# 13 October 2015 Democratic debate (for commentary during & after) **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 14, 2015, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593 "2015-10-14T00:20:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2015, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/241 "2015-10-15T22:39:21Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > I noted that none of them went near the notion of having colleges scale back on the millions of dollars spent on athletic programs. Coaches make far more than professors, stadiums cost a fortune to build and maintain, teams travel all over the country; if that money was used to offset tuition, the country would be in far better shape. But I know that football has become a national obsession, and that sports is a sacred cow that no politician wants to gore. Football programs are by far a net income generator for most major colleges. Not only do they pay for the salaries, travel, and stadiums, but the money pays for other sports that do not make money. I’m all for reductions in higher education, but don’t start with things that are money-makers. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2015, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/242 "2015-10-15T23:00:10Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Football programs are by far a net income generator for most major colleges. Not only do they pay for the salaries, travel, and stadiums, but the money pays for other sports that do not make money. I’m all for reductions in higher education, but don’t start with things that are money-makers. [Only 20 colleges make a profit.](http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2014/dec/22/jim-moran/moran-says-only-20-colleges-make-profit-sports/) > [@](#): > > According to the report, all athletic departments outside of the FBS operate in the red. In other words, only 20 of the 1,083 college sports programs in the nation are profitable. [Is College Football Profitable for Universities?](http://www.ethosreview.org/intellectual-spaces/is-college-football-profitable/) > [@](#): > > That means that while these big-time teams generate millions of dollars of revenue, the cost of running such programs usually exceeds that revenue. To put that more starkly, even within the so-called top tier, 82% of college football teams actually take away money from the university’s budget, rather than generate net revenue. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2015, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/243 "2015-10-15T23:06:28Z")
> [@GrandWino](#): > > How many republicans do you think tuned in to hear Hillary and Bernie discuss the issues? How many democrats do you think tuned in to see what Trump was gonna get up to? > > One of these numbers is a lot higher than the other. Viewers doesn’t equate to people agreeing with what they’re seeing. OK, the Democrat debate came in third in terms of overall viewers, but it’s not their fault. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2015, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/244 "2015-10-15T23:26:14Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > “More” Americans seem to be “more” interested in what the GOP candidates had to say. Many have pointed out the absurdity of comparing the ratings of a clown show wit that of a political debate (Do Not Taunt even taunted you about it) but I had already suggested a remedy and been ignored: The DNC/CNN could have invited Donald Trump to their debate. 😃 🆒 :eek: :eek: :smack: ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2015, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/245 "2015-10-15T23:54:39Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > …The DNC/CNN could have invited Donald Trump to their debate. 😃 🆒 :eek: :eek: :smack: At the beginning of the show, CNN personal mentioned Trump several times. Probably just to boost their ratings. CNN also mentioned Ben Carson and showed the empty podium they had ready just in case Biden made an appearance. It’s not like CNN didn’t try to inject a little Trump into their debate. ---
**Author:** ![Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slow_moving_vehicle/32/291_2.png) [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slow_Moving_Vehicle)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/246 "2015-10-16T00:00:46Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > Never mind that he basically agrees with the Democratic Party on everything except guns and race-based affirmative action and has advocated prison reform since 2009. :rolleyes::rolleyes: Oh, I know. And I’m not going to dismiss him or even judge him, based on just one debate. But his comments on affirmative action and being “where the Democratic Party has traditionally been” made him sound like an old fashioned Zell Miller-style southern Democrat. He definitely seemed like his place on the far right of the stage was not accidental. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/247 "2015-10-16T00:06:17Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I’ve been talking about the number of viewers. So far, during the 2015 campaigning season, there have been three (3) presidential political debates. Both of the GOP debates drew more viewers than the DNC debate. The GOP debates are in first (1st) and second (2nd) place. The DNC debate is in third (3rd) place. Some people might consider that to be last place. It’s last place in a completely irrelevant metric. > [@](#): > > If people are interested in hearing what the candidates actually have to say, it’s not unreasonable to believe that viewers would actually tune in to hear what the candidates actually have to say. I watched both Republican debates, and not the Democratic debate. I can assure you this was not out of greater interest in Republicans’ ideas. ---
**Author:** ![Ulf\_the\_Unwashed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Ulf\_the\_Unwashed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ulf_the_Unwashed)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/248 "2015-10-16T00:14:19Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I’ve never heard of the “Peggy Noonan fallacy”? Who made up that term? I don’t know where it comes from. I don’t _think_ I made it up. If you’re not familiar with the blog post/column that it refers to, you can find it here: [http://blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2012/11/05/monday-morning/](http://blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2012/11/05/monday-morning/) Noonan was certainly not the only pundit who thought Romney would win, but her piece gained particular notoriety. I know Nate Silver has referred to it on a number of occasions…The article sort of stands as the poster child for the problems that arise when you look very hard–in the wrong places–for clues about how a political race will come out. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/249 "2015-10-16T01:06:29Z")
> [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](#): > > Oh, I know. And I’m not going to dismiss him or even judge him, based on just one debate. But his comments on affirmative action and being “where the Democratic Party has traditionally been” made him sound like an old fashioned Zell Miller-style southern Democrat. He definitely seemed like his place on the far right of the stage was not accidental. That’s as silly as thinking Pataki’s some sort of a flaming liberal because he supports gay marriage and legalized abortion and that of course ignores ignores that everything else Webb said on the platform. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/250 "2015-10-16T01:47:04Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > OK, the Democrat debate came in third in terms of overall viewers, but it’s not their fault. I’d be willing to bet that far more Democrats have already made up their mind. ---
**Author:** ![Andiethewestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Andiethewestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andiethewestie)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/251 "2015-10-16T01:52:50Z")
> [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](#): > > It’s last place in a completely irrelevant metric. > > I watched both Republican debates, and not the Democratic debate. I can assure you this was not out of greater interest in Republicans’ ideas. No doubt, it’s like watching a car accident, it’s horrifying but you can’t look away. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/252 "2015-10-16T04:14:42Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > …Since the Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 elections and Republicans haven’t won a legitimate election since 1956, I’m not worried about the ratings for the debates. Since _1956_? As a fellow Democrat, I would be very interested in your explanation of this. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/253 "2015-10-16T04:31:44Z")
I suspect it’s something like: '68 Nixon falsely claimed to have a secret plan to end the war, and won a squeaker. '72 Nixon was up to all kinds of dirtiness. '80 Reagan stole Carter’s debate prep book, and engaged in some fishy stuff with the Iranians to delay the hostage release. '84 Reagan covered up his Alzheimer’s, maybe? '88 Not sure about this one. Bush played some scummy McCarthyist politics with his flag factory and “card-carrying member of the ACLU” but politics ain’t beanbag. '00 No explanation needed. '04 Not sure about this one either. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/254 "2015-10-16T04:33:58Z")
I thought Sanders was the clearest and most straightforward. His language doesn’t seem to include ‘escape hatches’ like Hillary’s sometimes does, but rather seeks to define concretely the problems of income inequality, or a race-slanted justice system, or the risk we face from monster banks, along with plenty of anecdotes of him championing these various causes throughout his career. I think if he were elected POTUS and if both houses of Congress went blue we _still_ wouldn’t see all of his proposals enacted, but I like where his focus is at. Hillary definitely looked good. She was confident and comfortable, as always a little phony yet more relatable this time than on other occasions. Her game of hogging all the camera time like she was William Shatner was an act of political skill and cunning. She seemed like a lucid and polished politician with lots of good positions, some of which may turn out to be less than expected due to the fine print. I thought Webb was the most interesting of the also-rans. Griping about his face time was a bit of a blunder, but OTOH he was getting shorted and fought for his chance. I think he is in the running for “gruffest US president”. I am leery of a military guy for POTUS, but in this case the military experience seems to have turned him into a disciplined and productive guy who has had a very successful and wide-ranging career. I think we could have a “gruff president”; I could picture this guy wielding power and exhibiting that longed-for quality of “leadership”, but need to take another look at his positions. O’Malley was allright. I enjoyed his clever modulation of his Irish accent, there for effect one second and then gone in a flash. I guess I don’t agree with his “100% clean energy grid by 2050” idea. Don’t get me wrong, I think clean energy is a top global priority. However, I expect fossil fuels to remain too convenient to eliminate altogether. And what about places like Alaska, or Maine? Can they still burn a little natural gas if overall fossil fuel consumption is reduced 75-85%? I think so. O’Malley didn’t come across as incompetent or anything, but he didn’t really grab my attention either. I’m not sure why not- I don’t know him any worse than Webb, but he just didn’t seem to stand out somehow. I cannot imagine Chaffee as president. He repeatedly seemed silly to me, which is the opposite of gravitas. Everyone else could at least clear the gravitas bar. Overall, it does seem like Sanders is changing the entire conversation, if not necessarily winning the election. I like the positions the dems are taking overall. I agree with the poster who said the winner was the Democratic Party. They express much more vision, will and insight than the GOP into what will move this country forward. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/255 "2015-10-16T04:46:33Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That’s what you elect your Congressman for. A President does need to have domestic focus, I agree, but that focus is should be less on new ideas and more on how to make the government work. Sanders does have experience and a record on that, so that’s all peachy. O’Malley of course stands head and shoulders above all of them. I think there is a place for new ideas. Especially when the old ideas are, “cut taxes no matter what, especially for the wealthiest.” Can you provide some detail for how O’Malley is the best at making government work? He did bring up points from his resume, but to me it didn’t have the same punch as when Clinton or Sanders (or Webb) did it. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/256 "2015-10-16T05:10:44Z")
O’Malley has by far the most executive experience, and while not always popular he did accomplish the objectives he set out to accomplish, which demonstrates executive competence. As I mentioned before, he also is really into data driven governance, which I’m sure warms Nate Silver’s heart. There’s a ton of writing on O’Malley’s Maryland adminstration in the wonkier parts of the internet, but it’s an extremely important story that the media just isn’t all that interested in. But all the candidates from both parties should be spending a lot of time learning about this if they actually want to be good executives: [http://beyondtransparency.org/chapters/part-4/why-data-must-drive-decisions-in-government/](http://beyondtransparency.org/chapters/part-4/why-data-must-drive-decisions-in-government/) ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/257 "2015-10-16T06:26:59Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > I suspect it’s something like: > > '68 Nixon falsely claimed to have a secret plan to end the war, and won a squeaker. > '72 Nixon was up to all kinds of dirtiness. > '80 Reagan stole Carter’s debate prep book, and engaged in some fishy stuff with the Iranians to delay the hostage release. > '84 Reagan covered up his Alzheimer’s, maybe? > '88 Not sure about this one. Bush played some scummy McCarthyist politics with his flag factory and “card-carrying member of the ACLU” but politics ain’t beanbag. > '00 No explanation needed. > '04 Not sure about this one either. I agree that '84 and '88 don’t belong; and I’d certainly include '60 (with GOP victim instead of fraudster) before '68 or even '80. But the 2004 fraud is very firm. Kerry would definitely have won without the Swiftboat lies, and GWB still needed multiple frauds to win Ohio, which swung the electoral vote. Moreover, America would have surely rejected this hapless incompetent if it hadn’t been put on a war-footing due to the felonious treasons and perjuries of Dick Cheney, et al. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/258 "2015-10-16T11:46:40Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > Since _1956_? As a fellow Democrat, I would be very interested in your explanation of this. It’s well known that Richard Nixon [committed treason](http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21768668) to get the South Vietnamese to withdraw from peace talks with the North until after the election. > [@](#): > > In late October 1968 there were major concessions from Hanoi which promised to allow meaningful talks to get underway in Paris - concessions that would justify Johnson calling for a complete bombing halt of North Vietnam. This was exactly what Nixon feared. > > The US delegation, left, and North Vietnamese delegation at Paris peace talks > Image caption > The Paris peace talks may have ended years earlier, if it had not been for Nixon’s subterfuge > > Chennault was despatched to the South Vietnamese embassy with a clear message: the South Vietnamese government should withdraw from the talks, refuse to deal with Johnson, and if Nixon was elected, they would get a much better deal. > > So on the eve of his planned announcement of a halt to the bombing, Johnson learned the South Vietnamese were pulling out. Since the 1968 election was effectively stolen, Nixon’s 1972 resteal was tainted even without the Watergate crimes. Since treason worked so well in 1968, [Reagan did the same with Iran in 1980.](http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/20287-without-reagans-treason-iran-would-not-be-a-problem) > [@](#): > > Carter was confident that with Bani-Sadr’s help, he could end the embarrassing hostage crisis that had been a thorn in his political side ever since it began in November of 1979. > But Carter underestimated the lengths his opponent in the 1980 Presidential election, California Governor Ronald Reagan, would go to screw him over. > > Behind Carter’s back, the Reagan campaign worked out a deal with the leader of Iran’s radical faction - Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini - to keep the hostages in captivity until after the 1980 Presidential election. > > This was nothing short of treason. The Reagan campaign’s secret negotiations with Khomeini - the so-called “October Surprise” - sabotaged Carter and Bani-Sadr’s attempts to free the hostages. And as Bani-Sadr told The Christian Science Monitor in March of this year, they most certainly “tipped the results of the [1980] election in Reagan’s favor.” Since Reagan won in 1980 only by committing treason, he would not have had the opportunity to run as the incumbent in 1984 without said treason. And George HW Bush would not have been able to run as the incumbent vice president in 1988, negating his election credibility as well. Jump to 2000, and a bad ballot design in Florida, having the Bush campaign cheerleader in charge of the state election in Florida, and the utter joke that the Supreme Court has become all came together in a perfect storm to deny the White House to Al Gore. That would have stained Bush’s “re-election” in 2004 even without the voter suppression and other irregularities in Ohio in that year. To sum up, no legitimate Republican victories since Ike in 1956. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/259 "2015-10-16T12:08:53Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > To sum up, no legitimate Republican victories since Ike in 1956. Much of this is pretty silly stuff. Reagan and GHW Bush were far superior politicians, in terms of winning elections, then their opponents, and that’s the main reason they won. Even if you think '80 was “stolen” (and I don’t), '84 and '88 were definitely not – Reagan stomped Mondale, and Bush stomped Dukakis. They used the Southern Strategy (especially in '88 with Willie Horton), but it was real politics, and our candidates lost. This kind of nonsense is counter-productive, in my view. Republicans legitimately won elections – GHW Bush wasn’t even that bad of a president, in my view. The Southern Strategy exploited racism and was wrong, but the Republican party didn’t start to go nuts until the 90s, and didn’t go totally off the rocker until Obama was elected. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593/260 "2015-10-16T12:14:26Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Much of this is pretty silly stuff. Reagan and GHW Bush were far superior politicians, in terms of winning elections, then their opponents, and that’s the main reason they won. Even if you think '80 was “stolen” (and I don’t), '84 and '88 were definitely not – Reagan stomped Mondale, and Bush stomped Dukakis. They used the Southern Strategy (especially in '88 with Willie Horton), but it was real politics, and our candidates lost. > > This kind of nonsense is counter-productive, in my view. Republicans legitimately won elections – GHW Bush wasn’t even that bad of a president, in my view. The Southern Strategy exploited racism and was wrong, but the Republican party didn’t start to go nuts until the 90s, and didn’t go totally off the rocker until Obama was elected. We all have our own opinions, I happen to think that a presidential candidate that interferes with negotiations to get hostages released in order to win an election is a criminal and should be in the big house, not the White House. Take away that act of treason, he doesn’t win in 1980 and Mondale runs in 1984 as the two time incumbent vice president, from then on is conjecture. I don’t think it’s counter productive at all. Republicans indulge in this fantasy that the US is predisposed to elect Republicans, but in 2016 it will be 60 years since one was elected without some type of criminal activity. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-october-2015-democratic-debate-for-commentary-during-after/734593.md?page=14)