from a cnn article. I don't know about this Tom Steyer thing. I know he is a dildo- but he is close to qualifying and he has no purpose other than to join the crowd and be mouthy on steroids. So there would be that for dem clowns to deal with if he gets one more poll. Ten days left to qualify. ================================================ 2. Who will make the September debate?: There are 10 days left for 2020 Democrats to qualify for the third debate in Houston in September. To make it, candidates need a) 130,000 individual donors from 400 unique people in 20 states and b) 2% in at least four Democratic National Committee-approved polls. At the moment, these nine candidates are in for sure: Biden, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, California Sen. Kamala Harris, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, former Rep. Beto O'Rourke, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and businessman Andrew Yang. Who else -- if anyone -- will join those nine onstage September 12 and 13? The two most likely additional candidates are businessman Tom Steyer and former San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro. Both have met the fundraising threshold, according to their campaigns, and both are just one qualifying poll short of the four they need. Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has met the fundraising qualification but has only one poll showing her at 2% or better. Not making the debate stage, a fate which seems likely for people like Sens. Michael Bennet (Colorado) and Kirsten Gillibrand (New York) may well force tough decisions about how and whether to continue in the race.
there is still time for a new candidate to come in and hit the cut off. The problem is no one understands what the hell "130,000 individual donors from 400 unique people" means?!?!?!?!
They are going to knock out the one candidate who could beat Trump? LOL. The difference of one percent in some poll is within the margin or error, I would have thought. Whatever, but you have to wonder about a process that elevates Yang, Beto and Mayor Pete over Tulsi. At least the others are Senators or in Biden's case, former Senator and VP.
Only your dumb ass thinks Tulsi can beat Trump.Of course your dumb ass thought Michelle Bachmann was the best candidate in 2012.You are probably the only moron on this site candidate that thinks the strongest candidate is the one you find most attractive.
Castro Boy has just qualified in another poll so he will be there for the Sept debate. For what it is worth. At least we will get rid of Gillibrand. She is hard to take and is as worthless as tits on a nun.
Yup. The DNC is giving our favorite surfer girl the shaft. She failed to qualify as an Official DNC Dud based on their "you-are-dnc-dud-if-you" criteria. Gabbard Victimized by DNC's Dubious Debate Criteria To recap: Gabbard has polled at 2% or more in two polls sponsored by the two largest newspapers in two early primary states, but the DNC -- through its mysteriously incoherent selection process -- has determined that these surveys do not count toward her debate eligibility. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...d_by_dncs_dubious_debate_criteria_141055.html
I hope Tulsi will be out because many of Trump votes will go to her. I still think Biden will be the nominee because it's 'his turn' representing the establishment.
The issue is not just one of who will ultimately win the nomination and who will not. There is also the issue of whether the mix of candidates includes those who can expose the duplicity of another candidate who might be at risk of being nominated. To give a concrete example of this, look no further than Kamala Harris who has fallen from 17% to just 5% in a matter of days/weeks. If you want to know how that happened, it is a two-word explanation: Tulsi Gabbard. Tulsi Gabbard exposed her duplicitous, two-faced, sorry arse and took her down. Tulsi will never be the nominee, but she has dealt a very lethal blow to Harris who is/was at risk of being a top-tier candidate. Let's make that third-tier now. So now Gabby will be gone and Kamala will go back to getting away with her crooked shiite. That ain't right, and is not good for the process. Having a field of dnc-selected wusses does not identify the one who can stand up to Trump. Now, the political hacks among you will perhaps say, "Well that's a good thing then isn't it, for the dems to not adequately screen who can stand up in a real fight." To which I say: Yes and No. The No part is that I am interested in see what the internal fighters have to say and having them expose fault lines in the other candidates. And the other part of the "no" is that the dem candidates and the debates are so boring and the women are so flaccid that it is good to have Tulsi there to break up the scat-fest. But i guess that is over now. CNN's Borger on Kamala Harris: As People Look At Her Record On Crime, They Ask If She Is A Hypocrite https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v..._on_crime_they_ask_if_she_is_a_hypocrite.html