The DNC Debate Rule Change That Finished Off Tulsi Shows Why They Can Never Be Trusted
When American Samoa came up after Super Tuesday, it usually had to do with it being the epitaph on Michael Bloomberg’s $500 million night of futility.
After spending half a billion dollars on an idiosyncratic bid to inundate America with advertisements and start his campaign on Super Tuesday, Bloomberg didn’t even reach the delegate threshold in plenty of the states he spent grotesque amounts of money in.
He did, though, score one win — American Samoa.
However, there was another curiosity about the American overseas territory: It also gave Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard a delegate, her first.
This, in and of itself, isn’t huge news. The issue for the Democratic National Committee is that, according to reports, they’ve been inviting everyone with a delegate to recent debates.
If Tulsi Gabbard gets a delegate out of American Samoa, as it appears she has done, she will likely qualify for the next Democratic debate. We don’t have new debate rules yet, but party has been inviting any candidate who gets a delegate.
— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) March 4, 2020
“Candidates who had at least one pledged delegate automatically qualified for the debates that took place in New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina earlier this year,” Fox News reported Wednesday.
We’ve seen Tulsi Gabbard on Democratic debate stages before.
Quite frankly, she can be one of the few reasons to actually tune in — which is why the Democrats quickly decided to make sure everyone knew that the rules for the next debate would be significantly changed.
We have two more debates– of course the threshold will go up. By the time we have the March debate, almost 2,000 delegates will be allocated. The threshold will reflect where we are in the race, as it always has.
— Xochitl Hinojosa (@XochitlHinojosa) March 4, 2020
Of course.
That’s DNC communications director Xochitl Hinojosa, tweeting Tuesday night (after it became clear Gabbard would have a delegate) that the “have a delegate, have a podium” rule was likely to be changed because the former rules now meant Gabbard, least favorite candidate of Hillary Clinton and the woman who more or less ended Kamala Harris’ run, would be on stage at this late date.
By the way, there isn’t a while lot to sneeze at when it comes to a single delegate.
Billionaire tartan-tie enthusiast Tom Steyer didn’t even get one and was regularly on debate stages.
Amy Klobuchar only got seven , although she likely would have gotten quite a few more from Minnesota on Super Tuesday. (If her home state weren’t on the roster, however, she should have been prepared to stay at seven.)
“Hinojosa did not elaborate on what the new requirements will be, but if Gabbard fails to secure more delegates in next week’s primaries, she could be left out of the next debate in Arizona on March 15,” Fox News said.
Response to this wasn’t, shall we say, universally positive:
— Ben Domenech (@bdomenech) March 4, 2020
God forbid Tulsi gets back on the debate, right?
— ?Vote Tulsi Gabbard!??? (@fernandez2126) March 4, 2020
The people of American Samoa already don’t get to have electoral college representation, don’t you dare marginalize them further by keeping their second choice candidate from the debate stage.
— Swarley (@SwarleyHorse) March 4, 2020
The people of American Samoa already don’t get to have electoral college representation, don’t you dare marginalize them further by keeping their second choice candidate from the debate stage.
— Swarley (@SwarleyHorse) March 4, 2020
I understand most of the responses to a tweet like this are going to be negative.
However, I’ve never quite seen a partisan tweet with as few defenders as this one. After scrolling through a deluge of responses, I only found two responses in favor, this being the only substantive one:
Democracy is serious business, not a fancy academic experiment. Allowing her on the stage only undermines it. She needs to be kicked off the stage.
— ?Devin Nunes’ Perfidious Russki Malefactor Cow? (@AmericaPlsAwake) March 4, 2020
Except this is hardly an academic experiment.
What does this undermine?
The DNC loosened the debate requirements with the tacit goal of letting Mike Bloomberg on stage after taking significant criticism for tightening them to the point where candidates of color were no longer appearing in debates.
(They also refused to conduct additional polling, as per Andrew Yang’s request, to see if any other candidates like Pacific-islander Gabbard, Sen. Cory Booker or Julián Castro could qualify after failing to do so for a December event in Los Angeles.) This seems to have worked out well for Bloomberg.
With Elizabeth Warren’s Thursday morning exit from the race, there are three candidates remaining in the Democratic race: former Vice President Joe Biden, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Gabbard.
No, Gabbard doesn’t have the pull of either Biden or Bernie.
In fact, it’s safe to say only two of them have chances, and it’s the old, white men. That said, a third candidate who’s had a significant media draw, even if she doesn’t have flashy numbers, isn’t exactly a stretch.
Gabbard’s strange mix of policy proposals may not strike you as particularly interesting or salable. In fact, much of her popularity on the right comes from her refusal to vote yes on impeachment, her war of words with Hillary and her legendary “Stop! Stop! She’s already dead!” interaction with Kamala Harris.
That said, given the length of these debates and the fact we’ve had clown-car symposiums before, the idea there’s no room for a third candidate on stage is absurd. This is why nobody with any sense can trust the DNC.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
