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.
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 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”.
Totally worthy of its own thread, but a whole lotta this.^^^
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.
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.)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
I agree once again with most of what BLD said (except for a hard disagree about Beto).
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!”). :smack:
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.
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.
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.
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.
