Ken Berwitz
Are you aware of the debate among Democrats over how many debates there will be between its presidential candidates?
If you read this blog, I know the answer. But if you are new to this blog you may not be aware that both Martin O\’Malley, the Democrat candidate who has gotten virtually no traction at all, and Bernie Sanders, the Democrat candidate who is rapidly gaining on Ms. Clinton, demand more than the few which have been scheduled.
And why are there not more debates? It is hard to say which person\’s obstinacy is blocking them: Hillary Clinton\’s or DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz\’s.
The increasingly public rift between Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and others in her party\’s leadership over the number of presidential debates is threatening to become more than just embarrassing to the DNC.
It\’s spelling trouble for Hillary Clinton, the faltering front-runner who can\’t afford to look like she\’s being protected by party insiders, say Democrats aligned with both the DNC and 2016 campaigns
On one side of the fight is a pair of party vice chairs and 2016 candidate Martin O\’Malley, who have complained in recent weeks that the DNC should sponsor more than its six planned debates – only four of which will take place before voting in Iowa — and have protested the committee\’s vow to punish candidates who try to participate in unsanctioned events.
On the other side is Wasserman Schultz, who steadfastly insists she won\’t budge from the plan, which was carefully negotiated with the campaigns this spring – part of a process that included convincing the Clinton camp to agree to so many debates in the first place.
Not that I think she will be very receptive to it, I have a suggestion for Ms. Wasserman Schultz: maybe she might want to consider asking Hillary Clinton about that debate schedule again.
When Ms. Clinton was overwhelmingly ahead of the rest of the pack, all a debate could do was hurt her. The only reason she might agree to more than the minimal number would be so that voters could get a more complete look at all the candidates – which few prohibitive favorites ever want to have happen.
But now Ms. Clinton may need those extra debates – or, at the very least, to cultivate a perception that she is receptive to them – as much as her competition: specifically Bernie Sanders (who Ms. DeBenedetti inexplicably leaves out of the above excerpt) and Joe Biden.
I don\’t think much of Debbie Wasserman Schultz\’s reasonability or openness. But I have to think that even she can see the reasons this makes sense.
Or does she?
The next week or two will tell the tale.
