Sanders campaign hits DNC over new debate criteria: 'The definition of a rigged system'

[Uncle Joe]

Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-Vt.) presidential campaign ripped the Democratic National Committee (DNC) over its new debate qualifications, which opened the way for Mike Bloomberg to take part, saying it is supporting “a rigged system.”

The DNC on Friday said it would drop the donor threshold for the Feb. 19 primary debate in Nevada. The move could open the door for Bloomberg, a billionaire who is refusing any donations to his White House bid, to win a spot onstage.

(snip)

“To now change the rules in the middle of the game to accommodate Mike Bloomberg, who is trying to buy his way into the Democratic nomination, is wrong. That’s the definition of a rigged system,” said Jeff Weaver, a senior adviser to Sanders’s campaign.

(snip)

The debates held over the past several months have all included a mandatory donor threshold, a criteria that prevented Bloomberg from winning a spot onstage.

(snip)

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/480943-sanders-campaign-hits-dnc-over-new-debate-criteria-the-definition-of-a

[Kurt V.]

1. this decision has given trump ammunition for his reelection.

Yang's team is not happy either. it hurts biden as well bc of cross over voters. Terrible decision.

[Uncle Joe]

4. I agree Kurt.

All the candidates that have worked so hard and busted their asses since last spring but they don't have billions of dollars.


There is a timely George Carlin video that I just viewed on the video forum.

"It's one Big Club.....and You ain't in it"

[Kurt V.]

23. i watch it now and again. a genuine humanist is hard to come by these days.

i miss his voice and vonnegut and Einstein. but hey, forward.

[druidity33]

30. Ah Vonnegut...

I forget sometimes how much i miss his voice. In the realm of Ann Richards and Paul Wellstone in terms of Progressives i really miss...

[myohmy2]

51. "All the candidates that have worked so hard and busted their asses..."

...absolutely...

...has Bloomberg 'earned' the right to be there?

...this is a prime example of what Bernie rails against...

...it's patently unfair to all those who have played by the rules and as you put it, 'busted their asses'...


...not right...

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

80. We The People know what's going on here; the DNC needs to retract it's questionable decision ASAP.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[TomCADem]

91. Obama to Trump: Stop 'Whining' About 'Rigged' Election

Uncanny. Another example of horseshoe theory...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/10/18/obama-to-donald-trump-stop-whining-about-rigged-election

"I'm going to be a little more subdued in my discussions of the Republican nominee in this context than I might be on the campaign trail," President Obama said Tuesday, during a joint press conference with Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, when the topic of Donald Trump came up. But the president did not hesitate to denounce the Republican nominee's increasingly loud complaints about what he views as an election that's "rigged" against him. “I have never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history, any presidential candidate trying to discredit the elections and the election process before votes have even taken place. It’s unprecedented. It happens to be based on no facts," the president told reporters. "It doesn't really show the kind of leadership and toughness that you'd want out of a president. You start whining before the game's even over? If whenever things are going badly for you and you lose you start blaming somebody else? Then you don't have what it takes to be in this job."

Earlier in the press conference, when a reporter asked how Trump's seemingly cozy relationship with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin could affect America's interests in the world, Obama said, "Mr. Trump’s continued flattery of Mr. Putin and the degree to with he appears to model many of his policies and approaches to politics on Mr. Putin is unprecedented in American politics." Obama went on to question "how it is that some of the same leaders in the Republican Party who were constantly haranging us for even talking to the Russians and who consistently took the most hawkish approaches to Russia, including Mr. Trump's selection for vice president, now reconcile their endorsement of Mr. Trump with their previous views."

In an attempt to tie Republicans on down-ballot races to their party's presidential nominee, the president added, “Mr. Trump rarely surprises me these days. I’m much more surprised by the fact that you have Republican officials who historically have been adamantly anti-Russian and, in fact, have attacked me for even engaging them diplomatically, now supporting and in some cases echoing his positions. It's quite a reversal."

[Nanjeanne]

2. Warren isn't happy either. Frankly, it's disgraceful.

Link to tweet

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

82. Your being WAY too kind in your characterization of this travesty!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[David__77]

3. I wonder what the intention of the decision makers is.

...

[helpisontheway]

8. To prevent the nightmare result..Sanders as the nominee..nt

[Uncle Joe]

11. Yes having Bernie beat Trump would cause a nightmare with some. n/t

[DanTex]

15. A nightmarish result would be to divide the party by pissing off Democratic voters.

[helpisontheway]

38. Bern or Bust will be there regardless..look what happened in 2016

They acted a fool at the convention and many did not vote.

[HerbChestnut]

5. Agreed.

Unfortunate decision by the DNC.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

6. The GOP Senate is a rigged system. If you're going to whine,

whine about that instead of complaining about how a political party has decided to manage itself.

[Kurt V.]

28. Can't we do both? Multitasking isn't hard.

also this a very good time (more multitasking) to talk about abolishing the senate.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

33. The Senate is in the Constitution.

However, we can try for a better crop of Senators.

[Kurt V.]

37. no. its time to address this most unrepresentative body of the republic.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

39. So how do you propose to abolish the Senate, since it's in the Constitution?

[Kurt V.]

42. i'll get back to you on that. ian millhiser has some thoughts on this.

[George II]

7. It's almost like Pat Mahomes telling MLB how to establish their rules.

[lapucelle]

13. Amy Klobuchar likes the new critieria and the possibility for Mike to be included.

Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar took a different stance, indicating that she'd like to see Bloomberg in the debates.

"I'd be fine with him on the debate stage, because I think that instead of just putting your money out there, he's actually got to be on the stage, and be able to go back and forth so that voters can evaluate him in that way," Klobuchar said on MSNBC Tuesday.

According to ABC News' analysis, Klobuchar has qualified for the New Hampshire debate, but not the Nevada debate.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dnc-scraps-donor-threshold-nevada-debate-opening-door/story?id=68673875


So far it's Jeff Weaver, Yang, and Steyer who are miffed.

[squirecam]

68. Let him earn

A delegate in Iowa or New Hampshire and he would be in.

Changing the rules......not good.

[lapucelle]

70. The rules have been changing and evolving from the beginning.

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

[squirecam]

71. They made it harder all along for others

Only to make it easier for him. It isn’t fair.

[lapucelle]

72. How did they make it easier?

The Feb. 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. There is no donor requirement, but 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

[squirecam]

74. They dropped

The donor requirement.

[lapucelle]

75. So? How does that make it easier? N/T

[squirecam]

77. By not having ANY

Donor requirement, he didn’t have to spend $ getting donations, as Steyer did in order to meet a debate threshold. It’s not fair.

Does Steyer get a polling exemption because he has $? Or does only Bloomberg get special treatment?

https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/tom-steyer-january-democratic-primary-debate

[lapucelle]

83. Your Fox link concerns the January debate. The rules were the same for everyone

as are the rules for the February 3 and February 17 debates.

[squirecam]

85. I don't get your point

Each debate the POLLING and the DONOR requirement has been increasing.

Steyer had to spend $ getting a donor requirement. No one gave him a pass.

Now, there is NO donor requirement.

So the debates got harder for EVERYONE ELSE. But now Bloomberg gets a pass, because he didn’t spend $ to get donors, and couldn’t pass a donor requirement.

It’s not fair.

[lapucelle]

87. No one gave Mike Bloomberg a pass in January. He didn't qualify.

And Steyer won't have to spend money to raise money for the February debate.

[Kurt V.]

29. jr or senior?

[George II]

36. Bazinga! Junior. I just heard today that his father was a MLB player for about a decade!

[NYMinute]

49. Not Pat Mahomes

Try a third string QB from junior leagues, on a short term contract with the NFL.

[Horizens]

9. bernie

you're not a democrat so do us all a favor and STFU.

[myohmy2]

69. we...

...can't want Bernie and his followers in the Party supporting Democrats and not consider them Democrats...

...we can't have it both ways...

[Horizens]

76. Nonsense

There may be democrats who support sanders. That does not make sanders a democrat, he's not.

... you can't deny a fact just because you don't want it to be true.

[myohmy2]

81. A Rose...

...by Any Other Name?...

[Horizens]

90. Question

What do a rose and sanders have in common?

Answer: Neither of them are democrats.

[lapucelle]

10. As per NPR...

DNC chairman Tom Perez and his aides have said for months that the party would likely shift to qualifying standards based on actual results once voting began. But the move is nonetheless significant given Bloomberg's unique presence in the race.

https://www.npr.org/2020/01/31/801653384/new-democratic-party-rules-could-put-bloomberg-on-debate-stage

[Uncle Joe]

16. Well it was "months" ago when Bloomberg entered the race, November to be exact.

(snip)

Bloomberg made a late entry into the primary field, officially launching his campaign in November several months after many of his competitors. He is skipping campaigning for the first four nominating states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina and is instead dedicating hundreds of millions of his own dollars to expanding his staffing and blitzing Super Tuesday states with advertising.

(snip)

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/480943-sanders-campaign-hits-dnc-over-new-debate-criteria-the-definition-of-a

[lapucelle]

21. So? The rules have been changing and evolving since the beginning of the campaign

as the debate calendar progressed. That's the system that was set up and announced even before the first debate.

Besides, why would anybody be afraid of debating Mike Bloomberg?

Amy Klobuchar welcomes the change, and voters (especially independents) probably want to hear what Mike has to say.

[Uncle Joe]

40. Usually becoming more stringent in regards to donations, not eliminating them,

this is a first.

[lapucelle]

50. Yes, because it was thought to be indicative of grass roots interest.

Now that we have actual voting beginning and a smaller field, it makes sense that the criteria to measure voter interest are delegate counts and standings in the major polls.

No sure what the problem is with candidate Bloomberg having to take debate questions. It sounds like a good thing.

[Uncle Joe]

55. They didn't need to eliminate donations in order to add delegate counts. n/t

[lapucelle]

63. Those numbers will still be reported. N/T

[Uncle Joe]

73. That's not the point, donations won't be a qualifier for debates as of February 19th

and the candidate most benefiting from that arrangement is billionaire Bloomberg.

[lapucelle]

79. Why should donations be a qualifier at this point?

If Bloomberg hits the poll numbers he needs, he'll qualify for the debate. And if he doesn't, he won't.

[Uncle Joe]

84. Why not? I thought the goal was to narrow the field

and each debate's qualifiers became increasingly stringent until now.

[lapucelle]

86. The polling rules are very stringent. The money chase and race served a purpose,

but only up to a point.

[squirecam]

88. Bloomberg

Could have spent 20 million in Iowa or NH and won a single delegate. That was an alternate way to get in.

Instead he gets special rules. Not applied to Steyer, Booker, or Yang or anyone else.

[lapucelle]

89. They're not special rules. They are the same rules for everyone. N/T

[W_HAMILTON]

12. God, do I regret ever voting for this guy in 2016.

And Sanders's merry band of Jill Stein supporters are already signaling they are going to fuck us over again, with our democracy literally on the line.

Fellow Democrats -- actual Democrats -- please do the right thing and make sure this man doesn't come close to winning the nomination and is beaten so soundly that his and his campaign's cries of """rigged!!1!""" are rightfully laughed at.

[empedocles]

32. BS 'rigged' claim - even sounds like traitortrump

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

14. I am not a fan of Bloomberg,

and I don't like the idea that a rich guy can buy a nomination (although I have to give him credit for some very good ads). However, the fact is that he is moving up in the polls, probably because of those very good ads, and for that reason he ought to be put to the same debate test as the other candidates. We should hear from him directly instead of letting him ride on his ads.

[Devil Child]

17. Speak up and speak out Sen. Sanders!

[lapucelle]

61. It was Jeff Weaver who made the statement. N/T

[NYMinute]

18. It's too soon for whining about rigging to start

[OnDoutside]

52. Had they stopped ?

[NYMinute]

53. Good point

[still_one]

56. Isn't that the truth. If Bloomberg the polling criteria they should welcome it to hold his feet to

the fire in a debate

[C_U_L8R]

19. Oh please, just stop

Either join the party or go make your own.

[DanTex]

20. Umm, are they trying to piss off half of the party?

They didn't change the rules for Booker or Castro, neither of whom endorsed George W Bush. But now they change them for Bloomberg?

Do they understand that there are a lot of Democratic voters that actually don't like the idea of billionaires buying elections?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

24. At this point, since Bloomberg is moving up in the polls,

I think it would be good to hear from him directly instead of letting him coast along on the strength of some effective advertising. Let him answer some hard questions like the other candidates. Give him a chance to screw up.

[DanTex]

25. That makes sense. But still, it's bound to piss a bunch of people off. Which we don't need.

I mean, supporters of candidates who didn't have the rules changed for them have a right to be upset. And anyone who believed the whole "rigged" thing isn't going to become easier to talk off the ledge by decisions like this.

[NurseJackie]

22. Oh, whaaaa!

If a candidate can't adjust and accommodate something like this, then that candidate is completely unprepared and unqualified to be the POTUS and Leader of the Free World.

[DanTex]

26. That is a phenomenal message of unity!

[NurseJackie]

41. It's a phenomenal message of...

... quit your belly achin'. I can't imagine Obama, or Hillary, or ANY candidate acting like this. It's just not a good look, and it makes me wonder how he would react to all the unexpected and "unfair" twists and turns that the POTUS would have to deal with.

No crying in baseball!

[still_one]

59. I am not thrilled about Bloomberg in the race because I believe we have too many

candidates already, however, if he meets the polling criteria, I don’t understand why they wouldn’t want to debate him, if for nothing else to hold Bloomberg accountable in a debate instead of getting a free pass

[sheshe2]

60. Yep.

I have read all your 'unifying" messages.

[NurseJackie]

65. Preach girl, preach!

[still_one]

34. +++

[Sloumeau]

27. I agree with the Sanders campaign.

Bloomberg could have asked for donations. He chose not to. Bloomberg could have started his campaign seven months earlier. He chose not to. If Bloomberg were not rich, would we be even having this converstation? No, we would not. Billionaires already had too much influence. Changing the rules for a billionaire is not a good idea.

[gab13by13]

31. When will the DNC learn and keep its hands off the scale?

We need to overhaul the DNC rules. Even Republicans don't have super delegates, 1 person, 1 vote.

[Recursion]

35. FFS this decision basically hands Sanders the nom (nt)

[betsuni]

44. Could you please explain how?

I'm too stupid to figure it out on my own.

[Recursion]

45. Biden and Bloomberg cancel each other out

They each pull 20%, and Sanders pulls 25%.

[betsuni]

48. Ah. Thank you.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

78. .

[CentralMass]

43. K&R

[msongs]

46. oh poor bernie boo hoo hoo if he competes and loses lol nt

[Fiendish Thingy]

47. They should all boycott - let Biden debate Bloomberg alone nt

[still_one]

54. I am not thrilled that Bloomberg entered the race, because there are already too many candidates

in my opinion, however, Bloomberg has been increasing in the polls without being held to the scrutiny of a debate, and if his poll numbers qualify him, I think he should be part of the debate so he can be held accountable

[Drunken Irishman]

57. Who's it rigged against?

This is such a bad argument from Sanders.

Who benefits the least from Bloomberg getting on stage? It certainly isn't Bernie. I'd wager this is a far riskier overall change for Biden - not the far-left of the primary.

This is why I can't see Bernie winning. No one likes a whiner and all he does is whine, whine, whine.

[NurseJackie]

66. So much. I'm such of it.

[treestar]

58. Not the rigging crap again!

He criticizes the DNC of the party which he does not belong to, except to run for POTUS. How much can the DNC do anyway? Why does he think debating Bloomberg even harms him?

[RandySF]

62. What's the problem? Sanders will be in future debates.

[SaschaHM]

64. Oh Brother...

Poor Zephyr, she can't say one thing without Bernie coming around the next day to toss her back under the bus.

Link to tweet

The debate criteria is arbitrary nonsense and a candidate polling at 9~8% nationally should be on the debate stage to take blows and return.

Let Sanders and Warren take on the billionaire because I want to see them say the same things to his face.

I don't support the guy, but he is surging nationally and may have an impact. There's no reason that he shouldn't go through the same gauntlet that everybody else has.

[Gothmog]

67. I want to hear from Bloomberg

I really do not care what sanders thinks about this