No charlatans in charleston

​
WHAT: @Ballot_ball will be live-tweeting the 4th Democratic Presidential debate

WHERE: Charleston, South Carolina

WHEN: 9 pm ET on January 17, 2016 on NBC
January 17, 2016 - On Sunday night, 3 Democratic Presidential contenders are going to take the stage in Charleston, and Ballotball.com is going to play referee. We aren't going to pick a winner--you, the voter, should decide that for yourself. What we WILL do is help keep the bout civil by calling penalties in real time. So, tune in live on Sunday night, and check back with us on Monday to find out who was penalized the most.

Update: see debate results here.

The Contenders (listed alphabetically)

The Penalties

With the NBA season heating up, we've instituted some new basketball rules for the debate.

Candidates can receive a foul for the following infractions:

  • Failing to answer a question
This one is pretty self explanatory. Candidates might have a good reason to avoid the question, but this is a debate and if you're not here to answer the questions, then it's just a televised press conference. 

  • Failing to stay on topic
For instance, in an earlier debate, Lindsey Graham was asked about his opinion on the right of bakers to refuse to cater a gay wedding. He responded: "Whether you're the wedding cake baker or the gay couple or the Baptist preacher, radical Islam would kill you all if they could."

  • Candidates can receive a technical foul by comparing their opponents to the Nazis.
​​This rule might be controversial due to the innumerable times Donald Trump's opponents have compared his xenophobic policies to Nazism. However, going back to the first debate, we, at Ballotball, have held a zero-tolerance policy towards Nazi comparisons. We flagged Lindsey Graham for comparing ISIL to the Nazis, and we were watching Governor Mike Huckabee closely after he compared President Obama to the Nazis after he agreed to the Iran nuclear deal (this didn't happen during a debate, so no penalty was issued). The reason for this rule is threefold:
  1. Nazi comparisons are lazy. If you'd like to compare Donald Trump's ban on Muslims entering the country to a historical precedent, why not try McCarthyism, or the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, or the Jim Crow south? Instead, people always grab the low-hanging fruit of the Nazis to make their point.
  2. Nazi comparisons ignore the fact that there are still Nazi parties alive and well in many countries. They have not receded to the dustbin of history and currently have at least one member sitting on the European Parliament. 
  3. This is a debate. And nothing shuts down a debate faster than a Nazi comparison. It is our strong opinion that such comparisons send all parties to the barricades and prevent anyone from actually communicating. Disagree strongly, and make your case the best you can, but leave the Nazi metaphors at home, please.