Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 07-30-2019, 10:33 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,093
I thought both Beto and Amy were a bit...robotic.

For me, I went into this hoping for a solid night from Bullock. I got that. My rankings of tonight's debate, based on who my union uncle and union cousin from metro Detroit might vote for (both of whom voted for Obama, one voted for Trump, the other sat out 2016):

1. Bullock
2. Ryan
3. Beto
4. Mayor Pete
Everyone else...

Of those, I honestly don't see any of them winning the nomination, even though Bullock is someone I may be donating to in the next few days.

Onward to tomorrow!
  #52  
Old 07-30-2019, 10:40 PM
I Love Me, Vol. I's Avatar
I Love Me, Vol. I is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SF
Posts: 4,559
Is there any way to watch this debate? I just looked all over and can not find it. Anywhere. Does anyone have a link to the entire debate tonight?
  #53  
Old 07-30-2019, 10:46 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Love Me, Vol. I View Post
Is there any way to watch this debate? I just looked all over and can not find it. Anywhere. Does anyone have a link to the entire debate tonight?
Looks like CNN is rebroadcasting it in its entirety beginning at 11:00 p.m. PST, if that helps.

Last edited by Aspenglow; 07-30-2019 at 10:46 PM.
  #54  
Old 07-30-2019, 10:52 PM
I Love Me, Vol. I's Avatar
I Love Me, Vol. I is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SF
Posts: 4,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Looks like CNN is rebroadcasting it in its entirety beginning at 11:00 p.m. PST, if that helps.
Thanks. That's something anyway. It just seemed odd to me that I couldn't just stream it after the fact. Did NBC/MSNBC also embargo the re-airing of their debate until later?
  #55  
Old 07-30-2019, 11:07 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,921
I don't know. My limited rural internet bandwidth prevents me from streaming.
  #56  
Old 07-30-2019, 11:10 PM
sps49sd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocking chair View Post
Huh, here I thought the us was the only country that has used a preemptive nuclear strike. Twice!

What was all that about?
Those were not preemptive.
  #57  
Old 07-30-2019, 11:24 PM
sps49sd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 461
And why is Warren getting extra screen time? Can the rest of the field object, or is this just CNN trying to influence/ anoint?

Either way, she is much lower on my list now. UBC means I can only gift a family member with a firearm if I go to a FFL and pay them for the privilege. If there is not at least an exception for people one knoes, I will not vote for a candidate who wants to take away my rights.

Yes, I know the response this is likely to get; no, I'm not trolling.
  #58  
Old 07-30-2019, 11:35 PM
MyFootsZZZ is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,748
I'm pretty sure many/most Dopers now dislike/hate Bernie and/or Warren, but I would say they, collectively won the night. Or perhaps it's just because those are my dogs in the fight.

There were some goddamn stupid questions. Likinging Bernie Sanders to Trump who said he was against being 'the world police'.
  #59  
Old 07-30-2019, 11:44 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyFootsZZZ View Post
I'm pretty sure many/most Dopers now dislike/hate Bernie and/or Warren, but I would say they, collectively won the night. Or perhaps it's just because those are my dogs in the fight.
.

Reading the articles, yes Bernie did good.

Warren had a great line, but... reparations?

and how many were in favor of decriminalizing aliens?
  #60  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:04 AM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,774
Two things that annoy the shit out of me: when they talk about their upbringing and childhood and parents, and when they do that "I know this guy named Bob in Wisconsin" thing. Both of them I view as lame ass heart-string-tugging attempts that make them seem more fake instead of more real. Just tell me what you're going to do. Warren was particularly annoying with it this time but almost all candidates do it to a degree. Just stop.
  #61  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:08 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
I only saw the highlights, but both Sanders and Warren fought, and won.
  #62  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:18 AM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,774
I will say this, Swalwell knocked it out of the park tonight.
  #63  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:22 AM
Bullitt's Avatar
Bullitt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: SF Giants Nation
Posts: 25,650
A good debate with impressive performances. Each candidate had their separate positioning strategies (play it safe, or appeal to the middle, etc), but overall my top 3 in no particular order are Bullock, Delaney, and O’Rourke. Also good performances by Warren, Sanders, Klobuchar, and Ryan.

This was a good debate and I look forward to tomorrow’s.
  #64  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:43 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
Two things that annoy the shit out of me: when they talk about their upbringing and childhood and parents, and when they do that "I know this guy named Bob in Wisconsin" thing. Both of them I view as lame ass heart-string-tugging attempts that make them seem more fake instead of more real. Just tell me what you're going to do. Warren was particularly annoying with it this time but almost all candidates do it to a degree. Just stop.

I can understand why you find it annoying, but itís an important part of effective Democratic politics IMO. Blame Bill Clinton for elevating it to an art form.
  #65  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:45 AM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,774
I recall the GOP candidates indulging in it equally during the 2016 primary. Kasich comes to mind as being particularly annoying.
  #66  
Old 07-31-2019, 02:08 AM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,181
John Delaney was destroyed tonight, I have no idea who in their right mind would consider him having a good night, Warren and Sanders dominated the debate.
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #67  
Old 07-31-2019, 05:09 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Don’t be so sure. Nate Silver made an interesting point on the immediate post-debate 538 podcast. Right now taking away private insurance is about 12 points underwater, with roughly 43% of the public supporting it and 55% opposing. But if people see that quite a few Democrats are willing to criticize that move, it might go to something more like 25 points underwater, a real danger zone.

So that actually does somewhat justify Warren’s complaint that these are GOP talking points. In theory, if the party were unified behind single payer, it might help keep the issue close to being at least not super damaging politically. But of course the more moderate candidates are not under any obligation to help prop up Bernie and Warren at this point, especially since neither of them is a frontrunner.

And it cuts both ways: if everyone were supporting the same agenda, it would not provide those two as much of a lane to differentiate themselves and elevate their own campaigns.
  #68  
Old 07-31-2019, 06:34 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Donít be so sure. Nate Silver made an interesting point on the immediate post-debate 538 podcast. Right now taking away private insurance is about 12 points underwater, with roughly 43% of the public supporting it and 55% opposing. But if people see that quite a few Democrats are willing to criticize that move, it might go to something more like 25 points underwater, a real danger zone.

So that actually does somewhat justify Warrenís complaint that these are GOP talking points. In theory, if the party were unified behind single payer, it might help keep the issue close to being at least not super damaging politically. But of course the more moderate candidates are not under any obligation to help prop up Bernie and Warren at this point, especially since neither of them is a frontrunner.

And it cuts both ways: if everyone were supporting the same agenda, it would not provide those two as much of a lane to differentiate themselves and elevate their own campaigns.
Again, I didn't see the debate, only the highlights, but I had a similar thought as I was watching the responses by Bullock and other moderates. They may not have a snowball's chance in hell at the nomination, but they're making the case for Republicans on why Warren would be a problematic nominee.

This is one reason why I'm glad the Democratic party tightened up its requirements for future debates. Being a big tent is fine, but you don't want different factions having it out on national TV and weakening the front-runner, whether it's the progressives weakening a centrist or a centrist weakening a progressive.
  #69  
Old 07-31-2019, 06:49 AM
Shoeless's Avatar
Shoeless is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Sunflower State
Posts: 6,725
I've seen a lot of comments about the candidates, but not many about the debate format. I realize that with 10 candidates on stage you have to make sure they (mostly) get equal time, but the one minute time limit, especially with a 3 hour debate, was ridiculous. Just when a candidate would get to the meat of their response, the moderator would cut them off, often switch to a different candidate with a question like "Congressman, Senator Warren says you are a big doody-head. How would you respond to that?" It was incredibly frustrating, to the point where I'm not even sure if I will watch tonight.

Also, if they ever make a live-action Simpsons movie, that Delaney guy would be a perfect Homer.
__________________
I'm not black, but there's a whole lotsa times I wish I could say I'm not white. -- FZ
  #70  
Old 07-31-2019, 07:10 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Although I was glad they policed interruptions better than MSNBC did, I agree that the time limits were too short. They needed to let everyone have 15 or 30 seconds more and be content with fewer questions.

But I did like how they encouraged more back-and-forth to make it more of a debate rather than a joint appearance.
  #71  
Old 07-31-2019, 08:03 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dag Otto View Post
So a day after a mass shooting and CNN feels the need to air an ad, during the debates, for a movie about hunting humans? What the fuck is wrong with CNN?
When are they supposed to air it, then? Given how mass shootings occur so often in this country. And on gun control in the debate, we get the usual references to how background checks are evidently gonna solve all of our problems.
  #72  
Old 07-31-2019, 08:07 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoeless View Post
I realize that with 10 candidates on stage you have to make sure they (mostly) get equal time
No, you don't. People who are in the low single digits, or fractions, are there because they haven't shown they deserve any more attention than that. Air time should go mostly to the contenders. Why the hell did CNN let Delaney and Ryan and Williamson take so much time away from the real candidates, especially when it was only to disparage them?
  #73  
Old 07-31-2019, 08:17 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,035
In general, everyone was pretty impressive, each in their own way, even though I certainly don't agree with all of them. This is how debates should be. Reasonable, yet passionate discussions of the issues at hand, not performances, a la Harris in the last debate, where bluster is mistaken for competency.

I give the slightest of edges to Warren. Just one thing. I understand her need to have big, bold ideas, and I respect that and think it's the right path, but please for the love of God, drop the decriminalization of border crossing stance. Talk about dreamers and the truth of how immigrants are always a benefit to the country, and the like. The feel-good stuff. When you use the word "decriminalize", the unintended connotation is that some immigrants, even most, are criminals. Enough. Get elected, and then come back to that.
  #74  
Old 07-31-2019, 08:22 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Having had more time to watch the extended highlights, the candidates who passed the eye test were:

Williamson
Warren
Buttigieg

Note that I don't think Williamson gets to the next round of debates, but she came out feisty and got lots of applause, so she won in that sense.

Sanders looked tough, but last night was the first time where I really felt that he came across as a grouchy old man. His acuity is there, but he just seemed like angry gramps trying to find batteries for his TV remote.

If you look at Google Trends, FWIW, the names that seem to have been searched the most over the last 24 hours are:

Williamson
Delaney
Warren
Sanders

Others weren't too far behind but those candidates in particular seem to be getting the most attention.

Based on that triangulation, I'd say Williamson and Warren won the debate. They were the ones who seemed most ideologically in tune with their audience, who looked good on camera, who sounded like they were fighting for a cause, and who consequently are getting attention because of it. But whereas Williamson is probably just a spectacle candidate, Warren is for real. Thus, the real winner last night was Elizabeth Warren, IMO.

This of course is purely within the context of the Democratic primary; whether or not, Warren 'won' in the eyes of the centrist voters who would matter against Donald Trump is a completely different matter. I think Happy L's family might be a better barometer in that regard.

Last edited by asahi; 07-31-2019 at 08:24 AM.
  #75  
Old 07-31-2019, 08:30 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Sanders looked tough, but last night was the first time where I really felt that he came across as a grouchy old man. His acuity is there, but he just seemed like angry gramps trying to find batteries for his TV remote.

The first time? He always comes across like that to me.
  #76  
Old 07-31-2019, 08:33 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,126
Warren gets bonus points for shutting Delaney up, too.

The more I see of Buttigieg, the more I like. He's right to put the emphasis on how the Republicans have broken the government, and the concept of democracy itself, and that takes precedence over specific policy details that can be easily and soundbited by the lying opposition. Also, for the Democrats to seem like the party of energy and determination, they may not be able to afford to nominate a septuagenarian. You can't beat a dotard with another dotard.
  #77  
Old 07-31-2019, 08:49 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
The first time? He always comes across like that to me.
This was the first time where I thought, "Shit, let's go to the store and buy him some AAA batteries before he has a heart attack - and let's get some Depends while we're at it."
  #78  
Old 07-31-2019, 09:02 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Imagine a few years of being president and being over eighty rather than just pushing eighty.
  #79  
Old 07-31-2019, 09:11 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Warren gets bonus points for shutting Delaney up, too.
Whether it works with independents or not is one thing, but I felt the same way: she shut him down every time. Not in a nasty witch kinda way, but just like a courtroom lawyer would do, or the way a law professor would put down a smart-ass, know-it-all student.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
The more I see of Buttigieg, the more I like. He's right to put the emphasis on how the Republicans have broken the government, and the concept of democracy itself, and that takes precedence over specific policy details that can be easily and soundbited by the lying opposition. Also, for the Democrats to seem like the party of energy and determination, they may not be able to afford to nominate a septuagenarian. You can't beat a dotard with another dotard.
Buttigieg really handles himself well in debates. I'm just not sure if it really matters, unfortunately. Maybe he'll gain traction as other candidates drop out.
  #80  
Old 07-31-2019, 09:20 AM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,680
It will be interesting to see what happens as the field starts to narrow. Looking back to the 2016 Republicans whose field was almost as large. trump led most all the way. My expectation was that as conventional pol A dropped out that his support would go to conventional pol B. Didn't happen, trump gained support from every departure. Will that dynamic operate amongst the Dems as well?
  #81  
Old 07-31-2019, 09:23 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,430
What I take away from these debates is that it's much easier to run as a Republican than as a Democrat. Democrats have healthy debates about policy and whether these policies will work, while Republicans can run on mindless platitudes: "We're going to build a wall and Mexico will pay for it..... I'm going to pay off the national debt in four years.... I'm going to give you better insurance for less money and you're going to love it, buh-leeve me."

Bernie belongs in the Muppet Show balcony, not running for president. Republicans would eat him alive and spit out the bones. Beto, God love ya, yes you ran a good campaign in Texas but for fuck's sake, it's Texas. Fighting a lost cause and flapping your arms aren't qualifications for leading the free world. Go back and build up some gravitas. Bullock I think is an interesting dark horse. He looks like a president from central casting, he's won in a red state and he isn't going to alienate the swing state voters. If the goal is to beat the criminal in the White House, I think he and Biden are the best bets.
  #82  
Old 07-31-2019, 09:23 AM
Chefguy's Avatar
Chefguy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Portlandia
Posts: 42,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Reading the articles, yes Bernie did good.

Warren had a great line, but... reparations?

and how many were in favor of decriminalizing aliens?
The talk about reparations was very uncomfortable and seemed like pandering to a voting block to me. If we're going to seriously offer reparations for wrongs in this country, we need to first start with the original occupants, who have been relentlessly cheated, murdered and robbed throughout our history.

Sanders and Warren clearly "won" the debate, which is worrisome, as their agendas are not going to resonate with moderates and swing voters. That said, given the choice, I'd prefer Warren over Sanders.
  #83  
Old 07-31-2019, 10:00 AM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 15,979
I couldn't help thinking Williamson needs to be somewhere near the White House, just not in the Oval Office. She's definitely the most influential orator of the bunch. Beto seemed like he had trouble finding his words when had to follow one of her tirades--what he said was fine, but following her it just sounded hollow. Plus I didn't think he had a stellar night anyhow. Sanders, as usual, was right most of the time but I don't think anyone wants to have grampa yell at them for the next 4 years. I don't want to like Buttigieg but I'm having a hard time saying he wasn't the best balance on the stage last night.

Bullock, Delaney, and Ryan can hang it up now--they are what Republicans/conservatives should be. Hickenlooper has been a great mayor/governor and could make a fine, uniting POTUS. But he just doesn't have "it".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chefguy View Post
If we're going to seriously offer reparations for wrongs in this country, we need to first start with the original occupants, who have been relentlessly cheated, murdered and robbed throughout our history.
Totally worthy of its own thread, but a whole lotta this.^^^

Last edited by Inigo Montoya; 07-31-2019 at 10:01 AM.
  #84  
Old 07-31-2019, 10:05 AM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. •
Posts: 12,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I can understand why you find it annoying, but itís an important part of effective Democratic politics IMO. Blame Bill Clinton for elevating it to an art form.
None of these people do it as well as Clinton and they should just stop trying. It's a cheap ploy and offensive. Warren's insistence on trying got her laughed at. It doesn't work. It shouldn't work. Especially in a debate where they only have 60 seconds at a time.
  #85  
Old 07-31-2019, 10:31 AM
Shoeless's Avatar
Shoeless is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Sunflower State
Posts: 6,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
No, you don't. People who are in the low single digits, or fractions, are there because they haven't shown they deserve any more attention than that. Air time should go mostly to the contenders. Why the hell did CNN let Delaney and Ryan and Williamson take so much time away from the real candidates, especially when it was only to disparage them?
Actually, even though I don't think Williamson has a snowball's chance in hell, in both debates I think she has made some valid points that more mainstream candidates have avoided. I thought she was just going to be the crazy fringe "woo" candidate but I'd rather see her on stage than Delaney or Swalwell (who thankfully dropped out so we didn't have to listen to another round of his "next generation" blather.)
__________________
I'm not black, but there's a whole lotsa times I wish I could say I'm not white. -- FZ
  #86  
Old 07-31-2019, 10:35 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Imagine a few years of being president and being over eighty rather than just pushing eighty.
Bernie would be entering the White House at an older age than when Reagan left it.
  #87  
Old 07-31-2019, 10:59 AM
dropzone's Avatar
dropzone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 29,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I will say this, Swalwell knocked it out of the park tonight.
I saw what you did there.

As for Williamson, good VP material for controlling congressmen, but she makes me feel funny and I'm fidgeting in my seat. Women have had DILFs like JFK and Obama for presidents, but are we ready for a MILF? I'm not joking and I'm wondering what the fundamentalists (and their wives) would think.

Last edited by dropzone; 07-31-2019 at 11:01 AM.
  #88  
Old 07-31-2019, 11:04 AM
Oakminster is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Surefall Glade, Antonica
Posts: 19,098
CNN's coverage was ridiculous. They had a pregame show with a countdown clock to the start of the debate. Treating this silly, inconsequential non-event like it's the freaking Super Bowl, when it is really the political equivalent of early preseason football, featuring a bunch of scrubs that won't make the final roster.
  #89  
Old 07-31-2019, 11:11 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
Either way, she is much lower on my list now. UBC means I can only gift a family member with a firearm if I go to a FFL and pay them for the privilege. If there is not at least an exception for people one knoes, I will not vote for a candidate who wants to take away my rights.
Why is Warren lower on your list because of this issue? Universal background checks are an absolutely standard, near-universal talking point in Democratic politics. I don't know that any of the 20 candidates don't support them; even Steve Bullock flip-flopped when he started looking at running for president.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 07-31-2019 at 11:15 AM.
  #90  
Old 07-31-2019, 11:13 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
CNN's coverage was ridiculous. They had a pregame show with a countdown clock to the start of the debate. Treating this silly, inconsequential non-event like it's the freaking Super Bowl, when it is really the political equivalent of early preseason football, featuring a bunch of scrubs that won't make the final roster.
Hard for me to get excited about that. They've got to make a buck when they can, when you show a countdown clock it gives the impression that there's a big event coming up and they won't want to miss it. Just marketing. Don't want to see the clock? Put a throw pillow in front of that corner of the screen.

These debates aren't perfect, but I think the DNC handled the logistics of a large field better than the RNC did four years ago. Splitting them up by a draw is fairer than the Republican kids' table debates. Slowly ratcheting up the qualifications makes sense to me too. If you can't start to grow your support after two debates, then it's obvious that it just isn't going to happen for you.
  #91  
Old 07-31-2019, 11:22 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
I saw what you did there.

As for Williamson, good VP material for controlling congressmen, but she makes me feel funny and I'm fidgeting in my seat. Women have had DILFs like JFK and Obama for presidents, but are we ready for a MILF? I'm not joking and I'm wondering what the fundamentalists (and their wives) would think.
I'm trying to think of a non-insulting way of describing these comments but coming up dry. They're idiotic. A self help guru is not a good VP candidate. She can talk nice but no way should she be a heartbeat away from the presidency. But you're only objection is she might be too pretty for the fundies? What the fuck? You think if the woman VP candidate is plain enough the fundies are going to vote Dem?

Last edited by CarnalK; 07-31-2019 at 11:26 AM.
  #92  
Old 07-31-2019, 11:24 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
I agree once again with most of what BLD said (except for a hard disagree about Beto).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
None of these people do it as well as Clinton and they should just stop trying. It's a cheap ploy and offensive. Warren's insistence on trying got her laughed at. It doesn't work. It shouldn't work. Especially in a debate where they only have 60 seconds at a time.

Well, Warren is just terrible at it. One of the fundamental things she should understand is that these stories are about connecting with the audience, not scolding them (“It’s not funny!”).

Last edited by SlackerInc; 07-31-2019 at 11:25 AM.
  #93  
Old 07-31-2019, 11:28 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
But you're only objection is she might be too pretty for the fundies? What the fuck? You think if the woman VP candidate is plain enough the fundies are going to vote Dem?
:shrug: Sarah Palin. Just sayin'.
  #94  
Old 07-31-2019, 11:30 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,960
I don't get it.
  #95  
Old 07-31-2019, 11:49 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,126
The fundies don't object to pretty.
  #96  
Old 07-31-2019, 11:54 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
A self help guru is not a good VP candidate. She can talk nice but no way should she be a heartbeat away from the presidency.
From Wikipedia.


Quote:
Williamson describes herself as a "pretty straight-line progressive Democrat", supporting an increase of the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour, reducing income inequality, addressing climate change, and tackling student loan debt. She backs a "Medicare for All model", Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants without a "serious criminal background", and says that the U.S. needs to be an "honest broker" in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

She ranks climate change as "the greatest moral challenge of our generation" and backs the Green New Deal. She has called for the establishment of a Department of Peace to expand global diplomacy, mediation, and educational and economic development. She also voices support for stricter gun control, criminal justice reform, improving public education, free college tuition, and raising the top marginal tax rate to a point where high earners pay "their fair share of taxes". She describes her policies as a "renovation" of a "sociopathic economic system" focused on "short-term profit maximization".
Seems in line with a lot of other candidates. Why should she not be considered along with them? This is not a rhetorical question. I'd truly be interested in yours or others' thoughts. I myself don't know much about her.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 07-31-2019 at 11:57 AM.
  #97  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:05 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
CNN's coverage was ridiculous. They had a pregame show with a countdown clock to the start of the debate. Treating this silly, inconsequential non-event like it's the freaking Super Bowl, when it is really the political equivalent of early preseason football, featuring a bunch of scrubs that won't make the final roster.
WaPo's Erik Wemple posted a good YouTube clip that really takes CNN to task over their debate coverage, and it's hard to disagree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn-3uRrhc3s

Over the years, few networks have done more to treat politics like a football game and sensationalize the conflict than CNN. Few networks have done more to sensationalize politics than CNN period, and as much as we like to blame Fox News for all that's evil in the world, it's worth pointing out that CNN gave them a model to copy and adapt from.
  #98  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:10 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I can understand why you find it annoying, but itís an important part of effective Democratic politics IMO. Blame Bill Clinton for elevating it to an art form.
But nobody since Bill Clinton has done it without it being cringeworthy. Even when Gore tried it, SNL lampooned him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDgRRVpemLo

It starts at the 7:00 mark if you want to skip to the "I know this poor old lady" part.
  #99  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:12 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chefguy View Post
The talk about reparations was very uncomfortable and seemed like pandering to a voting block to me. If we're going to seriously offer reparations for wrongs in this country, we need to first start with the original occupants, who have been relentlessly cheated, murdered and robbed throughout our history.

Sanders and Warren clearly "won" the debate, which is worrisome, as their agendas are not going to resonate with moderates and swing voters. That said, given the choice, I'd prefer Warren over Sanders.
I don't see how Sanders won the debate. In fact I think the exchange between Hickenlooper and Sanders, though a bit juvenile, was reminiscent of Howard Dean's "Yeeeaaaaahhhh!!!!" moment. I don't think that was spontaneous either; I sense Hickenlooper set out to make Sanders look like "Crazy Bernie." Maybe Hickenlooper's this year's version of Chris Christie, who exited the race early but stayed long enough to make Marco Rubio look like Marco-bot.
  #100  
Old 07-31-2019, 12:13 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
not scolding them
Also known as speaking passionately, (as long as you have a Y chromosome).
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017