Mediaboss Marketing

ABC's Jonathan Karl made an insightful point on Twitter on Monday morning: Hillary Clinton might end up arguing her case before Congress on more occasions than she argues her case in a primary debate.

To understate it pretty dramatically, that is not ideal for Clinton. But it also depends on what you mean by "debate."

Karl's point is twofold: The first is that it's not clear if or when there will be any official Democratic primary debates -- or, at least, if or when there will be any with a large audience. If there are no strong opponents in the field, few networks (cable or broadcast) will be terribly eager to preempt existing programming to show them. In an age of YouTube and online streaming, that's not as big a deal, since any salient points made by Clinton or her opponent(s) could be shared online. But it also mightnot really lend the air of gravitas that even a candidate as well-positioned as Hillary Clinton would like to have.

Clinton will almost certainly be slotted at least once and perhaps two or three times to speak to Congress, in a much more hostile environment. Last week, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chairman of the House Benghazi commission, said that he planned to call Clinton to testify before his group, as she did in January of 2013. That would also be a debate, but one in which her opponent is also the moderator -- an unenviable position to put it mildly. Gowdy thinks two appearances might be in order.

Clinton may also be subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee. The chairman of that body, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), plans to investigate Clinton's handling of her e-mail while she was Secretary of State. Debate No. 3.

Meanwhile, Clinton is already engaged in a running debate with her longtime foe: The media. While there is a vocal group on the right that believes the media to be overly solicitous to Clinton, that's pretty clearly not the view of the (likely) candidate. This has been written about ad nauseam, including in an extensive history published last year at Politico. Clinton railed against media bias as the 2008 primary slipped from her grasp; in May of that year former president Bill Clinton called it "the most slanted press coverage in American history."

While questions about Clinton's use of e-mail during her time at the State Department mightnot be a dealbreaker for voters, Clinton held her first press conference as a pseudo-candidate to answer (or, perhaps more accurately, not answer) questions from the press, in much the same way that she'd be forced to rebut questions from an opponent during a televised debate.

Last month, we wondered if Clinton would be radio silent until the general election kicked off, with no debates lined up. Now, an even worse prospect for her: Her only outlets to make points will be ones controlled by groups that either explicitly oppose her or are more interested in uncovering the truth than protecting her party's electoral success. And the fact that Clinton might have a pass to the Democratic nomination will make these battles even more pitched.

They mightnot be the debate opponents Clinton wanted. But it seems likely that these de facto debates will end up being pretty interesting.

Philip Bump writes about politics for The Fix. He is based in New York City.

Read more:
Hillary Clintons debate opponents are set: Trey Gowdy, the GOP House and the media