Clinton Strategist: No More Debates Unless Bernie Sanders Changes His Tone.

[The Other Castro]

seems like Team Clinton just doesn't want to do any more debates and are looking for an excuse. Typical front-runner strategy.   I suspect in the end there will be one more debate between NY and PA.

It seems like a pretty bad way to word it though. The Clinton campaign refusing to debate based on Sanders' tone is laughable, and there are several other routes they could have taken that would have at least seemed legitimate.

[Xing]

I understand not wanting any more debates, since they really don't affect that much. Still though, I would not describe Sanders as "very negative." There's a difference between being critical and being rude.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I see, Bernie has to run a 100% positive campaign while Hillary is thousands of miles deep in the gutter with her campaign.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I see, Bernie has to run a 100% positive campaign while Hillary is thousands of miles deep in the gutter with her campaign.

[Adam Griffin]

This is just the whiniest thing I've read all day. This has been the least divisive and contentious primary - measured by the campaigns' actions - since God knows when. Both candidates could be bashing the ever-living hell out of each other using a whole lot more than just "tone", and tone is going to be the least of anyone's worries in the GE.

I get it: the front-runner doesn't want to have any more debates (unlike where we were one to two months ago) because the polling and delegate counts are clearly in her favor. It's stupid to come out and try to make up some blatantly transparent justification for not having more debates when you could just stay quiet about it. Who in their right mind over the age of 30 and not already firmly in Clinton's corner is going to believe that this has been a nasty campaign, when all they have to do is look back to 2008 and/or the past two GOP primaries?

[Ebsy]

This is just the whiniest thing I've read all day. This has been the least divisive and contentious primary - measured by the campaigns' actions - since God knows when. Both candidates could be bashing the ever-living hell out of each other using a whole lot more than just "tone", and tone is going to be the least of anyone's worries in the GE.

I get it: the front-runner doesn't want to have any more debates (unlike where we were one to two months ago) because the polling and delegate counts are clearly in her favor. It's stupid to come out and try to make up some blatantly transparent justification for not having more debates when you could just stay quiet about it. Who in their right mind over the age of 30 and not already firmly in Clinton's corner is going to believe that this has been a nasty campaign, when all they have to do is look back to 2008 and/or the past two GOP primaries?

People have short memories.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I see, Bernie has to run a 100% positive campaign while Hillary is thousands of miles deep in the gutter with her campaign.

Oh come on, even you can realize that this talking point is utterly ridiculous.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I see, Bernie has to run a 100% positive campaign while Hillary is thousands of miles deep in the gutter with her campaign.

Oh come on, even you can realize that this talking point is utterly ridiculous.

Sanders has definitely not ran a 100% positive campaign. His minions have pulled enough dirty tricks (hacking the DNC voter data base, posing as union representatives in Nevada, smearing those who criticized his policy plans as unrealistic).
And it was Sanders' campaign who went on record at the NYTimes as being ready to go full negative during the next weeks.

[Lyin' Steve]

Sanders has run a negative campaign.  That it's not as negative as Obama's campaign in 2008 is beside the point because Obama never had to drop to his knees and beg for a debate.

Hillary has won this nomination and doesn't owe Sanders anything, least of all the opportunity to stand next to her on national television and insult and insinuate about her for two hours.  The Sanders people have given her no motivation to do so other than flinging mud at her in the press.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

#ToneDownForWhat is a trending hashtag because of this now.

[Lyin' Steve]

#ToneDownForWhat is a trending hashtag because of this now.

I hear that the DNC this year is planning to add ten delegates to a candidate's score for each hashtag their supporters get trending on Twitter!

[Averroës Nix]

...inviting obvious jokes about Clinton only speaking in NYC when there's a six figure paycheck involved.

I know that this is normal process bickering, but the fact that it's happening in Cuomo's NY leaves such a awful taste in my mouth that I can't help getting upset about it. Our primary is almost always too late to matter, and dominated by machines on both sides even when it does. Our state elections are a joke, and most people living here - especially Upstate, of course - feel disenfranchised, disengaged, and disempowered by state government. Our notoriously stage-managed and tight-lipped governor just gave his first open press conference in nine months... on Easter weekend. So it's particularly frustrating that "our" former Senator (whose campaign has been no less stage-managed or insulated from the media and, by extension, the public, than our esteemed governor) would refuse to debate here.

Jesus Christ, do these people ever make it hard for me to vote for them.

[The Free North]

If Sanders had said this about Clinton we would have a 10 page thread about BERNIE SANDERS AND HIS RAMPANT SEXISM.

[RightBehind]

Hillary's the one who asked where Bernie was when she fought for healthcare reform as first lady. He was right behind her and she acknowledged him.

I guess every candidate has ammunition which could be used against them, but I think Bernie would be doing even better if he ran negative ads on Hillary. I'm glad though that he isn't because it shows how principled he is.

[Panda Express]

Who cares if there are no more debates? They are a complete waste of time at this stage.

[Ebowed]

Understandable that Clinton is afraid to debate Sanders.  Yet...  Sad!

[Pyro]

If Sanders had said this about Clinton we would have a 10 page thread about BERNIE SANDERS AND HIS RAMPANT SEXISM.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Clinton is right. Why should she waste her time debating a Neo-Nazi who refuses to accept that the primary is over?

Troll?

Pot, meet kettle?

But he's right: Obama had already moved on to the general election and his delegate lead was much smaller than hers. Sanders and his supporters need to face facts, which I know is easier said than done for you all.

[MIKESOWELL]

There goes Team Clinton.....playing the gender card. What the heck are they talking about with "tone," anyway? Bernie,stop vigorously debating me! i am but a wee damsel in distress!

[Shadows]

For once Hillary fans should man up & look at things objectively - Not through Clinton-lenses. You are not much of a person if you don't have an independent mind - This only makes Hillary fans even more ridiculous than Trump fans because they chose to ignore any issues with their candidate.

Let it go - Have an objective viewpoint - You guys are the one causing this divide!

[Democratic Cynicalism]

#ToneDownForWhat is a trending hashtag because of this now.

I hear that the DNC this year is planning to add ten delegates to a candidate's score for each hashtag their supporters get trending on Twitter!

Woah, you sure jumped down his throat quick huh? Pretty benign observation he was making there - it's a poor excuse from her campaign and it's getting negative publicity. To say nothing - or even say "we've had plenty of debates and explored most issues" - would have been better.

It's a poor move in general for her, really. It's usually a bad idea for campaigns to say no to more debates. Not that anything is usually gained from them, but at least your candidate isn't the one that's "SCARED OF DEBATES!" (I honestly think this is the only reason most debates happen - neither candidate wants the small fallout that comes from blinking)

Generally, you should only say no to debates if your tendency to make gaffes is Palinesque/Perry-level. Hillary not only has a fairly strong record of avoiding gaffes (in an era where gaffes are losing their significance/impact), she's actually put in some strong overall showings against Bernie. If Trump is the nominee, there'll probably be a high number of debates, and the best debate prep for that might be actually debating now.

[Shadows]

Rand Paul weighing on the NY Debate thing - https://twitter.com/randpaul/status/714644914433355778

[The Other Castro]

And here's the backpedaling:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-03-29/clinton-perfectly-willing-to-debate-sanders-in-new-york-aide-says

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Bernie is not a Democrat, loses Democrats in almost every primary, and is actively sabotaging the eventual Democratic nominee in the most important election in at least 36 years. She should refuse to acknowledge him, let alone debate him.

[This account no longer in use.]

Bernie is not a Democrat, loses Democrats in almost every primary, and is actively sabotaging the eventual Democratic nominee in the most important election in at least 36 years. She should refuse to acknowledge him, let alone debate him.

lol ok