Rally outside Democratic presidential debate, July 2019

When the first Democratic Party presidential debates had 20 or more participants last year, many viewers found the format unwieldy and unworkable. The candidates never had enough time to answer the questions, and constantly were cut off. While one candidate was giving an answer, one or more other candidates were raising or waving their hands to try to be called upon for a response. The moderators were too intrusive. It was all very distracting, and sometimes provided heat but very little light. Plenty of folks said, just wait until we have fewer candidates, then the problem will be solved.

U.S. Senator Kamala Harris

Yesterday, U.S. Senator Kamala Harris abandoned her efforts to win the Democratic Party presidential nomination for 2020. In an email to supporters, Harris wrote:

I’m not a billionaire. I can’t fund my own campaign. And as the campaign has gone on, it’s become harder and harder to raise the money we need to compete.

On paper at least, the highly accomplished Harris should have been one of the favorites to win the Democratic nomination, and, for a time, she was in the top tier, polling at 15 percent. So what went wrong?

Sign of unity outside 2019 Democratic debate

Are you reading or hearing about the “fireworks” or “clashes” at last night’s Democratic presidential debate aired on CNN? If so, that’s part of the problem. This year, the televised Democratic debates have shown more about the failure of the TV debate format than about the success or substance of the candidates.

First, CNN (along with the New York Times, which co-sponsored the debate) brought together the 12 qualifying candidates on one stage, on one night, instead of splitting the event into two debates with six candidates each. Right off the bat, this caused the candidates to be given inadequate time to answer most questions, and to be cut off just when getting to the substance of most of their answers.