No sooner have we finished the third Democratic debate and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is already giving us details on the next installment coming up in October. We knew it would take place in Ohio, but not exactly where. Now we know, from a press release, that the campus of Otterbein University, located in Westerville, Ohio, will be the setting for the October democratic debate. The university sits on the outskirts of Columbus, the state capital.

This time around, CNN will join with The New York Times as the debate host and broadcast partner.

CNN/New York Times Democratic Debate

When: Tuesday, October 15, 2019, with the chance for a second night on October 16
Location: Otterbein University in Westerville, Ohio
Sponsors: CNN, New York Times
Moderators: CNN hosts Anderson Cooper and Erin Burnett, along with New York Times National Editor Marc Lacey

October Debate Candidates

Candidates have until Oct. 1 to qualify, but here is the list so far.

NumCandidatePolls AND DonorsDonors Only
1Joe Biden
2Cory Booker
3Pete Buttigieg
4Kamala Harris
5Amy Klobuchar
6Beto O’Rourke
7Bernie Sanders
8Tom Steyer
9Elizabeth Warren
10Andrew Yang
11Julian Castro
12Tulsi Gabbard
Not Qualified
13Michael Bennet
14Steve Bullock
15John Delaney
16Wayne Messam
17Tim Ryan
18Joe Sestak
19Marianne Williamson

According to the Times, the rest of the field has until Oct. 1 to qualify which means the lineup could expand beyond eleven:

So far 11 candidates have qualified for the CNN/New York Times debate — the 10 Democrats who appeared in Thursday night’s debate on ABC, as well as the businessman Tom Steyer, who recently qualified for the next one. Other candidates have until the end of the day on Oct. 1 to meeting the qualifying standards.

The criteria for October are the same as those for September: Candidates must have 130,000 unique donors and register at least 2 percent support in four qualifying polls.

What’s the chance that Rep. Tulsi Gabbard or author Marianne Williamson can make the cut for October? The chances are unlikely but possible. With both candidates having failed to make the cut for September and therefore being left off the national debate stage, it will get harder for them to find poll numbers as their name slips from the list of candidates voters have seen anytime recently.

Gabbard sits with two qualifying polls in search of two more. Williamson only has one qualifying poll and needs three more to make the October stage. Both candidates have met the donor threshold.

The Times notes that depending on the number of candidates, the debate could be split over two nights. With 11 candidates, and a pledge by the DNC to have no more than 10 candidates on stage, it can only be assumed that CNN or the Times don’t want to commit to two nights given the chance that one candidate dropping out would compress the field back to the magic number of 10 meaning the debate would be set for only one night.

Follow the Democratic debate schedule page for all the latest information.


  1. How about we hold the DNC to releasing the 10 polls that they said they would release. They said there will be a total of 17 that the candidates could participate in that would be included in the official polls. So far they haven’t held up to that… They have only released seven. That’s not playing by the rules. It’s about time we start letting the DNC know we are watching them and we demand that the rules be played fairly.

  2. Who funds the official polls? If the DNC is only going to include the official ones, doesn’t it seem right that we should know who is officially sponsoring those? They say these polls are expensive and that’s why it’s so hard to get them done. So I want to know as a registered voter, who’s funding it? Who’s money is paying for this information? I kind of think I know who is. We need to start demanding transparency of the system. We know it’s corrupt and it’s time to call it out!! Show me the data! Voters are entitled to see who is funding this… This is public information and should be available. Come on America! Use your voice to tell our government that corruption is not acceptable!!

  3. Well it definitely looks like we’ll be going back to a 2 night debate for this next one in October.
    With Tom Steyer in the mix they have already crossed the 10 person threshold to keep the debate on one night and surely Tulsi Gabbard will land another poll in that time too.

  4. 1. This time, DO HAVE the American flag on the stage. 2. This time, DO HAVE either name tags, or the names of the candidates on their individual podiums. 3. This time, DO HAVE sufficient security guards to get protesters out immediately. 4. THIS TIME, shorten the questions and lengthen the time of the answers.

    • You forgot about one more THIS TIME. That is the candidates answer the questions in English and only English. Answering in Spanish is pointless. The reason being is that you have to be completely fluent in English to become a US citizen. Speaking to those unable to understand English means you are speaking to a non citizen or illegal. Don’t tell me that the Democratic party has somehow snuck illegals and non citizens into the voting electorate.?

      • I didn’t forget. That would not have crossed my mind. As long as a candidate translates what he says into English, no problem. I do NOT connect the speaking of another language with “illegals”. Also, you don’t understand WHY he said a comment in Spanish. It was to CONNECT emotionally with our Hispanic Democratic voters. It worked. We NEED all people who are going to vote Democratic who ARE citizens, ON OUR SIDE. By the way, we DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH in America. We speak AMERICAN. The British speak English. We have different words and vocabulary. Example: They say RUBBERS instead of erasers. The term KNOCK ME UP means get me pregnant here, but it means WAKE me up in England English.

        • I forgot to add, however, that in the next debate, the questions need to be a shorter time and the answers a longer time. It felt as if the questions were more like diatribe ranting than questions.

        • I am Canadian so I know that there are subtle differences in the language, but ultimately it is from the same root language. As far as your other comment about connecting with those who speak Spanish, sorry that doesn’t cut it. As quaint as it is to speak to another group of people there is no way you can sugar coat the fact that English is the one and only language any candidate should speak during the debates.

          • There are a lot of people in the US who speak mainly Spanish. To me, it’s no different from the fact that all Canadian goods we buy are written in both English and French.

            • I speak Maltese but I wouldn’t expect you to understand me. In public I will speak the common language and that is English. Many people are unwilling to assimilate and then they wonder why the better paying jobs are going to primarily English speakers.?

              Canada is a whole other kettle of fish. Being Canadian born I have often wondered why one province is allowed to dictate what will be.?

  5. Tulsi Gabbard achieved her 4th qualifying poll on the Monmouth poll on September 19th, with 2%, but this article is from the 13th, so it won’t reflect those results. Tulsi now has 3 CNN polls and 1 Monmouth poll under her belt. I for one, am so happy and excited for her. Lastly, Tulsi will be the only candidate that I will vote for, even if I have to write-in her name in the primaries. I won’t have to boycott the 4th debate like I did the 3rd, because she wasn’t there. Now let’s see if the DNC makes some excuses and say that some of those polls don’t count? I wouldn’t put it past the corrupt DNC! The RNC is even more corrupt! What a broken and corrupt political system we have here in the USA!

    • Nice try. the Monmouth poll was New Jersey. Only the early primary states count: Iowa, NH, SC, Nevada–conducted by one of the approved polls.

      She had to have four polls from different pollsters. I only see three.

      Sept 17–NBC/WSJ
      Sept 11–CNN
      Sept 8–ABC/WaPo

      • I sure hope that it doesn’t work that way, because that would piss me off even more than I’m already pissed at the DNC and their stupid rules. The USA has 50 states and any national poll from any of those States, along with the 16 qualifying polling organizations should count, as well as certain DNC approved polls from the 4 early primary states too. At least that’s how I understand it. If not, then it’s total BS! Why should the rest of us be shut out from the process? Also, what if the 4 early primary states were all heavy Republican strongholds?… I know that New Hampshire and Nevada are not, but Iowa and South Carolina are. If it’s only based on 4 states, that is not the true reflection of all the voting population. Fuck the DNC!

        By the way, where did you find that data? I sure couldn’t find it on the Politico website. I’d really like to go to the site where you went to. Thanks!

        • There have to be rules, and as long as they’re announced in advance, it’s hard to say they’re unfair.

          Tulsi keeps throwing around the word “transparency” when she goes on Hannity or Tucker Carlson. It’s one of those things like, “when did you stop beating your wife.” No amount of detail can refute the “lack of transparency” complaint, because “you’re not telling us what individuals (by name) were interviewed in the polls!!”

          Anyway, here are the poll results.

          And here are the rules:

          Qualified polls:

          The Associated Press, ABC News, CBS News, CNN, the Des Moines Register, Fox News, Monmouth University, NBC News, The New York Times, National Public Radio, Quinnipiac University, University of New Hampshire, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, the Washington Post, and Winthrop University.

          National polls by these organizations, plus early states: Iowa, NH, SC, Nevada

          Poll results between June 28-Oct 1.

      • One more thing, I heard that the Sept. 17th NBC/WSJ did not count, because the DNC went with the general count of 1% and not the registered voter count of 2%. Oh and, I just found the polls you posted on the Politico website. Damn, this is confusing!

      • One more thing, Tom Steyer (who I like somewhat), does not even show 1 single poll, other than 1 from the Economist, on the Politico website. Where in the hell is all this information located? Thanks again!

        • Steyer got 2% in the Sept 8 CBS Iowa poll, and 2% in the CBS Nevada poll. They’re supposed to be different pollsters, but they consider State polls as separate.

          Monmouth gave him 3% in Iowa August 8. I’m not sure what his fourth poll is.

          I don’t see his fourth one

          • Thanks, but that Real Clear Politics website is the exact one that I’ve been using, sorry, I said Politico, but I’m just so mad and frustrated at the DNC. Also, we were both partially right, because they do take into account all 50 States with their National polls, plus the 4 early state primary separate polling results.

            I also probably didn’t see Steyer at 2%, because I was only looking at the results of the National polls. I’ would have to use the individual drop down boxes for each of the 4 early primary states results. Thanks again!

Comments are closed.