Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, March 07, 2020

The Democratic National Committee on Friday announced the criteria to qualify for the next Democratic primary debate, and the rules set up a face-off between Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Party of Inclusion indeed...

#1 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-06 06:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

It's no so much sexism, as it's criticism of the DNC Clintonite establishment. That's the deal breaker.

#2 | Posted by nullifidian at 2020-03-06 06:59 PM | Reply

Gabbard has how many delegates?

Two.
She's screwed all right.
By Democrats who didn't vote for her.
The DNC would be more stupid than usual to keep her in.

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-06 06:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Or they are afraid of her making the septuagenarians look, well old and feeble.

#4 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-06 07:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Yeah, I hear they're televising it in black and white too. That's how scared they are of the woman with two delegates.

#5 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-06 07:11 PM | Reply

Good point. The visual contrast would be, well, stroke-inducing.

#6 | Posted by nullifidian at 2020-03-06 07:11 PM | Reply

Ha ha @ Fake Lawyer!
Your fellow Ruskie failed and you're all butthurt about it.
Precious!

#7 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2020-03-06 08:51 PM | Reply

No matter what, the hate against Gabbard is unwarranted and stupid. Gabbard is measured, intelligent, and a great public speaker. Watching the party completely ostracize het is comical. If they embraced her, she had a great chance of beating Trump ... But instead the weird hate, misinformation, and demonization kills it.

No where this is more evident in the next debate. The rules were, when you have a delegate, you get invited to debate. Literally 15 minutes after she won a delegate, they changed the rules to keep her out.

I don't understand it. What's the reason?

#8 | Posted by ABH at 2020-03-07 10:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" I don't understand it. What's the reason?"

Her main issue as a candidate is ending unjust military engagement. They don't want her making that case when one of the other candidates on stage has supported every war of the last 25 years.

#9 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-03-07 10:29 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I would have voted for her with a second thought. But I really have to think about whether I will vote for Biden.

#10 | Posted by ABH at 2020-03-07 10:33 AM | Reply

Republicans canceled a bunch of their primaries to hand the nomination to a demented sex offender and they're criticizing the Dems for not including a literally who in their umpteenth debate.

#11 | Posted by JOE at 2020-03-07 10:41 AM | Reply

"I would have voted for her with a second thought. But I really have to think about whether I will vote for Biden."

She was in my top three or four (with Sanders, Warren, and Yang) early on even though I disagreed with a lot of her other positions because her standing and position on war is compelling. Too bad her candidacy fell victim to the Clinton machine before she was able to gain any real traction.

#12 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-03-07 10:42 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" Republicans canceled a bunch of their primaries to hand the nomination to a demented sex offender and they're criticizing the Dems for not including a literally who in their umpteenth debate."

Putting the hypocrisy aside, they still have a valid point, even if it's made disingenuously.

#13 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-03-07 10:44 AM | Reply

www.politico.com

Tulsi Gabbard trashed the Democratic Party as "not the party that is of, by and for the people," accused Kamala Harris of trafficking in "lies and smears and innuendo" and attacked Pete Buttigieg as naive.

Her performance at Wednesday's debate earned an attaboy from the Trump War Room. And some rank-and-file Democrats are at wit's end with the congresswoman who Hillary Clinton called "the favorite of the Russians."

MY WORDS FOLLOW

Lord she sounds familiar. LMAO

#14 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-03-07 10:52 AM | Reply

She's a fox news bot whose sole apparent campaign goal is to enhance her standing as an anti-Dem TV personality. I think the Dems should have had the exact same debate rules for the entire campaign, but i'm not shedding any tears that Gabbard isn't going to be there to echo the gripes of people like Nullifidian and ROC.

#15 | Posted by JOE at 2020-03-07 10:54 AM | Reply

" She's a fox news bot whose sole apparent campaign goal is to enhance her standing as an anti-Dem TV personality. "

I think that's unfair. It's not her fault that Democrats leave a vulnerability wide open to valid exploitation.

#16 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-03-07 10:58 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Too bad her candidacy fell victim to the Clinton machine before she was able to gain any real traction.

You are such victims. it just never ends. Gabbard's comments and actions knocked her out of any consideration long before Clinton said a word about her. Her candidacy was going nowhere fast.

I was thinking the same thing as Clinton by the time Clinton said a word. But it was the "Clinton Machine."

I am LMAO over that.

#17 | Posted by YAV at 2020-03-07 11:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A "vast right wing conspiracy" is to be accepted without question but the "Clinton machine" is LMAO material. Marching orders received, Corporal.

#18 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-03-07 11:42 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Gabbard is more level-headed and WAY more likable than either Biden or Sanders. She's also a vet and she's young and attractive. She interviews well and comes across level-headed and measured. So naturally the DNC wants to cancel her.

#19 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 12:15 PM | Reply

Gabbard lost me when she said that our 1000 troops in Syria were there for regime change.
Considering it too 160,000 troops to attempt to control Iraq... me thinks her visit to Syria tainted her judgment.

#20 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2020-03-07 12:38 PM | Reply

The DNC is obviously colluding to protect Sanders from someone more likely to peel votes away from him than Biden. Can't you all see that? LOL

#21 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-03-07 12:39 PM | Reply

It says a lot about Gabbard when 99% of the people who like her are Trumpers.

Birds of a feather, and all of that.

#22 | Posted by JOE at 2020-03-07 01:12 PM | Reply

The Democrat party is not above criticism, especially by its own leaders.

She was the best candidate, and could have done very well, if given a chance. Instead the partybb has destroyed her deliberately. The purity test is very difficult to pass. As Bernie can attest.

#23 | Posted by ABH at 2020-03-07 01:40 PM | Reply

"No matter what, the hate against Gabbard is unwarranted and stupid. "

Okay, but it's also very understandable:
Elected in 2012, she is the first Hindu member of Congress and the first Samoan-American voting member of Congress.

Woman
Immigrant
Non-Christian

#24 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-07 01:46 PM | Reply

Woman
Immigrant
Non-Christian

#24 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Having the debate rules changed a week ahead of time by the Democratic Party in order to keep her off the stage. This is the same Democratic Party that changed the rules before the second to last debate in order to get old, rich, white Michael Bloomberg onto the stage.

So, what does that say about the Democratic Party and the MSM's constant insipid identity politics nonsense? That it only applies to the right and the GOP.

#25 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 02:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

It says a lot about Gabbard when 99% of the people who like her are Trumpers.

Birds of a feather, and all of that.

#22 | POSTED BY JOE

Is she a Putin stooge?

#26 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 02:38 PM | Reply

Given the treatment she's been given by the DNC she should run as an Independent. I'd vote for her.

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 02:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Gabbard qualified for some of the DNC debates in 2019, but the congresswoman has not met the debate thresholds this year, and and has not polled above 1% in recent national surveys."

And that's why she's not being treated unfairly.

#28 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-07 02:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Too bad she's not a billionaire.

The DNC doesn't care what you do when you're a billionaire like Bloomberg.

#29 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-03-07 02:54 PM | Reply

The voters must feel the same way, since Bloomberg easily has 10x more delegates than Gabbard.

Is Gabbard staying in just so Deplorables can say life is unfair?
???

#30 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-07 02:59 PM | Reply

#30

I don't believe Tulsi was ever going to win the presidency.

That wasn't my point.

This better states it:

"Having the debate rules changed a week ahead of time by the Democratic Party in order to keep her off the stage... [then changing] the rules before the second to last debate in order to get ... Michael Bloomberg onto the stage."
-JeffJ

This is absolutely why the Democratic Party is corrupt.

Well. This and more. But. This for now.

This is why I'm suspicious of Klobuchar and Buttigieg's sudden decision to step out of the race.

This is why I believe Biden's surge on Super Tuesday was manufactured.

The Democratic Party is bringing this all on themselves.

#31 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-03-07 05:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Never mind the fact that Tulsi was given the opportunity to participate in more debates than Mike Bloomberg was.

#32 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-03-07 05:34 PM | Reply

Her biggest mistake was opening the door on Kamala Harris's closet and revealing the skeletons inside.

She's never been forgiven for that.

#33 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-03-07 05:41 PM | Reply

## 25 and 31

Nailed it, truly well done.

#34 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-07 05:50 PM | Reply

I think snoofy is grouping you in with the "deplorables", clownshack.
You're right, this is all manufactured to stop Bernie.

#35 | Posted by willowby at 2020-03-07 06:08 PM | Reply

... set up a face-off between Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders ...

Finally, the Democratic Party is focusing upon whittling down their cast of thousands to a more reasonable number.

Granted, I would have liked to see three, or maybe even four, at this point. But after these two, the remaining contenders are so far behind that it is clear these two represent the major, um, factions of the Democratic Party at this point.

#36 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-03-07 07:39 PM | Reply

A "vast right wing conspiracy" is to be accepted without question but the "Clinton machine" is LMAO material. Marching orders received, Corporal.

POSTED BY HAGBARD_CELINE AT 2020-03-07 11:42 AM | REPLY | F

Yeppers The Democratic party is as useless as teats on a boar hog. They are selling Liberals and progressives down the river and we're supposed to just lap it up. Not me honey. I'm done.

#37 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-03-07 08:05 PM | Reply

laura learned nothing from not voting for hillary, even though sanders asked his supporters to.

if you're going to sit at home and pout every election, why bother
posting on a political blog?

#38 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2020-03-07 08:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I completely understand Sanders supporters anger given the DNC conspiracy against him.

#39 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 08:13 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

lol

#40 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2020-03-07 08:17 PM | Reply

@#37 ... They are selling Liberals and progressives down the river ...

Or maybe they are trying to find candidates that can win in November, based upon the current likely voters? (btw, did you notice that in the RealClearPolitics.com Pres Trump Approval Ratings poll that Rassmussen is the only one that uses likely voters? www.realclearpolitics.com )


fwiw, I still have no preference in the Democratic primaries.

From a political viewpoint, I have leanings, though.

I am saddened that Sen Warren had to drop out. I also think that her Native American fiasco hurt her badly.

Mayor Buttigieg had some good ideas, but he was not yet experienced enough for the Office, imo. I think he should run for the Senate in his state to see the wider perspective. He has the benefit of time on his side.

#41 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-03-07 08:19 PM | Reply

laura learned nothing from not voting for hillary, even though sanders asked his supporters to.
if you're going to sit at home and pout every election, why bother
posting on a political blog?

POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE AT 2020-03-07 08:08 PM | REPLY

Alexandrite learnt nothing about why people like me wouldn't vote for Hillary. People like him expect people like me to vote for the schit sandwich the DNC Foists upon us. Sad that.

#42 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-03-07 08:22 PM | Reply

I hope Jill Stein runs again.

#43 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 08:23 PM | Reply

Rasmussen consistently fluffs Trump approval by weighting it towards Republicans.

Other pollsters know this, so they put little credence in Rasmussen.

Morning Consult, on the other hand, are respected. Their monthly Trump approval poll contacts 5000 voters A DAY.

As you can see (scroll down and hover over/click individual states) is not doing well in MI or WI (-10), neither of which he can lose and retain the WH.

Tracking Trump: The President's Standing Across America
morningconsult.com

#44 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-03-07 08:27 PM | Reply

I hope Ralph Nader runs too.

#45 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 08:29 PM | Reply

I hope Jill Stein runs again.

#43 | Posted by JeffJ

If she can get enough money out of Moscow, she probably will.

Jill Stein dining with Putin

#46 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-03-07 08:30 PM | Reply

laura-

how you liking trump so far?

#47 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2020-03-07 08:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I hope Ralph Nader runs too.

#45 | Posted by JeffJ

And your 2016 guy, Gary Johnson and ...

#48 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-03-07 08:32 PM | Reply

Trump is a huge advocate for the trans community.

#49 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 08:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

laura-
how you liking trump so far?

POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE AT 2020-03-07 08:32 PM | REPLY

Emotional blackmail doesn't work with me. Try again.

#50 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-03-07 08:34 PM | Reply

#48. Nah. Johnson has his chance and he ran his campaign like a johnson.

#51 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 08:35 PM | Reply

or reason, apparently.

#52 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2020-03-07 08:35 PM | Reply

Trump is very philanthropic. His altruism knows no bounds.

#53 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 08:37 PM | Reply

or reason, apparently.

POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE AT 2020-03-07 08:35 PM | REPLY

Your anger is misdirected. I'm just the easy scapegoat because I'm here.

#54 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-03-07 08:37 PM | Reply

or reason, apparently.

POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE AT 2020-03-07 08:35 PM | REPLY

Your anger is misdirected. I'm just the easy scapegoat because I'm here.

#55 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-03-07 08:37 PM | Reply

JEFF

Turnout will be huge this year. America's gotten a load of Trump. And Clinton, who was bashed like a pinata for 30 years, won't be on the ticket.

No way MI will be won by 10,000 votes because of Russian-backed candidates like Jill Stein

#56 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-03-07 08:46 PM | Reply

@#44 ... Rasmussen consistently fluffs Trump approval by weighting it towards Republicans. ...

I do not necessarily disagree.

But my comment still stands.

According to the Morning Consult website, methodology section... ( morningconsult.com )

...On a daily basis, Morning Consult surveys over 5,000 registered voters across the United States.

Note the "registered voters" mention.

So I repeat, my comment still stands.

Now, let's look at the real problem here that needs to be solved...

How do you determine how many of the Morning Consult "registered voters" become Rasmussen's
"likely voters?"

That is the major problem that vexes the surveying industry.

Let me state it simply...

How do you determine who will be a likely voter?

Eight months away from Election Day, how do you know who of the people you talk with will actually go out and vote.

The LATimes had an awesome article on this back in the 2016 timeframe, but my search engine skills are not up to the task of finding it again.

It is easy to say, "Yeah, that's Rasmussen."

But what do you have to substantiate what you say?


#57 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-03-07 08:46 PM | Reply

#50 | Posted by LauraMohr

Thank god your disability-getting ass is parked in Kansas.

#58 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-03-07 08:47 PM | Reply

#57 | Posted by LampLighter

We're gonna fight like Trump is 20 points ahead!

#59 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-03-07 08:49 PM | Reply

LAMP

MC's is a Trump approval poll, not a general election poll.

One can gauge general sentiment towards a politician with a poll that size that isn't measuring national results but state-by-state.

#60 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-03-07 08:51 PM | Reply

@#56 ... Turnout will be huge this year. ...

I don't know about huge, but I'd say it will be good, possibly, very good.

I remember 2018 at my polling center. There was a line. There never had been a line. But in 2018 there was a line.

I was waiting in the line, and some guy started to bitch about the line.

I said [loudly] to him as we waited in the gym, this line is great. It means people are voting!

I got a lot of looks. I saw a lot of smiles.



#61 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-03-07 08:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

LAMP

I had the same sentiments in 2006, when there were long lines of voters standing in the rain, refusing to leave before they could vote to show their displeasure at W. Like 2018, there were huge Dem gains. Two years later, Obama crushed it.

There is a ton of pent up desire by voters who want to throw Trump out of office. The wave that began in 2018 will continue. That's my guess.

#62 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-03-07 08:55 PM | Reply

I wonder at what point on the campaign trail does Biden forget his own name?

#63 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 09:00 PM | Reply

@#60 ... MC's is a Trump approval poll ...

On that we agree.

It is a good snapshot of what is here and now.

But when it comes to November, what criteria would you want to look at, likely voters or registered voters?

My point in all of this is to be aware of what the polls are measuring and how that measurement reflects waht you want to know and understand.

The MC poll is great for the here and now measurement.

But it can fail if it is used to project to November.

All I am trying to convey is the following...

Be very aware of the difference between "registered voters" and "likely voters."

It is very significant come election day.

The polls that use registered voters are taking the easy way out.

#64 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-03-07 09:01 PM | Reply

Trump is very philanthropic. His altruism knows no bounds.

Who can forget all the cash he gifted to the pornstar he was rawdogging while Melanoma was pregnant?

#65 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2020-03-07 09:04 PM | Reply

$130k is a lot of philanthropy, Rein.

#66 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 09:06 PM | Reply

Robbing children cancer charity to pay pornstars owned the libs.

#67 | Posted by bored at 2020-03-07 09:11 PM | Reply

#50 | Posted by LauraMohr
Thank god your disability-getting ass is parked in Kansas.

POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY AT 2020-03-07 08:47 PM | REPLY

Awwwwwwwwwwwww I wuv you too sweetums.

#68 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-03-07 09:12 PM | Reply

#50 | Posted by LauraMohr
Thank god your disability-getting ass is parked in Kansas.

POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY AT 2020-03-07 08:47 PM | REPLY

Awwwwwwwwwwwww I wuv you too sweetums.

#69 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-03-07 09:12 PM | Reply

#64 | Posted by LampLighter

I understand all of that.

My point had to do with his popularity in some key states.

#70 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2020-03-07 09:14 PM | Reply

@#70 ... My point had to do with his popularity in some key states. ...

Yeah, I'm watching that also.

#71 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-03-07 09:20 PM | Reply

Given the treatment she's been given by the DNC she should run as an Independent. I'd vote for her.
#27 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Which just shows how entirely duped you are by your television.

Tulsi Gabbard's own website says she supports single-payer healthcare, promoting a "green economy" and breaking up big banks. You call these things "nationalization of industry" when other Dems discuss it - but when Tulsi says it, she's got your vote - and it just so happens that she parrots Trump talking points on Tucker Carlson on a weekly basis.

Just a coincidence, i guess.

#72 | Posted by JOE at 2020-03-07 09:34 PM | Reply

#72. There are no unicorns in politics, Joe.

I don't watch cable news and I'm well aware of the planks she has that I disagree with. You're kind of making my point, the Dem hostility toward her clearly isn't policy-based.

#73 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 09:49 PM | Reply

#73

Joe has been told not to like her so she is now Satan's spawn.

If the DNC changes their mind Joe will be among the first to tell us that Tulsi is now in good standing.

#74 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-07 09:54 PM | Reply

#74. That is a really good point but it won't be the DNC that drives his opinion it will be MSNBC/CNN.

#75 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 09:59 PM | Reply

Dem hostility toward her clearly isn't policy-based.

She grabbed the policies of Sanders and Warren (without any of the plans) and then alienated herself by aligning herself with Assad and Russia. Why would any of you vote, or even pretend to vote for her, when you wouldn't vote for Sanders or Warren?

This whole thread is silly. It's also academic. She's not in contention and she never was going to be no matter what in this election cycle. She buried herself repeatedly. She sealed it by voting "Present" on Trump's impeachment vote in the House.

#76 | Posted by YAV at 2020-03-07 10:34 PM | Reply

And ROC will vote for a rapist who didn't have to debate any Republicans, then lie online about it.

I'm comfortable with where i'm at.

#77 | Posted by JOE at 2020-03-07 10:49 PM | Reply

Biden giddily voted for the Iraq War. By virtue of that, he's done more to weaken our position in the world against the Assads and Putins than a thousand Tulsis ever could.

#78 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2020-03-07 10:50 PM | Reply

#76. That is no diffferent than the absurd modified "Green New Deals" being promulgated by other Dems, Yav.

#79 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 11:03 PM | Reply

#77 you really shouldn't talk about lying, Joe.

Like myself, ROC was consistently Johnson and that predated the actual election and predates your return to this site.

#80 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-07 11:05 PM | Reply

Uh huh.

Now go spend another 3 years gargling Trump's balls, like all the other "Gary Johnson voters."

#81 | Posted by JOE at 2020-03-08 12:06 AM | Reply

Go ahead and Hans my anti Johnson posts, Joe.

#82 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-08 12:40 AM | Reply

Now go spend another 3 years gargling Trump's balls, like all the other "Gary Johnson voters."

#81 | POSTED BY JOE

I've noticed a funny dichotomy with you.

A lefty who voted for Jill Stein is a horrible leftist because Hillary Clinton was the best candidate of all time - disagrees with Joe.

A righty who voted for Gary Johnson, even a registered Republican like myself, somehow threw the election to Trump - disagrees with Joe.

It's amazing how anyone who disagrees with Joe, right or left, is not only a moron but is also a horrible person.

You absolutely despise, with a passion beyond all belief, anyone who has the temerity to be right of center. You ALSO despise anyone on your side of the aisle who has the temerity to disagree with you regarding the Democratic nominee.

Doesn't matter who it is, if someone disagrees with you they are pilloried by you.

You must be fun at family parties, Joe.

#83 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-08 12:56 AM | Reply

"Having the debate rules changed a week ahead of time by the Democratic Party in order to keep her off the stage"

^
False narrative, fake news.

#84 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 03:06 AM | Reply

If you read this article, you can see the premise is BS.

The threshold simply gets progressively higher; the only tomfoolery is when they changed the way donations are counted towards reaching the threshold, for when they let Bloomberg buy his way in, which surely made many TV station owners very happy!

2020 Democratic Party presidential debates
en.wikipedia.org

Eighth debate (February 7, 2020)
Qualification
The qualifications for the eighth debate were similar to those for the January debate (5% nationally/early states, or 7% in early states, this time excluding Iowa)...

Ninth debate (February 19, 2020)
Qualification
The DNC announced on January 31 that it was eliminating the donor threshold as a debate qualification requirement for any debate following the New Hampshire debate on February 7,[229] which prompted criticism from several candidates as it was perceived to accommodate Bloomberg, who is not accepting individual donations. The polling thresholds were drastically increased since the last debate, with candidates now having to reach 10% in DNC-approved national polls or 12% in early state polls conducted in Nevada and South Carolina....

Tenth debate (February 25, 2020)
Qualification
The qualification criteria remained largely unchanged from the last debate, with candidates having to either garner at least 10% support in DNC-approved national polls or 12% in early state polls conducted in the remaining state of South Carolina...

#85 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 03:21 AM | Reply

"This is absolutely why the Democratic Party is corrupt."

Look who flagged you Newsworthy.
Look whose Kool-Aid you're drinking.

#86 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 03:34 AM | Reply

Next Democrat debate. The confused versus the communist. Bolshevik Bernie will wipe the floor with him. His supporters will swoon in Marxist ecstasy.

#87 | Posted by willowby at 2020-03-08 03:59 AM | Reply

The DNC just made it mathematically impossible for Tulsi Gabbard to make the next debate, leaving Biden and Sanders one-on-one

#88 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 10:47 AM | Reply

It's almost like the fear of 2 Russian backed candidates vs Biden is too much for the DNC after just buying everybody for Biden.

#89 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 10:47 AM | Reply

#83 Find a post where i've ever said a word about Jill Stein voters, you pathetic liar.

It must be miserable having to invent positions and assign them to other people for the sole purpose of smearing them. Work on not being such a -------- and you won't have to lie.

#90 | Posted by JOE at 2020-03-08 10:59 AM | Reply

Buying?

With what? What money? What power? What offer? The DNC has no money, they're nothing like the RNC.

Might as well say "everyone that voted for Biden in SC are all idiots, unable to know their own best interests," or that they were "bought." With WHAT?

You, given your political persuasion, have an excuse for saying something that abjectly stupid. It's tactical. People will believe it, won't think about it, and you get to inflame division.

Others that think they're helping their candidate by saying/implying such nonsense aren't grasping what their words are actually doing.

#91 | Posted by YAV at 2020-03-08 11:27 AM | Reply

#91 Just a guess, but perhaps he means certain promises were made to the dropouts in exchange for their endorsement?

Not that i think those candidates aren't ideologically closest to Biden anyways. Just that we've seen the DNC put their thumb on the scale against Sanders in the past, so there's no reason to rule it out.

And before Dorky shows up with some strawman about the DNC's action not being determinative, i never said it was - just that they were outed as being actively anti-Sanders behind the scenes, so there's really no reason to think they're any different now.

#92 | Posted by JOE at 2020-03-08 11:36 AM | Reply

#90 | POSTED BY JOE

You are the king of straw men and are WAY too young to be so fricking angry all of the time.

#93 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-08 12:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If it's directed at the candidates, that makes sense as a possibility, however what was offered to Warren? She dropped out, too. What was offered to any of them to have them make that big a decision? Without any evidence it's lazy cynicism or more conspiracy theory crap (which I have had my fill of with Trump).

I love Pete, and I have supported Warren from the beginning. Honestly, there was no path, no money coming in, and the votes were drying up. The handwriting was on the wall. Especially after SC.

When reality is staring you right in the face, there's no need for all this other excuse making.

What Sitz did was jump right in there and further play in the "You're right! You ARE victims!' The DNC!" crap, and the confirmation bias for some gives that fertile ground to grow.

Do you see it, Joe, or do you believe I am I wrong?

#94 | Posted by YAV at 2020-03-08 12:10 PM | Reply

Buying?

#91 | POSTED BY YAV AT 2020-03-08 11:27 AM | FLAG:

Ahh, yes, all of the challengers drop out and torpedo Bernie all on their own right before Super Tuesday. No quid pro quo. No deals. It's all just a coincidence. That is how political parties work. Puritans, doing the right thing for moderate voters.

#95 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 02:22 PM | Reply

A political party acting like a political party shouldn't hurt your feelings. Unless you're really all in for Bernie. You just got checkmated.

#96 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 02:22 PM | Reply

And ROC will vote for a rapist who didn't have to debate any Republicans, then lie online about it.

Never have, never will. My last four votes in the GE/primaries: Obama, Kasich, Johnson, Biden.

#97 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 02:29 PM | Reply

You're registered independent?
That's cute.

#98 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 02:37 PM | Reply

"The DNC just made it mathematically impossible for Tulsi Gabbard to make the next debate, leaving Biden and Sanders one-on-one"

Yeah, well, it's not the first time Tulsi Gabbard hasn't qualified for a debate.

What's the bizarre fixation with Tulsi anyway.
Is she like the Anti-AOC for Deplorables?

#99 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 02:43 PM | Reply

#98 It's probably true. Independents often switch parties, that is why they are "independent". Duh?

#100 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2020-03-08 02:45 PM | Reply

Yeah, well, it's not the first time Tulsi Gabbard hasn't qualified for a debate.

Based on the rules as they existed a week ago, she would have qualified.

Of course, now that it's 1 on 1 they changed the format to a town hall where both candidates will be seated. Heaven forbid they have Biden stand for 2 hours and go toe-to-toe with Sanders with moderator questions as opposed to town hall questions. I wonder if Donna Brazille will feed the Biden campaign the questions in advance of the debate?

#101 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-08 02:48 PM | Reply

"Based on the rules as they existed a week ago, she would have qualified."

Let's see those rules then.
Surely you must have a link, to support your claim, right?

#102 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 02:50 PM | Reply

It's an interesting story. Last woman standing. First female combat veteran to run for president. Resigned from the DNC to endorse Bernie, ended up slandered by Hillary. One of the two non-interventionist "Russian backed" candidates left. Now a DNC rules change to silence her.

#103 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 02:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Now a DNC rules change to silence her."

Again, let's see these rules, and the change.

#104 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 02:51 PM | Reply

#98

It's called Decline to State and I have been that status for over 20 years.

#105 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 02:52 PM | Reply

Feel free to reference my #85 in showing us how the rules changed.
Be sure to show how Tulsi did good under one set of rules, but failed to qualify after the change.

Thanks, you two.

#106 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 02:53 PM | Reply

"It's called Decline to State and I have been that status for over 20 years."

Me too, except I haven't been here 20 years. So is your vote for Joe an actual vote for Joe, or is it a vote for Trump's weakest opponent?

#107 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 02:54 PM | Reply

"First female combat veteran to run for president."

It's funny because the people here saying she got screwed are the same people saying women shouldn't have ever been allowed to serve in combat in the first place.

#108 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 02:55 PM | Reply

#106

Here you go:

"The Democratic National Committee has increased its requirements for participating in the March 15 debate in Arizona, hosted by CNN and Univision, the next Democratic debate of the primary season. The new requirements mean Tulsi Gabbard will not be on the stage.

Under the new requirements, candidates must have at least 20% of the total number of pledged delegates, a requirement only Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders have met. The previous rules only required candidates to secure one delegate, which Gabbard did in American Samoa.

Gabbard has not yet addressed the new requirements."

DNC raises debate requirements, excluding Tulsi Gabbard

#109 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 02:58 PM | Reply

So is your vote for Joe an actual vote for Joe, or is it a vote for Trump's weakest opponent?

#107 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2020-03-08 02:54 PM

I have said from the start, if he wins the Primary I will vote for him in the GE.

#110 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 02:59 PM | Reply

#109

Here is the link, they keep getting stripped out:

DNC raises debate requirements, excluding Tulsi Gabbard

#111 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 03:01 PM | Reply

#108

Strawman noted, and as far as I know, Jeff, Sitz and I have never said that.

#112 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 03:02 PM | Reply

Me too

Kind of doubt that, since you called it "Independent", which in California registers you for the Independent Party.

#113 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 03:04 PM | Reply

" as far as I know, Jeff, Sitz and I have never said that."

That's fine, you didn't have to, because I'm as smart as JeffJ:

They are not going to come out and say it - they aren't stupid.
#134 | POSTED BY JEFFJ
drudge.com

#114 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 03:06 PM | Reply

Ah. I said independent with a small i. Not the party. Unaffiliated.

#115 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 03:07 PM | Reply

#112 it's all he's got.

#116 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-08 03:08 PM | Reply

Believe it or not, it is progress that Bernie is seen as being white. As a Jew, 50 years ago he wouldn't have had a chance.

#117 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2020-03-08 03:09 PM | Reply

#114

TFF, I flew with women in the 90's and have long been an advocate for women in combat, try your assigning positions BS elsewhere.

#118 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 03:13 PM | Reply

"try your assigning positions BS elsewhere."

Nah.
JeffJ gets to do it on your watch, and so do I.

#119 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 03:17 PM | Reply

lol.

#120 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 03:19 PM | Reply

Any luck tracking down those "rule changes?"
LOL!

#121 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 03:22 PM | Reply

#121 see #111

#122 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-08 03:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The DNC has consistently raised requirements, except the one time they changed the interpretation of requirements to let Bloomberg in.

To say that they raised requirements specifically to keep Tulsi out gives Tulsi's failure to succeed own her own far too little credit.

She built this.

#123 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 04:56 PM | Reply

Also, in what was was the rule "changed?" Are you saying it wasn't the same rule as the previous debate? That's typically the case. The barrier to entry has been the same or higher each time. It's not like it just started getting harder for the tenth debate.

Gabbard didn't qualify for a bunch of previous debates either.
Maybe if RightOCetner had voted for her, she would have qualified!

Instead, RightOCenter votes for Biden, then complains the system is rigged to favor Biden?
LOL dude.

#124 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 05:00 PM | Reply

Also, in what was was the rule "changed?"

A Candidate automatically qualified for this debate if he/she got at least one delegate, regardless of your polling %.

Are you saying it wasn't the same rule as the previous debate? That's typically the case.

No, CBS/NBC/CNN and I are all saying that they changed the previously published rules for this debate specifically to keep Tulsi out.

The barrier to entry has been the same or higher each time.

Yes, and that is why the delegate rule was there...until it was only Tulsi remaining, so they changed it.

It's not like it just started getting harder for the tenth debate.

Correct, and then when the DNC realized that Tulsi qualified under the previously published rules...they changed it to keep her out.

My voting for Biden doesn't diminish the hypocrisy of the DNC.

#125 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 05:43 PM | Reply

"A Candidate automatically qualified for this debate if he/she got at least one delegate, regardless of your polling %."

No they didn't.
They automatically qualified for the previous debate.

New debate, new rules.

#126 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 05:45 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

You just got checkmated.

Self-declared winner! All built on assumptions with zero proof.
I do hope you're enjoying patting yourself on the back.
Your cynicism is lazy.

#127 | Posted by YAV at 2020-03-08 05:46 PM | Reply

"My voting for Biden doesn't diminish the hypocrisy of the DNC."

Is your augment that unless the DNC keeps the same rules for every debate, they are being hypocritical?
The concept of an increasingly higher threshold is hypocritical to you>?
I don't believe you. Because we both know you don't really that.
You might as well be saying it's hypocritical when a player on the expanded roster but didn't make the final cut.

What is it you think you win when you die on this hill, RightOCenter?

#128 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 05:48 PM | Reply

Is your augment that unless the DNC keeps the same rules for every debate, they are being hypocritical?

You are usually smarter than this, the DNC had published rules for each debate and now has changed them twice right before the debate: one time to let Bloomberg in, the other time to keep Tulsi out.

The concept of an increasingly higher threshold is hypocritical to you>?

Re-read my posts as many times as you need to, making sure to sound out the big words, until you understand that is not what I/CBS/NBC/CNN etc. are saying.

I don't believe you. Because we both know you don't really that.

LMAO, your "tell" when you have been proven wrong is claiming disbelief and then typing so fast that you make tons of typos.

The only one dying on this "hill" right now is you Snoofyphus...over and over again.

#129 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 06:07 PM | Reply

New debate, new rules.
#126 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2020-03-08 05:45 PM | FLAG:

You see, it depends on what the definition if "is" is, when talking about "is qualified".

#130 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 06:27 PM | Reply

Sanders just got the highly-coveted endorsement of Jane Fonda. This could turn the tide against Biden.

#131 | Posted by nullifidian at 2020-03-08 06:27 PM | Reply

He's got the Putin endorsement. It worked last time.

#132 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 06:30 PM | Reply

"One time to let Bloomberg in "
has a lot more truth to it than
"The other time to keep Tulsi out."

Because Tulsi has only been in debates One, Two, Four, and Five.
Her candidacy isn't on the ropes; it's stillborn.
She failed to qualify for Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, and Ten all on her own.

To claim she's the victim of a dastardly rule change is kinda missing the point.
She's only a victim of democracy.
A victim of voters like you and me, who collectively rejected Gabbard in favor of the two old white guys.

#133 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 06:32 PM | Reply

To claim she's the victim of a dastardly rule change is kinda missing the point.
She's only a victim of democracy.

So you finally admit that they changed the rules to keep her out.

Sure beats continually rolling that boulder up that hill, amirite?

#134 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 07:11 PM | Reply

"So you finally admit that they changed the rules to keep her out."

Again, you're making it too personal; Like it's her, like it's something about her politics or her message which needs to be silenced. Like it wouldn't be the same for anyone in her position at this point in the race.

It's like saying when the CVS changed the rules so that nobody under 65 gets a flu shot, they did it to keep me from getting a flu shot.

#135 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 07:18 PM | Reply

They are afraid that make Biden bumble the debate and expose his war lust. They are scared of her.

#136 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2020-03-08 08:34 PM | Reply

Not scared of her, just scared of Biden losing delegates. She's gotten her ass kicked.

#137 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 08:52 PM | Reply

Scared of feeling the Bern would be more appropriate to say.

#138 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2020-03-08 08:53 PM | Reply

#135

Don't tear an Achilles backpedaling so hard, this part of the conversation started with you denying that the rules had changed:

Let's see those rules then.

Surely you must have a link, to support your claim, right?

#102 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2020-03-08 02:50 PM

. . .

Again, let's see these rules, and the change.

#104 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2020-03-08 02:51 PM

#139 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 09:24 PM | Reply

You are the king of straw men and are WAY too young to be so fricking angry all of the time.
#93 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Translation: No, you! And you're angry too!

Boring.

And yeah - i am angry at Trump supporters. Most good Americans are. Doesn't surprise me that this evades you.

Now go gargle Trump's balls, Johnson voter.

#140 | Posted by JOE at 2020-03-08 09:28 PM | Reply

And yeah - i am angry at Trump supporters. Most good Americans are.

Virtue signaling at its lamest.

#141 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-03-08 09:32 PM | Reply

"And yeah - i am angry at Trump supporters. "

Weird. Good Americans are pleased that people can exercise their right to support who they want. -------- get pissed at people who support those they do not.

"Most good Americans are."

Logical fallacy of ad populum. You do not speak for anyone but yourself. Sorry to burst your egotistical and arrogant bubble, Joe, but you simply don't. Learn to live with this fact.

"Now go gargle Trump's balls, Johnson voter.

#140 | POSTED BY JOE "

Wow. Does this childish rhetoric work for you in court, counselor? It sure doesn't with me.

#142 | Posted by goatman at 2020-03-08 09:33 PM | Reply

Wow. Does this childish rhetoric work for you in court, counselor? It sure doesn't with me.

Who cares about the opinion of a ------------- deadbeat who abuses whores? LOL *Grin*

#143 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2020-03-08 09:36 PM | Reply

You're getting repetitive and boring, Rein. Just sayin'

#144 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-03-08 09:40 PM | Reply

Don't tear an Achilles backpedaling so hard, this part of the conversation started with you denying that the rules had changed:
#139 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Good looking out!
Let's backpedal to the tenth debate:

Tenth debate (February 25, 2020)
Qualification
The qualification criteria remained largely unchanged from the last debate, with candidates having to either garner at least 10% support in DNC-approved national polls or 12% in early state polls conducted in the remaining state of South Carolina...

Does Tulsi Gabbard qualify under those rules?
No.

So, what's this rule change I keep hearing about, between the last (tenth) debate and next (eleventh) debate, that's keeping her out?

#145 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-03-08 10:12 PM | Reply

At 1% in the polls she did not qualify, delegates or not.

Don't fall for GOP or Russian bullschitt.

#146 | Posted by americanunity at 2020-03-09 03:44 AM | Reply

The DNC's should set the rule that only members of the Democratic Party can participate in participate in debates for the party's presidential nomination.

#147 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-03-09 01:53 PM | Reply

On the other hand, recent polls all show Biden up anywhere from +15 to +41 (!!!) in Michigan. If those numbers are even close to accurate, Bernie needs a miracle.

#148 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2020-03-09 02:40 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort