Agreed. This impeachment flap is not at all helpful to Vice President Biden’s quest for the nomination. It can only hurt him as matters he at one time considered over and done instead reemerge very much to his detriment.
But let’s face reality. Biden was already, before all this, falling in the polls in favor of Senator Warren. The only thing remaining which can save him is the actual voting, still months away.
Tulsi has changed her mind. After reading the transcripts, she now feels not going through an impeachment inquiry would set a dangerous precedent.
Translation - if I’m not part of the lynch mob, I’ll be left behind. And while I dont think backing out now would set a “dangerous precedent” (not sure it those are her words or yours), but it would certainly kill the credibility of those who initiated it. So I guess “grandstand, then backtrack” would in fact be a precedent they’d want to avoid.
But really, now that it’s in motion you almost have to support it being played out to the end, no matter what side you believe. Probably the worst outcome now would be for the inquiry to be preempted by a technicality.
I should have mentioned earlier:
The cut off to qualify for the October debate is end of September. There are six additional candidates who have not, so far, qualified. From what I’m reading, I do not believe anyone else will be able to qualify before the deadline.
Only after the deadline passes will Mr. Perez, DNC chairman, announce exactly how the October debate will be handled, in particular regarding how the candidates will be divided between the two nights . . . assuming there ARE two nights. Point is, while that appears very likely, nothing is official yet.
Stay tuned. We will know all this just a few days from now.
Also and finally, regarding the November debate:
It will be significantly more difficult to qualify to be on that stage in November. Several current October contestants would not be able to qualify in November unless they improve their numbers. Mr. Perez is seeking to narrow the field.
Surprise announcement . . . at least this comes as a surprise to me:
The October Democrat POTUS debate will take place on only one night!!
Yes, this means there will be twelve candidates on the stage!!
This also means, in my opinion, that the “lesser” candidates will not be called upon very often . . heck . . there will not be time for that. Here is what I’m going by as I post this news:
All twelve candidates, one stage, one night!
ETA
To me, and in my view, this stinks out loud. This is placing a decision which should belong to Democrat voters instead into the hands of the Democrat media. I am referring specifically to the left leaning NY Times and to the equally left leaning CNN moderators.
The DNC, up until now, has been steadfast and resolute that no more than ten candidates could be accommodated on stage at once. This for what I think everyone considered obvious reasons. Heck, even at ten it was a stretch and not every candidate got their say. But set that aside. Ten was the rule and it was a good rule . . . . until now.
By failing to direct a sufficiency of questions to each candidate, because of obvious time restrictions, the moderators will in effect be playing favorites. Lower tier candidates will not have adequate opportunity to speak and rise. Instead, today’s leading candidates will be enabled further to extend their leads. This is wrong. The debate should be split six and six across two nights so everyone has a chance to be heard.
What was the right way to go back in July and in September, remains in October the correct approach. Why this change if not to favor Vice President Biden and Senator Warren? Twelve people on stage is too many.
You must concede Beto is a very special sort of candidate. He has now moved on from eating dirt and is venturing into new forms of weirdness, to wit, mention of animal cruelty!
OMG if Trump got anywhere near a mention like this the firestorm of criticism and charges of his off-the-charts wickedness and warped thinking would go on for a month!! And impeachment for mention of animal cruelty would be on the table without question.
But no such outcome for Beto. He can say anything he wants to say and think anything that springs to mind, all without fear of criticism or any bad outcome whatsoever. It must be nice:
“These fundraising campaigns are using really silly tactics. [Lists half a dozen]. If I were to play along, I’d do ___. But I’m not going to do that” → Specifically indicating a joke and exaggeration, but really must be advocating animal cruelty…
"Russia, if you’re listening, hack the DNC server for me! It would be really helpful to me. " → Clearly a joke, and not soliciting foreign interference… Especially not the requested action that shortly followed.
“My supporters are so stupid and support me so blindly, I could shoot people in Times Square and get away with it!” - This one clearly is a joke like the one you referenced, but a joke at whose expense?
You’re right, it’s easy to see the double standard you are referencing.
Why is that? I’d say having everyone on the same stage inherently makes it equal. Otherwise, your performance in the debate is partially dependent on who you got lucky enough (or unlucky enough) to be on the stage with.
What you are complaining about being unfair is stuff that can/will happen with 5 people on stage or 15 people on stage. Either the questions will be evenly distributed, or they wont.
Simply because available time for questions to lower ranking candidates will be more limited this way than it would be with, say, only six people on stage and a debate of the same length.
Readily apparent solution: extend the debate to 6 hours. It will not be obvious to any viewers that their normal programming / mantras have changed one iota. 
I apologize to other participants here for having mentioned Trump in my post, above, about Beto. This thread is for intraparty discussion of the Democrat POTUS race. That does not include Trump. There is another thread now for inter party stuff. That is where I should have commented. I was off topic. My fault and I will try hard not to do that again here.
Actually this is not a bad idea. I dunno about six hours, but extending the time a bit to allow lower tier candidates to be heard more fully is smart thinking. Perhaps Mr. Perez will do this.
There is also a chance the moderators will be fair and divide the available time, whatever it might be, equitably. I do not foresee that happening, but I surely could be wrong.
Well, you’ve just guaranteed that no Democrat party candidates can post in this thread. That’s pretty anti - you-name-it, @shinobi
Uh, not certain I understand. Was trying to say discussion here is limited to discussion of the Democrat candidates and I violated that restriction by mentioning Trump. Maybe I did not express it properly.
Uh, have you heard a Democrat party candidate say anything without mentioning Trump? Consequently, they will not be allowed to post in this thread. My last sentence in that post was sarcastic to the max, dude. 
If there’s going to be moderator bias in where questions are directed, it’s going to be there no matter how many people are on stage. And I’d argue that if a candidate is unable to find his voice on a stage with 11 others, it’s an indication he might not be all that capable of governing on a global stage.
Two weeks from this evening the Democrat candidates will convene in Ohio for their third debate.
So time now to take a peek at November. Friends, it is a vastly different picture than at present. Here is a list of the candidates who already have qualified for that November stage. You might find one or two surprises:
Joe Biden
Elizabeth Warren
Bernie Sanders
Pete Buttigieg
Kamala Harris
The other candidates have time to make the cut. But being on that stage next month is no slam dunk. My money says there will be very few additional qualifiers, if any! If you disagree I would be interested in your opinion.
Bernie hospitalized for heart issues, everything campaign related canceled for now.
This is a very bad thing. I think we all wish Bernie well and hope he has a speedy and complete recovery. He is a force today in American politics.
That said, the implications of this for Joe Biden have to be mentioned. Those two fellows are, after all, “of an age” when stuff like this happens.
I think this event boosts the candidacy of Senator Warren.
Since they’re not obese, they’re “of an age” with a morbidity rate lower than the current office holder… who is only a few years younger.