Three 2020 Democrats languishing in their party’s presidential field have resorted to shock tactics in attempts at staying in the race.
Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard this week walked back her threat of boycotting Tuesday’s fourth primary debate in Westerville, Ohio. She’d earlier claimed to be giving the idea “serious consideration” over the Democratic National Committee’s “arbitrary” qualification criteria and the “commercialized reality television” format, calling the process “rigged.”
“Thank you so much for your support. I just want to let you know that I will be attending the debate,” she wrote in a brief email to supporters.
Gabbard’s flip-flop, while unsurprising to political observers, generated press coverage and social media chatter at a time when the Hawaii National Guard major and Iraq War veteran, 38, needs a significant boost in the polls to meet the higher standards set for November’s debate. Although White House hopefuls aren’t required to debate, the events provide invaluable national exposure and bestow “contender status” on the candidates.
Julián Castro, however, is taking a bigger gamble: He’s staking his presidential bid on making the cut for November’s debate.
The Obama administration housing secretary’s assertion that failing to qualify would be the “end of my campaign” resulted in his name being back into the news cycle, at least for a day. So far he has the donors, but the 45-year-old has yet to cross any of the polling thresholds.
Christopher Hahn, “Aggressive Progressive” podcast host and former Democratic consultant, said Castro’s approach was good media strategy, particularly given he’s got nothing to lose.
“All politics is to an extent about playing the media. This is no different,” Hahn told the Washington Examiner.
Hahn pointed to Cory Booker’s example. The New Jersey senator’s campaign last month told supporters he would drop out if he didn’t raise $1.7 million in 10 days before the end of the third financial quarter. Booker ended up hauling in $6 million from July through September and will participate in November’s debate.
Hahn added that Castro’s ploy also offered cover for the former mayor of San Antonio “to bow out gracefully.”
“This is as good a reason as any,” he said.
University of Akron‘s David Cohen differentiated between Booker, Castro, and Gabbard, saying the first two used “pretty standard ways … to shake the money tree.”
“I don’t think there’s a whole lot of risk to it because it’s really a win-win situation. If they just can’t raise the money, they’re going to drop out anyway,” Cohen said. “She’s just trying to get some spotlight. I’m not really sure why she would make that threat because for her to boycott the debates would only end up killing her campaign and would be an enormous self-inflicted wound.”
Cohen questioned whether Castro would follow through but figured “at some point the second-tier candidates” had to weigh their options.
“If they start missing the debate stage, it’s really going to hurt them. They may reach a point where dropping out is feasible,” he said. “You don’t want to threaten to drop out of the race too much because it will look like a manufactured request and it’ll look disingenuous, so you can’t go to that well too often. If they’re going to make that kind of appeal, now is the time to do it.”
Republican strategist Brad Todd agreed the “real target” wasn’t journalists but donors “who have proven they will reset their attention span over and over.”
“In a circus train of a primary you have to stick your head out of the car to be seen,” Todd said.
