Clinton Campaign: No More Debates Until Sanders Starts Being Nicer

“If he does that, then we’ll talk about debates.”

Jose Caruci/ZUMA

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


The Democratic presidential candidates are back at it, having debates about scheduling more debates. Over the weekend, Sen. Bernie Sanders publicly challenged Hillary Clinton to face off on a debate stage in New York before the state’s primary on April 19. On Monday, a top Clinton staffer said not so fast.

The Sanders and Clinton campaign have tussled since the start of campaign season over the number of debates. But it seemed like those silly tiffs were finally settled back in January, when the two campaigns agreed to meet for debates once a month through May.

Now the Clinton campaign is sounding less sure about that agreement. Joel Benenson, the campaign’s chief strategist, said on CNN Monday morning that Sanders needs to watch his tone, or else the Clinton campaign will pack up its ball and head home. “The real question is, what kind of campaign is Sen. Sanders going to run going forward?,” Benenson said when asked about Sanders’ request for a New York debate.

“Let’s see the tone,” Benenson continued when pressed about why Clinton was reluctant to debate. “This is a man who said he’d never run a negative ad; he’s now running them, they’re planning to run more. Let’s see the tone of the campaign he wants to run before we get to any other questions.”

Benenson added, “Let’s see if he goes back to the kind of tone he said he was going to set early on. If he does that, then we’ll talk about debates.”

The problem with Benenson’s argument is that the 2016 Democratic primary has been one of the most remarkably friendly contests in recent memory. While Republican Party leaders mount a #NeverTrump campaign as the front-runner mocks the appearance of his opponent’s spouse, the Democratic candidates have largely focused on minor policy differences, with Sanders waving away efforts to get him to attack Clinton for using a private email server. Sanders regularly says he’ll back Clinton if she’s the nominee and encourages his supporters to do the same. And Sanders has yet to call Clinton’s success “the biggest fairy tale” or circulate old photos of Clinton to question her religious beliefs—actions the Clinton camp took during the far nastier 2008 Democratic race.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest