Stonehill debate cancelled, apparently because Indies were included.

[merrily]

The debate in Worcester was held, after indies were disinvited, but Baker and Coakley would not participate in the Stonehill debate, where Indies Falchuk, McCormick and Pastor Lively were welcome--until the debate was cancelled entirely.

I guess, in the shoes of Baker and Coakley, I might have done the same. Maybe. However, how likely is it that one of the Indies would overtake either Baker or Coakley? Do we fear ideas that much? And who suffers? Only the people who want to hear from everyone.

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/10/stonehill_college_gubernatoria.html

[shenmue]

1. Wow

Not cool.

[merrily]

2. Sadly, not surprising, either.

The one thing Republicans and Democrats agree on, it seems, is that everyone else should stay home.

As I said, if I were running, I might do the same, I guess. I hope not, though.

[Mass]

3. Having watched the two previous debates, all I can see is that the format does not work

or they need a 2 hour debate. With one hour equally distributed, you have as many time for Scott Lively's homophobic diatribes than for Coakley and Baker. The debates ended up being five stump speech one after the other, with no real debate. Baker has been able to pose as a moderate guy in everything including economy and a good manager (hello Big Dig) with very few opportunities to being counter attacked.

[merrily]

4. The answers to that may be to change the format, use time limits and stop

using moderators who allow their partisanship stand in the way of their being fair.

These are not new things in Massachusetts. Mass Dems need to stop playing victim every election and crying foul and address them, once and for all. For just one thing, it's beyond me why Dems keep agreeing to moderators with a proven track record of being so frustrated at the blueness of Mass that they all but challenge Dems to a duel at dawn. And why they even allow those kinds of moderators to be first, when the first debate is so crucial in voters' minds and usually the one that is watched by the most viewers.

None of this is esoteric stuff. Complaining about Republican unfairness, stolen elections and things of that kind gets me only so far. I'd much prefer to win elections, esp. in a state this blue. If Dem strategists can't do the basics, why not, and why are they still on the payroll?