I didn’t watch last night because I couldn’t find an over-the-air broadcast. Anyway, I’d be happy if the Democrats didn’t have another debate until the candidates have been whittled down to 4 or so.
That was exactly my thought last night. Her hair wavers, like she is barely controlling herself sitting still, almost teary eyed, and it gets rather scary looking at it for a long period, like a rabid dog.
And how should we go about that other than by pitting them against each other?
Normal campaign stuff? It’s not like the debates literally whittle down the numbers. People run out of money or give up.
Whatever man, I’m still waiting for you to give back the highlights that you stole.
She had a great night in my opinion.
If people want a younger, more vibrant moderate than Biden then she’s a strong contender.
Exactly. She is a natural to be on the ticket if anyone but Biden gets the nod.
My analysis, for what it’s worth. Winners (starting with the winning-est):
Mayor Pete - Intelligent, thoughtful, says relevant things.
Bernie - I really hope he isn’t the nominee, but he’s smart and witty and says things that need to be said. A truly impressive person
Cory Booker - Didn’t knock it out of the park like he has in the past, but still a breath of fresh air. Charismatic and intelligent. Would absolutely massacre Donald Trump on a debate stage
Steyer - No idea who he was coming into this, but I was pleasantly surprised and impressed. But… hard to imagine him gaining traction
Middling:
Warren - As others have pointed out, didn’t really deal well with being front-runner. Yes, the taxes-vs-costs thing is bullshit, but you should have a better answer for it
Castro - Nothing wrong with his performance, but he needs to start standing out and fast if he’s going to go anywhere
Yang - After all the buzz he’s been getting online, I was hoping for him to really grab me. And he was OK, didn’t do anything wrong, had a few interesting takes, but certainly didn’t blow me away
Losers:
Klobuchar - Lots of people seem to think she was great… have no idea what they saw at all. She was mostly a non-entity, but has a weirdly grating presence. Actually anti-charismatic
Biden - Too many fumbling misstatements, too much riding of Obama’s coattails
Harris - Same as before, she just seems like a rehearsed and phony politician. That’s not how you beat Trump
Loserest Losers:
Gabbard - WTF are you doing repeating “regime change war” over and over again and trying to get people to lock into a single simple position on the incredibly complicated situation in Syria? That’s some serious BS right there
O’Rourke - Stop badgering the grownups. Stop bragging about an election that you LOST
Anyone else I forgot - If I forgot them, there’s a reason for it
That’s how I’ve felt all four times. I’d always heard good things, I saw her occasionally on cable news and she seemed perfectly fine there, etc. She blasts her opponents to smithereens in Minnesota so she must have something going on but it has completely eludes me in this setting. I don’t know if she’s getting bad advice, or if she’s just trying to rise past her level of competence or something.
Count me among those who find Klobuchar to be grating and off-putting. Plus, I keep imagining her eating her salad with a comb, which is just bizarre.
She likes to boast that she won Michelle Bachman’s district 3 times. I think that just shows how batshit that district really is.
…
Meanwhile, anybody else agree that the best parties are going to be at Yang’s house?
“Take off your tie! Here’s some money! I don’t care if you do heroin! I like math!”
Hey, if you’re going to have a fake name why not a memorable one?
I’m not entirely sure what people saw in Klobuchar either. But, contrary to others, I don’t think Buttigieg was all that great either - unless he was auditioning as Biden’s VP. He used to seem far more into a massive structural change (in how our government works, not necessarily in terms of programs) and now he’s talking about how others are going to practically get things done? While also talking about how we can drastically change the Supreme Court (regardless of how he can avoid a Constitutional amendment).
I do think Warren should have explained more costs v. taxes, but I also know she was trying to avoid a potential GOP attack ad. I think she could have said it without saying the words “middle class taxes will go up” in a nicely packaged soundbite.
I think Booker did well. But for all the uplifting things he says, it doesn’t really help him in the polls any.
Harris started off well, but her gambit to try to push Warren to say Trump should be banned by Twitter was bizarre. That’s your big attack?!
Biden was Biden.
Yang and Beto and Castro were mostly forgettable.
Steyer and Gabbard can go now.
I actually though Sanders won the debate. People feared his health and he gave his best debate of this year.
Pete could work as Veep. Harris numbers are so low, she has no chance (Pundits have guessed she is running for Veep). Nor does Pete, actually.
It’s annoying when people throw around the word “passionate”. As in, I’m really passionate about meat loaf. :rolleyes: 
Last night though, you could literally see Klobuchar trembling with passion. Oh, if Hillary could have displayed such emotion, along with reasonable arguments like K. had last night. She won, with Buttigieg slightly behind.
I think of this in terms of the Far Side comic with the dog hearing, “blah blah blah blah, Rover, blah blah, Rover…”, no matter what his master is saying. If you make the argument that you are going to raise taxes, but don’t worry, the savings in insurance costs will offset this, some voters are only going to hear the part about the raising of taxes. Better just to brush if off.
Sometimes. But sometimes it looks evasive. I didn’t watch, I’ll look at some clips later, but you can defend it while still bringing up taxes. Imho, you attack it head on. “Right now we all pay taxes and premiums for healthcare in this country. Any rises in taxes with my plan will be accompanied by bigger decreases in premiums. Out of pocket, you will be ahead”.
Possibly, though it was echoing criticisms she has been making about Warren. In any case it was a comedic visual.
I have 100% confidence in Gabbard to draw down troop levels quicker and better than Trump and anyone on that stage.
Well Warren makes a big deal about breaking up facebook? Going after Zuckerburg. Twitter must be fair game too unless her agenda is economic punishment…punitive as Beto said.
I think its worth noting Harris along with Biden, Booker and Steyer received packages containing pipe bombs by a deranged Trump supporter who drove around in a truck full of hateful pro-Trump anti-Democrat images and whose twitter was a cesspit of hate and threats. Trump’s twitter account encourages that with his postings.
Twitter is worth $4.4b while Facebook is worth $68b. If you are for breaking up the big companies under anti-trust (along with Google and Amazon), I’m thinking going after the one worth less than $5b would be far more punitive.
I think it’s amusing the folks who find Klobuchar’s voice mannerisms annoying. I hear exactly the same thing in Warren’s voice mannerisms. She comes across to me as almost wheedling, entreating. I don’t hold it against either one of them.
We could easily excoriate nearly all the candidates for their tics: Bernie’s “I wrote the damn bill!”; Biden’s “I’m going to beat him like a drum!”; O’Rourke’s arm waving; Harris’s tendency to talk ‘down home’; Yang’s body movements that make me wonder if he has a big key in his back, etc.
I just don’t care about this superficial stuff. I’m interested in their policies and to what extent they are qualified for the job.