DNC Debate Rules Forced Diversity Out of the Democratic Presidential Race—and Then They Changed the Rules for a Really Rich White Man

The Root ^ | February 3, 2020 | Stephen A. Crockett Jr.

[grundle]

When the race for president began with Sens. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker and former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julián Castro, it was hailed as the most diverse Democratic presidential field in history. By the end of January, damn near every candidate of color had withdrawn from the race. And all of them could cite one culprit as the reason for their withdrawal: the stringent and unwavering debate rules of the Democratic National Committee.

“In the seven months since they were first announced, the standards—a combination of increasingly higher polling and fundraising thresholds—have upended various campaigns’ tactics and become the proximate cause of multiple withdrawals from the race,” is how Politico described it.

And then former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg entered the race.

Bloomberg is an American businessman who has more money than God and, as such, he’s been able to fund his entire campaign himself. And because Bloomberg is rich and was blessed with the complexion of lightly cooked but still raw chicken, “The Democratic National Committee announced Friday that there will be no donor threshold for its upcoming Nevada debate (Feb. 22),” opening an avenue for Bloomberg to participate.

You know who could’ve used this kind of rule-bending? Kamala Harris. Cory Booker. Julián Castro. All of these viable candidates of color running for president could have benefited from a rule change, but the DNC wasn’t playing rule-breaker for them.

[KobraKai]

...and you will still vote for the D because you are DUMB. And you have to live with that fact.

[Steely Tom]

They like white men with green money.

[Bullish]

The dems favor rich whiteys and will cheat for them. Think about that, liberals.

[MrEdd]

Kamala Harris never really launched. All the manufactured poll results in the world couldn’t make people come listen to Willie Brown’s Mistress campaign.

Whores are only politically viable in California and New York.

[monkeyshine]

So let’s assume for argument’s sake that Bernie gets 20% of the delegates, Mayor Pete gets 20%, Warren gets 15%, Biden gets 15%, and Bloomberg gets 15% and others get 15%.

It won’t be exactly that but the point is there is no clear winner and they have to have a brokered convention. In such a case Bloomberg is basically the kingmaker. His commitment to the Dem Congressional fund and other PACs will swing the super delegate votes any way he wants - if not for himself then for whichever candidate he prefers. I think it is safe to guess he will not support Bernie or Warren. Steve Bannon thinks Bloomberg is not running to win but to control the outcome and help finance the eventual candidate, turning over his campaign infrastructure etc.

[libertylover]

What really happens is that their candidacies don’t generate enough interest to make people donate the money needed to continue.

[vpintheak]

I agree with their outrage, but none of who they mentioned were viable candidates, were viable. Not even close. Not even in the rat party.

[MadMax, the Grinning Reaper]

Harris, Booker and Castro “are still running for the presidential nomination” as of yesterday? News to me and most of America, but then again, the writer sounds like a leftwing hack and if he was related to Communist Party member, the late George Crockett Jr. (D-Mich), it would further explain his stupidity.

With Harris, Booker, and Castro, you have a “Hooker, Poofer and Commie”. Would you really like to invite them to anything other than their own execution?