Discussion for article #240342
C’mon people! We don’t need to debate a coronation. Best to let the Republican candidates suck up all the free media.
4 Likes
Just another reason why this election loser has to go.
5 Likes
6 nationally televised 90-120 minute debates among 3 candidates isn’t enough? Why?
5 Likes
I genuinely don’t understand why the DNC needs to schedule more than six. Both HRC and Sanders are holding press conferences, rallies, getting their ideas across in different venues. If our candidate can’t get their point with six, what’s more than six going to do? It seems to me that the average American has a pretty low threshold for information anyway so I don’t see how having more 1-2 hour debates is going to move the needle in our favor.
4 Likes
This is why Democrats will lose this year, and lose the Supreme Court forever – because the fix was in.
2 Likes
FIRED UP!
READY TO GO!
DEBATE-DEBATE IS BORING!!
WE WANT JOE!
Biden in 2016!
Let’s not lose sight of the fact that-
A) DWS was a former campaign manager for HRC, and
B) DWS campaigned on behalf of a republican contender in a FLA race rather than the Democratic candidate.
As a life-long member of the party, she is completely worthless in my view.
4 Likes
LOL …oh wait, you are serious?
You think because the Democratic Party will hold 6 debates instead of dozens, that’s why they will lose the election?
ROFLMAO
3 Likes
More debates might be nice, but 6 isn’t a bad number for the small group of candidates we have running.
There is no evidence of any kind—aside from silly speculation from sore losers—that the schedule was “rigged” to benefit Hillary Clinton.
But it does make a good excuse for people to whine about not getting their way.
3 Likes
More debates would provide more opportunity for HRC to come off badly.
1 Like
If DNC doesn’t wish to host more debates, fine. But to not allow candidates to participate in outside debates is ridiculous. Dems have stronger candidates (by far) than the GOP; we’d like to face them head on and let that be known.
3 Likes
I may have posted this previously, so bear with me, but HRC’s campaign is only starting. In debates and in town halls she is gaffe free, unlike Saint Joey, she is always on message, she is encyclopedic on policy and comfortable with confrontation and competition. The talking heads who are handling this election cycle as part of an endless horse race don’t care if they make sense just so we the public eat it up.
GO WITH JOE! FEAR THEE NOT! AND DON’T LOOK BACK!
FIRED UP! READY TO GO! CROWD-LOVING ATHLETE! WIN WITH JOE! Biden in 2016!
1 Like
Fuck me…for the briefest moment I read “DNC dismisses Wasserman Schultz.”
And for the briefest moment I spontaneously smiled.
BOO!
2 Likes
If you knew what you were talking about, you’d be dangerous, but as it is it seems like you’re buying into the predictions of gloom and doom and there are 13-14 months until the election. Six debates or twenty make no difference because the nature of the debate is shallow. 2 minutes here, rebuttal of 30 seconds, whatever, it’s a joke.
3 Likes
Any moment somebody will post something about her hair and/or her makeup. That’ll make for a content-free discussion.
I used to like Wasserman Schultz. Now I think she’s a power-mongering ass. She lacks the self awareness to recognize that her leadership is damaging the Democratic Party.
Her canned messages are annoying. She’s given to gaffes and overstatements. The methods she’s used to hold onto power (blaming efforts to replace her at the DNC on sexism and anti-Semitism, rather than on her utterly horrible election results) are disgusting.
And the fix-is-in engineering to protect Clinton from challenging public appearances smacks of Big Bossism. Worse than that, it is likely backfire: Clinton BADLY needs to get out of the bubble. But she’s not doing that. Instead, she’s insulating herself. Sycophants like Wasserman Schultz will ensure that Hillary remains unprepared for the real rough and tumble of the General Election campaign.
My God. Are these idiots really going to give the country along with Congress to the Tea Party?
6 Likes
@Littlegirlblue: Thanks much for addressing me directly. If she is the nominee, she will have few to zero more impassioned proponents than the undersigned, I promise. And maybe you’re simply right, utterly.
Listen. I want to win, I REALLY want to win! Maybe she’s just in a rut. But who is really excited about her? The e-mail shit is unfathomable – I worked twice in State and I can’t process it. And why is she running a Presidential campaign while overweight? Every candidate, male and female, knows better than this – it couldn’t be more basic. And are those marbles in mouth? Robotic and alien.Anyhow, I am moving off the fence. I want Joe!!
If it’s Hillary in the end, she’d better fucking win. She has every electoral advantage. As for me, it’s JOE IN 2016!
Decisively,
O.T.
3 Likes
The debates really serve one purpose only – they give candidates the opportunity to have their opponents fnck up live, in real time, in front of millions of voters.
3 Likes