I just figured out a Great Compromise for the debates. Do the Fox thing..

[Armstead]

Have one debate in prime time for the "upper tier" candidates who rank highest in the polls. And a "loser's debate" at 5 p.m. for the lower tier candidates.

Of course we'd have to set the bar high. So we can set it up so Hillary can debate herself in prime time for an hour.

Sanders, O'Malley, Webb and Chaffee can take the kiddie chairs at 5 p.m.

Sounds reasonable to me.




In case you miss it...

[Vincardog]

1. Sanders, O'Malley, Webb and Chaffee should go to FACEBOOK and do a FORUM.

They should have an old style DEBATE where each one states their positions and policies.
The others get to respond and then the candidate defends.
The important thing is to get their POLICIES out there and have them defend them.

They can have 1 a month until the primary election.

[Armstead]

2. Good idea, but they'd be booted oout of the "official TV" debates if they did

[Vincardog]

3. The point is to have a place for people to see their policies. IF HCR's machine wants to shoot

itself in the foot. LET THEM.

[Armstead]

4. Alas, TV is where candidates get over the bar

TV debates have a lot to do with voter perceptions of the zeitgeist.

The DNC/DLC/Clinton Campaign has decided in their infinite wisdom to put a muzzle on any candidates who try to work around that. It sucks but they hve the power to do it, if we all let them.

[1StrongBlackMan]

5. Seriously. How many debates would be adequate? ...

Would it be satisfactory, if the DNC rescinded the "exclusivity rule" and allowed/permitted any candidate attend any debate they choose, with the announced understanding that the 6 planned DNC debates are DNC "sanctioned" debates and any others are DNC-"unsanctioned" events?

I realize the limited number of debates hinders my preferred candidate; but, I believe he can get the job done in the six planned events.

The problem I see with numerous (DNC-sponsored) debates is it limits the $$$ they have to spend in down ticket races. And those races are as important as the Presidency.

[Armstead]

6. I'd prefer that candidates be able to appear elsewhere in "debate"

I'd also prefer the number to be increased, at least somewhat. Right now it's still in the early warming up phase, but if any candidate(s) can get through the Clinton Sranglehold, debates could be an important part of the process.

And, even though I just said the campaigns are just warming up, I do think it is important to have at least one debate sooner rather than later, to introduce them to the public.

As for $$$$$$$, I think a) the possibility for "discussions" on talk shows or something can help to reduce the drain on the coffers and b)I don't think if they took a minimalist approach it's have to be a big drain, and is a part of the process.