• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

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

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,273
2,971
126
Could not have happened to a more deserving person!!

  • The Democratic National Committee announced the new threshold for the March 15 debate would be 20% of all delegates awarded so far, a steep task for Gabbard, given her campaign's resources and track record of poor performances so far.
  • It's unclear why Gabbard is still in the race, but the bar being raised all but ensures a one-on-one debate between former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders.
  • Even if Gabbard somehow won all 352 delegates up for grabs on March 10 and the dozen split between Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands on March 14, she would still fall short.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.
For a few days, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii technically had a chance of making it back onto the debate stage.

But after the Democratic National Committee announced on Friday that candidates would need at least 20% of all of the delegates allocated so far to qualify, Gabbard will be on the outside looking in at the race's first one-on-one debate on March 15 between former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Even if Gabbard were to somehow secure all 352 of the delegates on the table on election night March 10 and nab the dozen on March 14 between Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, she would still fail to break the 20% threshold.

The Friday news led to the retirement of the hyperobservant Twitter account dedicated to the televised-debate qualifications, which now goes by the name "The Artist Formerly Known as Debate Tracker."

The only word from Gabbard's campaign Friday was an announcement postponing an event in Las Vegas, where the Nevada caucus took place almost two weeks ago.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
14,968
2,263
126
I'm sure the Gabbard Goobers will have some choice words about the "corrupt DNC"

Or not, because there aren't any; thank GOD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perknose

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
7,873
4,874
136
It's odd that the Business Insider piece frames this as if it's discrimination against Gabbard instead of a recognition that it's time to focus on the candidates with a viable chance of becoming the nominee. Like the delegates might say "you know what? Let's forget the contenders with strong potential and vote for the candidate supported mainly by people who'd never vote Democrat anyway."
 

uallas5

Senior member
Jun 3, 2005
866
487
136
I have no problem with excluding someone who is getting less than 1% of votes in most of the primaries done so far. Anyone is welcome to continue their campaign but that doesn't mean the DNC should be spending money and time accommodating everyone who happens to be running.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,637
7,708
126
She has no path to victory. She's only won 2 delegates so far, and a tiny percentage of the vote. The People have spoken. Get over it, trolls.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,435
1,810
126
I have no problem with excluding someone who is getting less than 1% of votes in most of the primaries done so far. Anyone is welcome to continue their campaign but that doesn't mean the DNC should be spending money and time accommodating everyone who happens to be running.
Andrew Yang set it best. The qualifications are whatever Tulsi had +1. They are right to fear her.
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
6,946
2,256
136
I feel that Hilary's misplaced attack on Sanders (i.e. 'nobody likes him') could be applied to Gabbard with much greater accuracy. Seems to me that neither left nor right are inclined to support her, so what would be the point of including her in the debate?
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
6,946
2,256
136
Andrew Yang set it best. The qualifications are whatever Tulsi had +1. They are right to fear her.
She seems like a complete oddball to me. Sympathetic to both Assad and Modi?

Reminds me of Peirs Morgan, a man who managed to get himself hugely disliked by both Daily Mail and Guardian readers simultaneously.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,435
1,810
126
She seems like a complete oddball to me. Sympathetic to both Assad and Modi?

Reminds me of Peirs Morgan, a man who managed to get himself hugely disliked by both Daily Mail and Guardian readers simultaneously.
Makes perfect sense if you think about it.

She is a Hindu. There have always been tensions between India and Pakistan, and if you know anyone from India, they will question why American foreign policy has been more favorable to Pakistan than India. She is Hindu, so sympathetic to Hindu nationalism.

As for Syria, she served in the Middle East. The enemy of my enemy is sometimes also my enemy.

If she’s pissing off entrenched thinking, she’s doing something right.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,435
1,810
126
The only reason the DNC has to fear her is that her inability to get votes might infect the other candidates.
Yet that fear didn’t extend to Bloomberg. Accommodations were made for him when people thought him an alternative to Biden. Bloomberg failed to seize his moment.

They fear that Tusli would succeed to seize hers, especially given the killing blow she delivered to Harris.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,637
7,708
126
Yet that fear didn’t extend to Bloomberg. Accommodations were made for him when people thought him an alternative to Biden. Bloomberg failed to seize his moment.

They fear that Tusli would succeed to seize hers, especially given the killing blow she delivered to Harris.
Such bullshit. The Dems have no obligation to continue to support a candidate who can't get votes, and whose only known tactic is to damage candidates who can get votes.

Where is your concern for the Republican party's complete absence of primary action this year? They're not even holding any debates. I genuinely would support Weld, but the RNC is too afraid to let Trump debate him. Funny, not a peep out of you about that.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,131
13,071
136
Such bullshit. The Dems have no obligation to continue to support a candidate who can't get votes, and whose only known tactic is to damage candidates who can get votes.

Where is your concern for the Republican party's complete absence of primary action this year? They're not even holding any debates. I genuinely would support Weld, but the RNC is too afraid to let Trump debate him. Funny, not a peep out of you about that.
His mission is to tear down the dirty Democrats & excuse the Trump admin.
 
Dec 10, 2005
20,505
1,828
126
Such bullshit. The Dems have no obligation to continue to support a candidate who can't get votes, and whose only known tactic is to damage candidates who can get votes.

Where is your concern for the Republican party's complete absence of primary action this year? They're not even holding any debates. I genuinely would support Weld, but the RNC is too afraid to let Trump debate him. Funny, not a peep out of you about that.
Let me answer that for you: It was expected with Trump, so I don't bother commenting on it. Instead, I save my postings for concern trolling about the Democratic Party.
 

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,574
1,555
136
Yet that fear didn’t extend to Bloomberg. Accommodations were made for him when people thought him an alternative to Biden. Bloomberg failed to seize his moment.

They fear that Tusli would succeed to seize hers, especially given the killing blow she delivered to Harris.
For someone who never had a fair shot (among others), she single handedly knocked out a "top tier" candidate. Not that I think she would've gotten the necessary votes regardless.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY