Christmas Week Democratic debate gets lowest ratings of any debate this year, by @Gaius_Publius

Christmas Week Democratic debate gets lowest ratings of any debate this year

by Gaius Publius





Digby had much to say on this subject — "The warning bell tolls for thee DNC" — but I wanted to add my bit. This is just a news piece, so you know how bad it was. At DNC headquarters, they're marking this "mission accomplished." Adam Edelman at the NY Daily News reports (my emphasis):
Saturday night 2016 Democratic debate gets lowest ratings of any debate this year

It was live on Saturday night but dead in the TV ratings.

The third 2016 Democratic debate got the lowest TV ratings of any debate this cycle, preliminary figures released Sunday showed.

About 6.71 million viewers tuned into the prime-time debate between Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley, Nielsen data showed, well below all of the other Democratic and Republican debates this year.
The first and second Democratic debates drew 15.3 and 8.5 million viewers, compared with 6.7 million for the most recent one. If this were a TV show, it would be cancelled. Contrast those numbers with the three highest-rated Republican debates, which garnered 25 million viewers, 23 million viewers, and 18 million viewers.

If it wasn't already obvious that party leadership is picking the candidate, and not its voters, it should be by now. I fear there may be an in-kind response to that, but later, maybe by the voters in November, at which point no one will be pleased. After all, this is the season in which both party's voters are rejecting the self-dealing players seated at the money-flush insider table. If I'm the Democrats, I'm not sure I'd stand in front of the train the Republicans are looking at. They do seem determined to, however.

Digby is exactly right. The warning bell is ringing loud and clear. Will the money that runs the DNC listen and stand down? 2016 is will be one of the most important election years in the history of this country. For one thing, on the climate front, if the next president is a money-serving incrementalist, no matter the party, well ... I'm definitely not feeling lucky about that.

(A version of this piece appeared at Down With Tyranny. GP article archive here.)

GP