For "supposedly" being the Party that values Progressive Ideals, and the free exchange of ideas and self expression -- we sure know how to stifle that, at a National level.
Martin O’Malley: DNC trying to ‘circle the wagons’ around Clinton
by Alex Seitz-Wald, msnbc.com -- 08/05/15
[...]
The Democratic National Committee has arranged for six official debates, and will penalize candidates who participate in unsanctioned events. [...]
“I want to say right off the bat here, that to those in Washington who think they can limit the number of debates that we’re going to have before the Iowa caucuses, can circle the wagons and close off debates, I think they’re gonna have another thing coming,” O’Malley said while campaigning in Cedar Rapids, Iowa in a video sent to reporters by his campaign.
Speaking with The Hill newspaper between campaign stops, O’Malley said he personally raised the issue with DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz last weekend and said the party is “all about trying to pre-ordain the outcome.” “If they could actually accelerate the date of the Iowa caucuses and hold them tomorrow -- they’d like to do that. Then there’d be no campaign at all. That’s what they’d really like,” he continued, calling it “undemocratic.”
Pssst, Martin! The DNC has a few words for ya ...
But the good Governor of Maryland, will not be cowed ... nor "ducked" either ...
O’Malley: Dems tilting race toward Hillary (with Video)
by Kevin Cirilli, thehill.com -- 08/05/15
[...]
“This isn't about the Clintons or the O'Malleys -- this is about our country,” said O’Malley, who noted that he backed Clinton for president in 2008.
“And to limit the number of debates in the Democratic Party in a year as important as this? To tell Iowa that they can only have one? Or to tell New Hampshire they can only have one? I don't know where these people -- it's the arrogance and the elitism that's creeped into so many aspects of our national party.”
[...]
O'Malley also ripped Clinton, the front-runner for her party’s nomination, for not taking clear positions on the issues -- and suggested that could cost her.
“Her positions and her lack of positions are becoming very apparent to more and more people across Iowa and New Hampshire,” O'Malley said. “People will not long tolerate any candidate who tries to duck or avoid debates or fails to take a position. I know that, for my part, I'm not going to duck.”
Quoting TheHill.com Video in that article:
[...] DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a Press Release: We've always believed that we would have a competitive Primary process, and that debates would be an important part of the process.
The DNC said a 6-Debate schedule is consistent with the precedent set by the DNC during the 2004 and 2008 cycles -- though Clinton and Barack Obama actually met more than two dozen times in 2008.
That happy-shiny DNC Press Release is cited here in this bloomberg.com
link, which also had this, Democratic Party-endearing tidbit buried in the DNC fine print:
[...]
The committee will implement a so-called exclusivity agreement, it said, whereby “any candidate or debate sponsor wishing to participate in DNC debates, must agree to participate exclusively in the DNC-sanctioned process. Any violation would result in forfeiture of the ability to participate in the remainder of the debate process.” The intent is to keep the number of debates manageable, committee spokesman Mo Elleithee said.
No, the intent is to stifle Debate. Freedom of the Press. The First Amendment.
"Manageable" is a very loaded term, as Candidate Martin O'Malley so eloquently expressed.
"Manageable" for whom? "Manageable" with what ultimate purpose?
To keep Democratic (and Independent) Voters in the dark, about what their Candidate choices are, and what those candidates actually believe and are willing to stand for?
Forcing the Democratic Candidates into an "exclusivity agreement" -- is the exact opposite of democracy and the free flow of ideas. It's no wonder that so many Independent Voters scoff at Democrats and our "supposed Ideals," of which they often chide as "All talk, and No substance."
NOW, with this lack of Debates on the Democratic side, it will just let them go on believing that cynical pie-in-the-sky stereotype. "Dems are 'all talk, no substance' -- except for when it comes to Debates -- then they are No Talk, and No Substance."
Pssst Ms. Schutlz! If you want to attract more Independents (and millennials, and Latinos, and the disaffected ...) into the REAL 'Big Tent' Party -- you've got to let them actually hear what's going on inside of the Tent. ... unlike those other guys ...
Ms. DNC Chairperson, you might know what Dems "supposedly" stand for, but it is about the 65 Million Voters who actually decide, if the D-Party platform is really OK with them, THIS Time around.
AND it is Debates that help them decide. And learn. And change their individual minds. And to motivate them to get up, and Vote!
For his part Candidate Bernie Sanders has asked us to contact the DNC, and express our discontentment with their "micro-management" (and stifling) of this vitally important democratic process.
The American People deserve better. And way more than 6 debates, you know like we had in historic 2008 contest.
I guess "history" decided to take a DNC nap, this time around.