Official 2020 US Election: Democratic Party Discussion

[Mnementh]

SpokenTruth said:

Mnementh said:

Well, that's why I explicitly said it, that not the most recent are used. Strange, but it is what the DNC decided. And it get's more relevant by the minute, because... tada!!!

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-steve-bullock-could-win-the-2020-democratic-primary/

Steve Bullock is running and apparently instantly qualifies via the poll criteria, as many past polls already included him. That means 19 have already qualified.

Bennet, Moulton, Messam and Gravel are currently trying to qualify. You have Bill de Blasio with an announcement of an announcement. And I think Stacey Abrams would be able to qualify, if she decides to run. That means six possible candidates might or might not qualify in the future. One more is no problem. With two more qualifying candidates Marianne Williamson is currently out. And also at this point is isn't enough anymore to qualify via donors alone. The third candidate who qualifies now triggers above rules. Currently Kirsten Gillibrand, John Delaney, Jay Inslee, Tim Ryan and Eric Swalwell look like the ones that could be endangered - if they not also meet the donor-requirement and therefore reach safety (for now at least).

I really thought it is too late for so many candidates to still qualify, and I thought 20 seats in the debate would be enough. But now it seems very possible, only one open spot left.

I was really hoping he wouldn't run.  I spent over an hour just getting the new tables to look somewhat decent last night and now a new candidate pops up to ruin it....and he possibly gets immediate debate qualifications?

Nice that you spent the time to accomodate the table to include Bullock. Now you can remake them, because Bill de Blasio announced his candidacy.

EDIT: And on another note... maybe this is my bias speaking, but does this opinion piece sound like a person thinking about candidacy staking out policy positions?

Last edited by Mnementh - on 16 May 2019