solution.

[djean111]

14. I think the DNC would be only too happy to use any excuse to dump Bernie from the debates

and some primary ballots. Also, I think it will soon be dirty tricks season.
What Hillary supporters think or say is totally unimportant. Totally.
And I think some people may not be aware of a little thing called TwitterAudit.

[sabrina 1]

24. Yes, I'm kind of glad that 'some people' are not yet aware of the power

of social media. Dirty tricks season may or may not have begun, we'll see when we see what Hillary's campaign does with this.

My thoughts are we should pressure HER to join O'Malley's debates.

IF she cares about democracy, she should be as outraged as O'Malley is at what the DNC is trying to do.

[fredamae]

3. Interesting move on the DNC's

part...and revealing..thanks for bringing this up.....
Sanders, O'Malley, Chaffee and Webb Could expose the DNC undemocratic (imo) manipulations if they choose too, but None of them should move forward with this unless all 4 of 'em are solidly in.
I believe WE should call the DNC Out-be the ones who raise LOUD holy hell On the behalf of Sanders/O'Malley/Webb/Chaffee. It is "we" after all...who want, will benefit from and Need More debates Sooner.

[sabrina 1]

5. Very clever of them to place a ban on anyone who decides to debate outside of their

schedule.

[fredamae]

9. But, apparently Not

clever enough to not get caught

[sabrina 1]

12. Right, sometimes you can be a bit too clever for your own good.

If they had nothing to do with this, then we won't hear anything more about it once Webb, Hillary and Chafee refuse to participate in O'Malley's debates. But IF it is used ONLY against Bernie, but not against the others, then we can safely assume, imo, that this wasn't just O'Malley's own idea.

[fredamae]

15. Once an "insder"

even a little bit...always an insider.
Hell, the GOP/DNC/Third Way/Heritage/AFP et al-have made or are Making all of us "calculating politicians". It would appear, many have learned our lessons well....
There is a River of Pure crap running beneath us and it has breached the levees of democracy.

[sabrina 1]

26. I know, ten years ago I would have been jumping up and down with joy

over this, encouraging Bernie to join O'Malley in defying the DNC's rules. We sure have learned a lot, I liked the naive 'me' better, but remaining that way for so long, is what cost us so much.

[malokvale77]

54. ^^^ this ^^^

Which is why I thought Bernie's twitter debate was wicked smart.

It allows him to debate the issues without breaking DNC stifling rules.

[jwirr]

19. I agree. And I am not so sure that we should be using the 6 debate idea to go after them. Better

to us the exclusivity rule for several reasons. 1st we have NEVER had this rule before in the Democratic Party. 2nd that rule limits discussion - it does not increase our knowledge in any way. 3rd it does not represent our Democratic values and is undemocratic in an American way.

If the exclusivity rule is lifted then the candidates are in control of how many debates they will agree to. Since the DNC has made it clear they favor Hillary they should not have control of how many debates.

Enough is enough. This is supposed to be a democracy.

[fredamae]

23. You raise good points and

This isn't even about the candidates-this is really about "us, democracy and our party".
I honestly wouldn't feel any different if the DNC wanted "OMalley or Bernie Or, or, or.

You are so correct in that we should focus upon DNC process, past VS present and ask them some really Blunt questions
Boy, has the Dem Party long fallen from Grace and can no longer Honestly claim they take the "high Road".
Sickening.
So called "Big Tent Dems" just erected a "pup-tent" thanks to DWS and it's becoming more clear-we ain't included.

[jwirr]

28. I know. I have been voting in every election since JFK and this is not the same party. We have

lost ourselves.

[fredamae]

32. I wasn't Quite old

enough to Vote yet then (not 21)..but..I have been loyally dedicated to the Dem Party since 1959.....
I am sickened by what leadership has done to and where "they" have steered the party.
I humbly submit, too many Dems in leadership are not nearly as progressive as the 1956 GOP platform.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=25838
They have silently moved so far to the right - disguised by the tailwind and distractions from the crazed in the GOP.
My cynical self believes It almost seems like it was "the plan" all along at this juncture.

[sabrina 1]

29. Those are very good points and I agree completely that the focus should be on

this undemocratic 'process' of exclusivity the DNC has come up with.

But seeing people applaud O'Malley's proposal though I know Bernie is a smart man, made me feel we need to consider all the possibilities surrounding this proposal.

In the past I would have applauded this proposal without thinking past 'it will show them that they cannot control debates'. Many of us were very naive in the past, and I admit to knee-jerk reactions without looking at possible consequences.

Pressure should be put on Hillary to join O'Malley's debates. Ask her why she will not. Turn the tables on this IF it is not what it appears to be.

[jwirr]

33. Totally agree. Hillary has to be pressured about the O'Malley debate proposal because she has to

be the one to decide to override the DNC in the end.

At the same time we need to really complain about the exclusivity rule because it just plain is undemocratic.

[malokvale77]

55. Point...

"In the past I would have applauded this proposal without thinking past 'it will show them that they cannot control debates'. Many of us were very naive in the past, and I admit to knee-jerk reactions without looking at possible consequences."

As my father used to say to me, "That'll learn ya".

[malokvale77]

53. Might I add a #4...

It makes the Democratic Party look too much like the Republican Party.

That's what happens when you put a Republican in charge of the DNC.

[TM99]

4. Too soon and too little information to vote.

I still have trust issues with O'Mally and confirmed connections to the Third Way/DLC.

I don't see Webb or Chafee as being serious enough candidates at this point to even go along with this. Besides, they are more than likely angling for a VP slot so why blow that by participating with O'Malley?

Sanders has embraced the Democratic party despite being an independent in order to win in this two party system. He knows very well how to play by the rules and still be the outsider we need him to be with regards to traditional progressivism.

Do we even know that O'Malley can pull this off? Who will be sponsoring the unsanctioned debate? Too many unknowns right now for me to support it.

My gut says something isn't right and not to act too hastily about this.

[sabrina 1]

7. I like O'Malley but he has nothing to lose by doing this, in fact, a lot to gain.

IF Bernie were to participate, the DNC would get their wish and I keep remembering hearing that O'Malley was only in this race to try for the VP spot. If Bernie doesn't bite, he will be attacked for not going up against the DNC. If he accepts, the DNC keeps him out of the debates.

Either way it benefits the DNC's choice of candidate.

Who should also be pressured into joining O'Malley's debates also.

[TM99]

61. If all agreed, and you have updated your poll to reflect that,

then yes, I would support a protest of the DNC debates in this way.

But only if Clinton, Webb, Chaffee, and O'Malley also agree to them.

Otherwise, definitely not.

[jwirr]

20. Thank you. Good observation.

[merrily]

6. The way this poll is set up made my choice difficult.

IMO, "No" and "regardless of anything else" should be dropped from the last option, which I chose with the following reservations.

Here is my full answer.

First and foremost, Bernie should participate in the DNC debates. If you're running as a Democrat, you don't want to piss off the DNC and the super delegates, which refusing to participate in the DNC debates would accomplish. If the DNC lifts its own ban, there is no issue at all and, of course, Bernie should, in that case, participate in the DNC debates AND in as many other debates as he can. He'll win against O'Malley, Chafee and Webb, hands down.

Right now, O'Malley's best hope (and probably the dream of Hillary and the DNC) is to get Bernie out of the way. I don't know what deals, if any, O'Malley may be making with Hillary and/or the DNC. I very strongly suspect that Kerry made a deal with Dean in 2004 and Obama made a deal with the Clintons in 2008, though. I'd be very cautious about anything coming at Bernie from Hillary, the DNC, O'Malley, Webb or Chafee. (Yeah, I know, duh, merrily.)


This option also made my choice more difficult: "Yes, participate but ONLY IF Webb and Chafee do so also and/or if the DNC lifts their ban."

Whether Webb and Chafee participate is totally irrelevant to my response. Neither of them has a thing to lose at this point. The key is whether the DNC lifts it's own ban. However, ONLY if the DLC lifts the ban is not a clear, stand alone choice in the poll. I'd drop make the DLC's lifting the ban a separate option if you want clearer results. JMO

[sabrina 1]

18. I edited to include Hillary btw. Why what Chafee and Webb do is so important is that

without them, the DNC has no debate, unless as someone said, Hillary chooses to debate the varying versions of herself.

IF they join O'Malley, then they too are banned by the DNC.

If they do not, then the DNC gets its wish. A show debate, where they will announce their regrets that Bernie isn't showing up and most likely will not explain why.

As for 'regardless of anything else', that was intended to show the option that he should just ignore all other debates EVEN if the DNC might be forced into lifting the ban.

There are people supporting Bernie who are loyal Dems and would want him to simply abide by the DNC's rules, regardless because for some Dems they are going out on a limb to support Bernie considering his longtime status as an Independent and would definitely want to assuage any misgivings they have by seeing him abide by the party rules.

[merrily]

34. Ignore other debates, even if the DNC lifts the ban? NO to that, so I voted wrong.

Thanks for the clarification of that option.

I will just undo my vote and vote for your newly edited option, with Hillary included.

[tularetom]

10. He should agree if the others participate and screw the DNC

Then they'll have to ban everybody and let Hillary stand up there and debate herself.

Although, given how she has "evolved" on so many issues, it would be easy for her to do.

In fact 1996 Hillary, 2003 Hillary, 2008 Hillary and 2015 Hillary could debate each other.

[virtualobserver]

11. I don't agree

Then there would be no debates with Hillary, which is what she wants.

I would only debate elsewhere if the non DNC ban if lifted,

but just as important, I would only debate in locally sponsored debates
where Hillary is invited.

[tularetom]

13. Her absence from the "O'Malley debates" would be noteworthy

And the DNC would be marginalized and totally discredited as the arbiter of the debate schedule which can only help to hasten the departure of D. Loserman Schultz.

[virtualobserver]

16. they would be viewed as the "kids table" debates

Hillary's people would say "See, he isn't really a Democrat"

[tularetom]

21. They'd be the ONLY debates

because the DNC would bar O'Malley, Sanders, Chafee and Webb from their debates, leaving them with the option of canceling their debates altogether, or letting Hillary stand up there and look like a fool and having to acknowledge that they (DNC) has no control over the process.

I think you misunderstand what I'm advocating. What I'm saying is this: Sanders should agree to participate in the O'Malley debates only if all other candidates do so as well, thereby forcing DNC to put up or shut up on their stupid rule. Of course I don't propose that he jump in alone.

[sabrina 1]

17. Yes, but so long as they have other candidates to put on stage with Hillary

after banning both Bernie and O'Malley, people will not realize WHY Bernie isn't there, and you can bet THEY won't explain it.

The way it would go would be: 'All candidates for the Dem Nomination were invited to participate in this race. We regret that Sen. Bernie Sanders will not be participating tonight'.

And let the audience try to figure out why not.

If they mention O'Malley at all, I'll be surprised.

[tularetom]

25. I guess I didn't express myself well

I would advocate that Sanders agree to participate in the O'Malley debates only if all other candidates do the same. Then the DNC would be forced to either (a) back down from their rule and lose face or (b) ban Sanders, O'Malley, Chaffee and Webb from their debates and lose face.

If this (b) happens they won't have any other candidates to put on stage with Hillary.

I dont propose that Sanders unilaterally agree to participate in any debates.

[sabrina 1]

31. Thanks, that makes a lot of sense and is a very good strategy imo.

Bernie could make a statement, welcoming O'Malley's proposal and requesting the DNC to lift their ban so that he and all Dem candidates can participate in those debates.

Sorry if I misunderstood.

[Scuba]

27. Or they'll get a Joe Biden or Alvin Green to debate Hillary.

[aspirant]

39. Agree

Biden will jump in the race and Hillary and Biden will be debate pretenders.

The only way this should happen is if Hillary is included, no other way.

[n2doc]

37. It would look really bad if the DNC's "debates" were only HRC

Really bad. Like informercial level bad. If the other folks running could band together and hold their own debates, I think the DNC would cave quickly. But I doubt that they will. All would have to stand together against the pressure. If only a few defied the DNC, then the DNC could get away with a HRC +2 or 3 others and make it look legit.

[malokvale77]

56. The "Show of Shows" persay? nt

[fbc]

35. I'm sure whatever Bernie chooses will be an intelligent, reasoned decision.

that's what he does.

[winter is coming]

36. We should go after the exclusivity rule hammer and tongs.

It's what's killing us, and it's indefensible. I don't think that increasing the number of debates will provide much benefit without lifting the exclusivity rule, because if the DNC is willing to cook the schedule, even going so far as to give the GOP a two-month lead on debates, they'll be cooking the format of the actual debates themselves to protect HRC as much as possible.

There's no reason--none--that can be used to justify exclusivity, and Bernie makes a good point that special interest groups should be able to sponsor debates if they so choose. If enough attention is drawn to the exclusivity clause and how DWS is tilting the playing field toward HRC, the DNC may have to yield. The MSM, which likes a good scandal, might be helpful there. The only reason the GOP isn't all over this is that the RNC has its own exclusivity clause.

I don't think O'Malley's deliberately trying to draw Bernie out of the DNC debates for nefarious purposes. O'Malley's still stuck in low single digits and if he doesn't break out of them soon, he's toast. Bernie's doing better: while he would definitely benefit from the broader exposure that a televised debate would bring, he can afford to wait until October. The trouble is, he likely won't get a meaningful debate even then.

If everyone but Hillary goes for an extramural debate, then Bernie should, too, but what we really need to be focused on is getting the DNC to defend exclusivity. BLM wants the candidates to address their issues with specific details. It's a pity they can't sponsor their own debate, for just that purpose.

[sabrina 1]

38. I agree completely re focusing on that rule, which is happening. But O'Malley's proposal kind of

takes the focus OFF that making it appear that there ARE other options. My OP was merely to point out that unless ALL candidates join O'Malley, this is not the case.

So I agree with your post completely. The way this is set up by the DNC is shameful and I hope Bernie will use O'Malley's proposal to draw even more attention to the exclusivity rule.

I expect nothing from Hillary, she is no doubt thrilled with things just the way they are. She could surprise us and join in the demand to remove that rule however. But that is very unlikely.

[winter is coming]

49. She'll only demand that the rule be lifted to help DWS save face.

If/when the heat gets too hot, the DNC won't explicitly lift the rule; instead they'll announce something about all of the candidates having requested blah-blah, so they're relaxing it. That way, they can run the same ploy again in the future, if they need it, and they won't have to admit they blew it.

And O'Malley is setting up other debates to make people wonder why someone would want to--and why the DNC would object to it.

[aspirant]

40. Focus on the rule, yet:

"to give the GOP a two-month lead on debates" This is planned so the Repub field will be thinned and Hillary will only be focused on a few Repubs and avoiding any of Bernie's questions, if allowed.

"If everyone but Hillary goes for an extramural debate, then Bernie should, too" Disagree, Hillary is the key.

This is premature, if after 2 debates we all see controlled questioning and discussion where Hillary is allowed to avoid everything, then the people will be aware of the scam and we can take action.

Also, after a few debates we can see O'Malley's strategy. Will he be soundly criticizing Hillary or focusing on Bernie.

[winter is coming]

50. "After a few debates" will carry us into December. If only one Dem candidate,

no matter who it is, is eligible for the DNC debate, you don't have a debate and the DNC looks silly. The joker in the deck is Biden. It would be a mistake for the four non-HRC candidates to agree to an extramural debate and then have Biden enter the race.

[aspirant]

51. IMO

Hillary and the DNC don't want any debates and will have talking point after talking point how it isn't silly. No debates are perfect for her mode of campaigning

There will be many jokers in the deck. If not Biden, the Third way and DNC will miraculously find others who will jump in.

Bernie is in a dead heat in NH and closing fast in Iowa. Seems like this type of campaigning is working just fine. Keep our focus on the Grass Roots Revolution and don't let these DNC distractions slow us down

We will know after 1 debate how the DNC and Hillary debate protocols will affect Bernie. The benefit of an OPEN debate will be a faster exodus of HRC supporters, but this exodus will happen anyway.

[malokvale77]

57. I like the way you think. nt

[blackspade]

41. The DNC is in the pocket of the oligarchs.

Expected given the 'leadership' of DWS.

[aspirant]

42. Don't forget NRN

If Hillary doesn't participate and protests ensue, is the future easily predicted then?

[sabrina 1]

43. We'd have to wait a year for that, but if they are what they claim to be

then yes, they SHOULD hold a debate with all candidates invited.

Why I feel certain that won't happen? NRN is a DLC/Third Way controlled convention.

[aspirant]

44. Why would we have to wait a year

If O'Malley, Sanders, Webb and Chafee hold a debate in a month w/o Hillary and shouting down ensues, what do you think the HRC camp talking points will be?

[sabrina 1]

46. Because NRN holds their convention once every year. Not sure what they do

other than that.

[aspirant]

48. Are you saying Shouting Down only occurs at NRN?

Again I ask, if the 4 hold a debate in a month w/o Hillary and having nothing to do with NRN and they get shouted down, what will be HRC's camp talking points? I hope this is clear now.

This is an unnecessary risk from many angles

[Zorra]

45. This has been on my mind as well. Thanks, sabrina1.

[sabrina 1]

47. I'm certain he is smart enough not to bite but it would be good

to use this to go after the DNC on their exclusivity rule, rather than wait for them to use it against HIM because he doesn't jump at the chance to allow them to ban him from the debates, where they are likely to claim he isn't 'really interested in debates' or whatever talking point they come up with.

[mikehiggins]

52. Puhlease. Don't consider this an O'Malley ploy intended to hurt Bernie, or orchestrated

by some other candidate towards that end.

The establishment wants HRC, which is probably the reason for so few debates, and DWS is simply doing their bidding. As for Hillary, I think she doesn't have a hand in any of these so-called ______-gates that too many people on our side see as plots and conspiracies.

After the GOPuke debates it has to be clear to all of us the the entire Republican slate is a clear and present danger to our nation.

If we don't win the nomination (and we all know that's a possibility) and HRC does I will do my damndest to help her get elected. I won't like it as much as I would working for our guy but even thinking about sitting this one out is not only stupid but suicidal.

An HRC presidency, at its worst, would provide four (hopefully not more) years to build the kind of coalition Bernie talks about. A GOPuke presidency would move us even closer to a fascist state in which God and the Koch brothers would rule the land. Halliburton and Bechtel would be available to build the detention camps for gays and uppity minorities and pesky leftists. After that, well who knows?

I'm not allowed to call them Nazis, am I? Probably just as well, there's not a one of them with the charisma Adolf had, thank God.

[restorefreedom]

58. bernie MUST debate hillary directly

any schedule that does not allow that bernie needs to decline. i agree that the exclusivity clause is bullshit to help hillary, and omalley might get it overturned. but bernie cannot lose a chance to confront her directly. that is when his numbers will soar and hers will tank.

[sabrina 1]

60. I agree!

[Babel_17]

59. How does the DNC define a debate, I wonder

But yeah, the more the merrier when it comes to participants. I'd love to see The League of Women Voters promote a forum of some kind and see the DNC try to threaten sanctions over that!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Women_Voters

[ibegurpard]

62. O'malley is just a Hillary surrogate

Sorry but that's what I believe.