agreed, but then don't agree to having one

no point in keeping her promises now
having zero public faith and polling in single digits on 'trust' actually has its advantages

I understand the strategy. She's already got this primary wrapped up, so why debate a candidate that's clearly going to go after you and potentially hurt you more in the polls?

But she already agreed to 4 debates. She already turned down the proposed 6, and the usual 15 or so that the DNC has. Most people don't understand how skipping another debate is good politics on her part, they just see Hillary Clinton again skipping out on talking to someone about the issues.

So she has every right to turn down another debate for political purposes, but she's also fair game to be criticized for it even if we understand that political strategy.

She comes across as calculating, cold, impersonal to many people. It's the same thing here, and that's part of why her favorability ratings are so poor. Always playing politics. Instead of showing her face to Californians that want to hear the candidates speak about issues in their state, she again plays politics.

And it could be her undoing. So yes, it is smart politics if you want to go by the book, but she's doing enough of this type of stuff and evading public evaluation enough times that it's just giving Trump and her critics more fodder against her.

Tl;dr: It's smart in this instance to skip the debate but potentially damaging if she builds this narrative about herself that she's only in it for herself, always plays politics, doesn't want to debate issues, etc. She's got the primary wrapped up, but there are still many undecided independents that are getting tired of these type of antics. Maybe it's best if she just debated the old comrade and then annihilated him in California to crush this potentially damaging narrative she is constructing and confirming about herself.

This post was edited by ThatAlex on May 24 2016 08:28am

B-b-but she pinky promised,wahhhhh

perfect leader for sheep

It's smart politics in this particular instance to break her agreement with Bernie/DNC/public for 4 debates because why would you debate a candidate that is clearly going after you and will probably only hurt you in the polls? (That is also a good question to ask, though, why doesn't Hillary see a 'boost' in the [general election] polls after debating Bernie?)

Couldn't she annihilate comrade Bernie in the debate, crush him in California (as she is projected to), AND also avoid this potentially damaging narrative that she always plays politics and is always politically calculating over addressing issues to Americans (in this case, issues specific to California, the largest state in the US)?

She's already got this primary wrapped up and is focusing on the general, why give Trump and her critics more of this type of 'dodge' fodder against her?

Many independents are tired of these type of antics, even if it makes good political sense. And most people don't understand how skipping this debate is good politics (at least temporarily), they just see Hillary refusing to get in front of people and talk about issues again.

So I think she has to be careful about this narrative she has and is constructing. People see her as always playing politics. She's focused on the general, but this narrative could hurt her in the general. Politics are a pretty complicated game. She's got to be looking at some of these exit polls coming out in states about her character and how people view her on trustworthiness and public accountability. She's got to be thinking about earning trust with the public and independents, too. She's not holding her end of the bet on something yet again. She's got this primary wrapped up, but she needs to be thinking about implications of decisions like these for the general election.

This post was edited by ThatAlex on May 24 2016 08:45am

Oh no, a president who is good at political strategy? That does sound terrible.

If Bernie had kept his promise of a clean campaign, this would be a much better idea and might even happen. Instead, he simply wants to drag Hillary through the mud and beat her up, and she'll have to talk about her leftist record quite a lot to boot, which isn't going to work great in the general.

why would anyone want to watch that? Her voice is fucking nauseating. Just let her hide.



This post was edited by Mangix on May 24 2016 09:23am

That's what my point is, though. This is certainly good short-term political strategy (why debate a guy who is clearly going after you when you already have the primary locked up), but whether it is good for her long-term is to be determined.

The narrative about Clinton always playing politics, always calculating every move she makes, etc might hurt her in the general against Trump. And she's adding to that narrative right now. A lot of voters don't understand the political strategy of her skipping a debate, they are just seeing that she wants to debate about issues as little as possible.

clinton sucks