Would MSNBC ever dare favor the Democratic Party establishment? Of course not!
Just kidding. But I at least thought that the de facto media arm of the Democratic National Committee might be a little bit more discreet. Wednesday night’s debate in Atlanta, moderated by MSNBC, was openly skewed toward Warren and tried to all but ignore outsiders such as Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang.
This was evident from the debate’s very first half hour. Warren got at least three questions before Yang or Gabbard were even acknowledged. In fact, it took approximately 32 minutes for moderators to ask Yang a question.
Moderators didn’t ask Andrew Yang a single question until 32 minutes into tonight’s #DemDebate. @ShelbyTalcott reports:https://t.co/2GzQAaiXZp
— Peter J. Hasson (@peterjhasson) November 21, 2019
Meanwhile, Warren and Biden got almost all the speaking time. Notably, Warren also got several softball questions, like the one about “should more people be in the military” rather than any serious scrutiny of her foreign policy.
With less than 15 minutes left of the debate, here is the speaking time #DemDebate pic.twitter.com/CdPNgTyeaT
— Jayson (@JaysonFras) November 21, 2019
It’s very clear what’s happening here. Gabbard and Yang are outsider candidates, who frequently criticize the Democratic Party establishment and reach out to disaffected voters from diverse backgrounds, perspectives, and political persuasions. MSNBC wants to shut anti-establishment candidates up and prop up Warren, or maybe someone else in her lane.
Some might point out that Yang and Gabbard poll at just a few percentage points, while Warren and Biden top the polls. This is true, to some extent, but it clearly doesn’t explain the discrepancy. Amy Klobuchar polls below Yang and Gabbard but received substantially more speaking time, according to the New York Times’ running tally. So, too, a similarly low-polling candidate, Cory Booker, received way more speaking time than Yang and Gabbard despite only polling marginally better.
Additionally, it’s ridiculous to suggest that only the higher-polling candidates should dominate the speaking time. The whole point of debates is to expose voters to all of the candidates and their contrasting ideas. Reinforcing the name recognition of the two most popular candidates does not further that goal but equal opportunity for all qualifying candidates would.
Ultimately, it’s up to debate moderators to ensure that a debate is actually what happens — not just a town hall with their favorite two or three candidates. And in that, they failed.
