Is It Fair Not to Let Yang & Tulsi Speak During Debates?


Hey David, is it fair not to let yang and
Tulsi speak during the debates? It’s not, I’ve, I’ve talked about this, we
did a big piece about this on the Monday show where I explained, I think there are too many
people on the stage. I think there should be five, maybe six at
this point at the most based on who still has a shot and how far into this thing we
are, but if you make the stage you should get roughly equal time. I don’t agree with the network making editorial
decisions to say if you’re pulling better you will get more time. If you’re pulling poorly you’ll get less time
except where we want to do it differently. And what we saw in the fifth MSNBC, the fifth
debate which was on MSNBC last week was that for example, Andrew Yang got drastically less
time than his polling support would predict. On the other hand, Pete booted. Judge was the biggest beneficiary who got
significantly more time on screen talk time then his polling would suggest. So I do not think it’s fair for yang and Tulsi
to speak during the, I’m no fan of Tulsa’s and she has no shot, but if she makes the
debate she should get the same amount of time as everybody else. Andrew Yang I like, I don’t think he’s going
to be the nominee. I’ve interviewed him on the program perfectly. Nice guy. Has good ideas. He should get the same amount of time as everybody
else. If he has made the debate, if your argument
is these people don’t really have a shot at winning, so it makes sense not to give them
much time, well then they shouldn’t be on the stage. If that’s your, uh, your, the DNC is running
the election, they should have requirements for making the debate stages that make sense. They should not be leaving it up to the whims
of for-profit media who may have all sorts of different priorities themselves. MSNBC 10 trending towards the sort of more
establishment centrist Democrats like Joe Biden, uh, Pete, Buddha, judge, they seem
to sort of have reluctantly made the call that if it is going to be a more progressive
candidate that wins between Warren and Bernie. They prefer Warren’s or they’ve been talking
up Warren over, over Bernie and they’ve been particularly unfair to Andrew Yang referring
to him as John Yang at least once, if not more. They put a poll up on the screen a couple
of weeks ago where they just ignored the Andrew Angus wasn’t on the screen even though he
was pulling, I think in that poll 3% they had people on screen who were polling to just
no explanation why John Yang or as he’s actually called Andrew Yang wasn’t there. So I want to be really clear. This is not me being a yang ganger or anything. I’ve said I’m a, I’m a Bernie Warren guy,
but fair is fair. And if you make the stage, you should get
the time that everybody else gets. It should be evenly distributed. If in a poll, you’re in sixth place, you shouldn’t
show one through five, skip person number six and then seven, eight, nine, whatever. You should just put the person up there. That’s it. It’s just not fair. And it’s bizarre and it’s strange. And to your question, it’s not fair to let
Andrew Yang and Tulsi, uh, uh, uh, speak so little when they have made the debate stage
based on the requirements that have been put in place by the DNC. We’ve got a great bonus feel for you today,
where I will be facing off against producer Pat Ford in a pre Thanksgiving chess match. What will happen? There’s only one way to find out, and that
is to check out the video version of today’s bonus show. Become a [email protected] or become a
[inaudible] patron at patrion.com/david Pakman show to
get instant access to the bonus show and through today’s chess match, the David Pakman [email protected]
[inaudible].

Author Since: Mar 11, 2019

  1. If they a) Don't offer anything uniquely different or b) are polling sub 5% then they shouldn't even be on the stage.

  2. It's especially unfair because, let's look on the flip side, people who literally have no chance get MORE time to talk and 'convince' people at home why they should be the candidate (i.e. Klobuchar and Buttigieg).

  3. i personally think the whole debate system in the US is terribly bonkers.
    in the EU most nations , debates can take a long fucking time. but everyone has to answer all the questions.
    this to prevent having the questions being too politically influential.
    and in these debates the questions can only be about policies anything else is jut fluff when the entire point of these debates are about policies..
    also its on national television and no party is allowed to have any direct or even indirect influence in what is asked. this goes trough polls sort of to see what kind of subjects are imprtant to most of the people..
    outside debates there are plenty of revenues to go about any other flaw a politician has.
    So yes they are lengthy and even the ones not popular enough to make a realistic chance at leadership they still get taken just as seriously as the popular ones.
    this is also necessary for the fact almost all work by parlement. so they nearly always have to make alliances.
    sometimes the party with the most votes will be joining into a government with not the second or even third party to get the majority needed for a government. but often with the much smaller parties. this so far has worked quite well to prevent too much division between people with different political orientations (apart from far right winged groups who by their nature try to set themselves apart from the rest)
    some examples do exist in it not working that well. right now you see this with brexit. no one knows how the government will look like after the elections.
    plus they only have 3 parties (not really counting ukip and the brexit party atm as they even do not want to take part in this election) which is not that healthy too. more parties means more different voices are heard.

  4. Frankly, I don't think it's fair to have candidates polling under 15% on the stage at all. Unless something crazy happens to Bernie, Warren, Biden, and Buttigieg, they have zero chance of winning the nomination, so having them up there is just a waste of time.

  5. just let them speak in a round-robin rotation of 5 minutes each . Let them speak without a moderator so that they can freely debate each other. Don't let msnbc turns debates into a reality TV show .

  6. I'm of the mind debates should cap at 5 but the lower polling candidates probably prefer SOME time over you know… NO time.

  7. What i would add to this video is that Yang got terrible question quality. I think 4-6 minutes of UBI discussion or discussion of another topic that Yang has would have been fair. But asking Yang "how would u slam putin over the phone hur hur" while asking buttigieg why he would be an amazing president just isnt fair at all.

  8. They should be in polls if they ain't on the ballots . Deval Patrick missed NH ballot access deadlines he shouldn't be in polls for NH.

  9. EVERYONE HAS AN EQUAL SHOT UNTIL AFTER WE FUCKING VOTE ON IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    There shouldn't even be polling taking place because it's undemocratic and used to push public opinion.
    Everything else is selfish bullshit spin and opinion to favor your own preferences.

  10. I hate to say it, but if Trump wins again I can’t say that Id be disappointed in seeing the dnc screw themselves again. They get what they deserve.

  11. Idiots the reason Tulsi , Steyer and Yang dont get time is because they have yet to place there names on some ballots.

  12. It's such a shame that the DNC cheats good candidates out of opportunity. They did it to Bernie in 2016, they're doing it to you now. It's DNC corruption that has given us Trump. F*** the DNC!

  13. I'm so surprised Biden is still leading in the polls. There's nobody that I know, both left, right and center that would want to vote for this guy.

    if Bernie, Tulsi or Yang become nominee, I hope the Democrats will win the election. If Biden becomes the nominee then I truly don't care who wins.
    My hope is set on Bernie since he's going second. Altho I worry about is health.

  14. Right. If you don't want to talk to them because you don't think they have a shot/are polling high enough, then you need to raise the standards to get on stage to begin with.

  15. It is sad that you are not for Yang but for Bernie and Warren. Warren is falling because of her no principal personality and you are for her, so disappointed. Bernie called himself democratic socialist, but his belief and plans are socialist not democratic. Large population of immigrants came from socialist and communist countries, they knew what socialism and communism are and they do not to go there again. Unfortunately, humans are greedy at the core if not socialist and communist countries would be paradises for people but they are not.There is no real socialism or communism, just citizens are strictly governed by one party.
    Yang are being blackout because these comporations, politicians and MSM knew he could win and their power and control would be stripped away. We are at very critical time, if we don't elect the right path this time, I'm afraid there will be no REDO and many people don't know what they are about to loose. Do you really want government and corporations control and decide your every move by using technology. Look at China, people there seem to have better living but they all know they are being watched and controlled online and offline. Don't believe me, travel to China, Vietnam, or Cuba to see how quick you get in trouble for saying or doing just barely against the regime.

  16. It's pointless to let them speak, as Biden has already won the nomination.
    "I AM A ZIONIST. YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A JEW TO BE A ZIONIST."

    ~ Joe Biden | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brPGZqPzjVo

  17. The debates are for to let the voters know who the candidates are and why they running for president. In at least the 2 first debates the most unknown candidates should have had most speaking time.

  18. well, to be fair every time Tulsi speaks, she kind of leaves other people's blood and body parts all over the stage. messy. Cecily did an awesome parody of her on last week's SNL.

  19. I dont give a crap what either have to say if that matters. They are taking time and effort away from much better candidates. Neither Yang nor Tulsi have a chance in hell of being primaried, much less winning the race. As such I see them as liabilities, who are INCREASING the chance Trump gets reelected.

  20. I LOATHE gabbard, and I like yang ok, (not voting for him) but yes, they should ABSOLUTELY get equal time as all the others!! How completely unfair not to!! I like MSNBC, but shame on them! 😡

  21. Tell us how you really feel Pakman. You don't have to hold back against the Yang Gang. You're perfectly fine with not giving Yang time.

  22. Why don't they just give each candidate 3mins speaking time they follow up with panel questions? Forget the debating it only works with 4 or less on stage.

  23. Yang never had a fair shot since the beginning which is probably the best example why I never liked getting involved in voting someone else in media decided who will be the winner.

  24. People are saying Yang is whining but there is lots of evidence showing that he is getting shunned. I’d say he’s doing what he should have done long ago!

  25. I agree, take the top 5 polled candidates averaged from polls since the last debate and toss them up. Everyone else, go run for congress.

  26. David with a Mic acting like a pro and god of the universe ,"Tulsi have no shot"…
    Get ur ass off that chair and accomplish half what tusli did

  27. Some of the Real Reasons they want to Silence Yang. Andrew Yang will Fix Many things that the Politicians don't want Fixed like getting money out of Politics and Not just Democracy Dollars. Ex Politicians go on book and Speaking Tours as soon as they leave Office, Giving 20 Minute Speeches for a Quarter Million Dollars Every Speech. Anyone think that Might be for Payment of Favours they handed out While they were in Office. Actually because they are Criminals and Do Not trust each other they Probably Received Very Large Sums of Cash and the Speeches are just a way to Launder the money so they have a Legitimate Reason for seeming to get these Large sums. Who would Ever think how this Crime is Committed there are Lots of ways to launder money bill clinton has made Over a Hundred Million on these Speaking Tours since he was in Office is he Really that Good at giving Speeches. Andrew Yang Will Stop Every Politician from Book and Speaking Deals for at least 10 years after they leave Office. If this Country don't Elect Yang then it Will be Politics as Usual he is the Only one that sees the Real Problems.

  28. I disagree. Yang has a huge chance to win the nomination. The frontrunners are barely polling 25%, so the race is really wide open. His grass roots support keeps growing at a bigger rate than the other candidates.

  29. I'm sure the whole world would be impressed by the US election of a young progressive president under fifty. Democrat candidates polls make me think of Khrushchev and Brezhnev who were old men running a declining empire. Good luck and a big hello from Spain.

  30. MSNBC has picked their favorites and are sandbagging the competition. It's simply anti-democratic behavior and shouldn't be tolerated, no matter who you support. It's bad for democracy.

  31. Another Bernie guy shitting on Tulsi. The person who told you Bernie was getting cheated. You wouldnt have known till it was over but for some reason you hate her.

  32. Glad Bernie’s supporters are backing Yang on this despite being a little frustrated at him for having the courage to take a strong stand against the network when their candidate doesn’t.

  33. There is a reason why they are blocking Yang. He would change our society. Just like the way they blocked Bernie in 2016…

  34. It's a prime example of the networks putting their thumb on the scales of democracy.
    They're horrified by Yang because he has answers to our problems, Tulsi wants to unplug the industrial war complex so she's really disliked by the establishment.
    Curious thing about Yang, despite the least time to talk he said more in his six minutes and got more post attention because of the slight by MSNBC. The strategy totally blew up in their face!

  35. Our primary selection process is massively obtuse anyway. We're essentially holding an election to figure out who is going to run in an election. It's too public with too many people running and all it does is create bruised egos and hurt feelings. Hilary Clinton likely would have won the last election (as she won the popular, she likely would have won the electoral college too) if the butt-hurt Bernie supporters didn't either stay home or vote Trump. We need to fix or remove this archaic system.

  36. Yes. They're irrelevant anyway. If I decide to declare I'm running for president and show up to the panel, will they give me speaking time? Nope. People who have no realistic chance to win should not get speaking time. If we give speaking time to Yang and Tulsi then let's give speaking time to every other American who wants to be president, see how long it takes.

  37. MSNBC's "Everything the candidates said at the November debate " Youtube video series stats as of today.
    Views followed by like/dislike ratios.
    #1 Yang 381,622 21K/547
    #2 Sanders 204,380 8.1K/825
    #3 Gabbard 92,053 2.7K/224
    #4 Buttigieg 46,661 974/931
    #5 Biden 22,000 156/536
    #6 Warren 19,000 322/351
    #10 Klobochar 2,600 25/179

  38. Flashback to history, I thought the 2016 republican debates had even more candidates in Nov/Dec

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Republican_Party_presidential_debates_and_forums#Presidential_debates

  39. David, I’ve heard you say numerous times that you don’t think Yang will be the nominee. I’m just curious, objectively, what would it take to convince you that he has a shot at the nomination?

  40. I think 3% or higher polling should be the next limit for the race, not even the debate. I think these rules were never necessary but they should be in place at least 9 months before election. See where all those 1%ers supporters will go to. Might make it more competitive at the top/2nd tier if they drop off soon.

  41. Lesser known candidates should speak more on the stage. DNC should let them talk otherwise they have literally no chance to win and only career politicians would win always. I strongly disagree with your opinion

  42. It is unfair. A debate is supposed to be a battle of ideas and one of the first rules of debating is equal amount of speaking time. But like Yang said: As soon as he realized it wasn't a deabte, things got a lot easier.

Related Post