Sanders lost. It wasn’t stolen. HE doesn’t peddle that fiction and those who do do Putin’s work.
Sanders might or might not have done better or horribly worse than HRC did in the general, I have my opinions and others have theirs, but if he had won he’d have at worst been an ineffective president, accomplishing nothing. But we’d still even in that worst case have two better judges on SCOTUS anyway. And a lot of Trump harms would never have been.
The vast majority of those on that debate stage would be decent as POTUS or better and likely able to beat Trump. IMHO some better on both counts than others. Critical analysis of who is best why is justified. Chicken Littling any of the top five or six is uncalled for though.
She should have done it four months ago. That’s the problem. Back then people were treating her as a serious top tier candidate but now her campaign is running out of battery. It carries less weight now than if she did it in July.
While I agree with your interpretations in this case, I’ll just point out that this is what Trump supporters have been doing for three years. “When he said X, clearly he meant (whatever is in the ballpark of X but less awful),” allowing everyone to construct their own version of reality. Republicans will create a different scenario for what Biden actually meant. I think at this point we need a president who is more in control of his or her words.
Boo hiss! I realize we can’t actually have a “debate,” but at least try for intelligent discussion!
I’m watching a rerun of the debate just now. Buttigieg was asked what he thought about military spending. This is a very important topic, and one on which the President will have much influence. If the U.S. is wasting Trillions (with a T) on its military priorities, shouldn’t we talk about it?
While Buttigieg was talking (and commenting that China was investing more in AI than the U.S.), Booker and Warren raised their hands. Good, I thought, at last interaction among the candidates on an important topic. Even if we don’t get the “right” answer, we’ll have a chance to gauge the caliber of thinking.
But the Moderators weren’t having it. They called a break; after the commercial: “Now we let Tulsi Gabbard give her prepared soundbites on racism.”
It just awful timing that the next debate will be so close to Christmas, people will be focusing on Frosty and Rudolph more than Bernie and Biden. It does look like the herd will finally be thinned, we will be down to 6 or 7 candidates likely.
It’s obvious the Harris campaign is bleeding money and I wouldn’t be shocked with a Friday news drop of suspending her campaign. I don’t know enough about Booker or Klobuchar’s campaign organizations to judge, but I know they didn’t bring on as much staff as Harris as she started off so strong plus wanted a focus on SC as well.
When the field thins out I’m hoping we get back to a debate format and less q and a.
Biden sounded better but he still fumbles and misspeaks, deer-in-headlights style, though less than before. Tulsi Gabbard is done, why is she still there? She should have dropped out already. Steyer is done too, unless he makes a Trump like turnaround in the 2015 primaries, but I doubt that. Cory Booker and Amy Klobuchar have good ideas and I want to see them go far, but it’ll be a challenge for them. I think Mayor Pete is a very strong and sound candidate, but does being the mayor of Indiana’s 4th largest city give one enough experience? I do like Buttigieg, yes.
I haven’t checked recent polling but I think Bernie, Warren, Biden, and Pete will be in the last four finally standing. Maybe add Kamala Harris for the last five.