I doubt this is unique to Warren, but -
Voters love the idea of a free lunch, and “don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree”, and sometimes it even gets politicians elected. But there is also the danger of
“The economy is doing great”.
Warren: “I have a plan to fix that!”
Regards,
Shodan
(Plus an explanation from Nate on how they conduct the averaging.)
I like Cory Booker, as I did Kamala Harris, but the idea that the Democratic debates absolutely must have a “person of color” in the late debates, regardless of their polling numbers, is kinda weak. Shit, I don’t even recall Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton pulling this shit.
Well, so much for me getting any work done today.
The Democrats may need a new debate location for Thursday. Loyola Marymount University, where the debate is scheduled to take place, is apparently having a union dispute involving dining staff, so naturally Bernie announced he was boycotting in solidarity and all the others have followed suit.
Also, I have to wonder if the DNC considered that Thursday evening is when millions of people will be lining up for midnight showings of Star Wars. Ratings for debates have declined throughout the year and I’d bet that trend will continue with this one.
Definitely not unique to Warren in a vaccuum, but generally a trait associated with typical politicians. It’s just more jarring when she does it because that’s not her brand.
The SJW class has gone from equality straight to openly advocating special treatment. It’s not that they don’t have reasoning for it(past discrimination leaves marginalized people at a disadvantage), and in the realm of politics, there just aren’t any really well qualified minorities. By necessity, they will almost all be fairly young and inexperienced and have electability concerns unless they have Obama-level charisma. But it’s still not a good way to think about democracy. The people have an absolute right to vote for whatever reason they feel like voting, and for whatever reason only the old white candidates and Buttigieg are really catching on.
There is a backlash against this from a lot of liberals.
Everyone from Barack Obama to David Chappelle have denounced their ideology.
We should not aspire to live in Mr. Bergeron’s world.
Don’t you hate when the art-supply stores have run out of every brush except the broad kind?
:dubious:
My rankings for tonight’s debate
Fewer people leads to a better debate, shock!
I thought Klobuchar was absolutely fantastic in taking the charge. She needed this. Went after Pete and got the better of him for experience and his nicely delivered but sometimes intentionally vague messaging. Highlighted the need not to create an us vs them theme and get caught in purity battles but to widen the tent.
Biden had a great debate too and proved there is still life in the old dog. Solid answers all round and strong rebuttals particularly to Sanders on healthcare.
Warren also got the better off Pete in my opinion. It seems he was a target going into this and while he did not necessarily do badly, the shiny glow he had in past debates vanished. He was now on the defense and to be honest saying that he’s the least wealthiest out of them all doesn’t sit right when he’s only been working for twelve years, mostly in public office. At the age of 37 he has experienced a more privileged upbringing and accumulation of power.
Wow. Takes all kinds of perspectives, I guess. My own is pretty different.
Pete: A-
Yang: B+
Sanders: B
Warren: C+
Biden: C-
Steyer: D
Klobuchar: F
I hate, despise, LOATHE Klobuchar’s manner. I’ve made no secret about disliking Warren’s and Biden’s as well, but at least in their cases they also have messages that they’re trying to stick to, however shakily. And I don’t get the impression that they’re arrogant people. Klobuchar I DO get a massive vibe of arrogance from, smugness, an utter lack of gravitas, a flippant mannerism, collossal self-entitlement and almost a delusionally inflated sense of her standing on that stage. She is an also-ran, yet she’s acting as if she’s won the goddamn race already. I cannot stand her.
Warren is becoming a little bit more endearing to me, but I still think her “sounds like she’s gonna cry” thing is a big weakness were she the nominee. I mean, come ON - after tonight’s performance you cannot tell me (as some have insisted) that this breaking-voice verge-of-tears phenomenon is all in my head. There were a few times near the end of the debate where I seriously, not hyperbolically, thought she was literally tearing up. It’s not an image of confidence. Nor was her apology for “getting worked up” - NO! Don’t apologize! That just makes it worse.
Yang had many, many good points (although I don’t know what he was on about in the part where he started talking about gender issues - he sounded confused.) But his answer to the first lead-off query about impeachment was DEAD ON and I wanted to reach through the screen and give him a high five.
Pete continues to be my #1 , and I think Klobuchar’s attack on him was the height of arrogance, low-class shit. She’s a joke. Pete is impressive as hell.
Sanders didn’t field the questions about race very well, and that’s a problem. He really needs to work on it. Other than that I think he was on point.
Biden - GO AWAY. Steyer - go have a bromance with Elon Musk, start a Formula 1 team or something, just get the hell out of this election, dude.
Here’s what Vox said:
winners:
Biden
Klobuchar
Losers:
Buttigieg
So I think Lamoral, you are letting your personal preferences over-ride what actually occurred. Boycotts ratings come close to what the pundits say.
Everyone agrees Biden did great (finally) and Klobuchar scored some good ones.
Pets did poorly tonite. Sorry. I love the guy, but he needs a national office and he needs America to get a little more mature before he can be president. Lets hope for 2028, eh?
I don’t think anyone got destroyed in tonight’s debate, but it’s clear that Buttigieg was the target for a lot of the debate field. I didn’t watch it all, but I thought he handled some of the incoming projectiles fairly well, such as the time when he pointed out that others, including Warren, had taken money from major contributors in the past and that it didn’t corrupt them.
I thought Andrew Yang and Tom Steyer both had potentially ‘breakout’ performances. Whether that’s actually true or not, time will tell. But I thought both of them cashed in on the opportunity to speak and present themselves. Yang sort of staked his claim to being the rebel of the field, which might impress some of those who were watching and searching for a candidate to fall in love with. Steyer established his anti-Trump and pro-climate bona fides.
I thought Biden did actually pretty well. He’s always got a target on his back, and I was surprised at how other candidates didn’t seem that interested in attacking him directly. I think Bernie did a time or two, but it didn’t seem to really rattle Biden that much. And speaking of Bernie, I thought he also probably did well enough to reassure those about his mental and physical health.
If there was a candidate who seemed weaker than previous occasions, I’d have to say it was Warren. She just didn’t seem to have nearly the same presence this time, and I find myself going back to something Lamoral pointed out a long time ago: her voice. She seemed too much like Sally Struthers last night.
Klobuchar did, well, okay in my view. I think she made some good points, and I’ve actually been hoping she would get more attention. I like a lot of what she says, but I wish she would stop talking about the Midwest so damn much. Like, okay, we get it: you’re from Middle America. You’re running for support in places like South Carolina and California, which ain’t farm country. Know your audience, Senator.
I had the TV on in the background, and watched lots of bits of the debate. I thought Yang and Klobuchar did well. Yang was on top of actual data, and is looking at the big picture. His comment about why there weren’t more people of color on stage was spot on. His concern about China’s utilizing technology to destroy freedom was spot on. And his riff on how we are all close to someone with “special needs”, and his plan addresses that, was really strong.
Klobuchar was the adult in the room.
But I have to admit, I really want to love Klobuchar. I really do like her platform. But the candidate just doesn’t light my fire.
I thought Buttigieg lost ground. He looked like he was going to lose his temper a couple of times. And yeah, of course a young man has less accumulated wealth than his elders. And he got bogged down in a basically petty argument. That exchange hurt Warren, too, imho.
Steyer? He’s a single-issue candidate. It’s certainly an important issue. But people who are starving don’t give a shit about next year. You have to address economics, too. On the other hand, I basically had zero idea who he was before the debate, so he didn’t lose any ground, because he didn’t have any ground to lose.
Biden? He seemed less ancient and out of it than in some prior debates. But he running on “more of the same”. I think he’s unaware of the structural issues the other candidates want to address, like climate change, voting rights (and manipulation thereof), the general concentration of power, and the changing economy. He’s be better than trump, of course, but I’d really prefer most of the others.
Bernie? Same old Bernie. He avoided a lot of the questions and just said what he wanted to say. I’m sure his base enjoyed his performance, but I doubt he picked up anyone new.
Yang was funny. I hadn’t realized that about him. He wins the “candidate I’d enjoy spending time with” by a long shot. I think he’s inexperienced and maybe has crazy ideas. I may support him anyway.
The NY Times ranked them this way, on a scale of 1-10:
Klobuchar 7.1
Sanders 7.1
Biden 7.0
Warren 6.7
Pete 6.6
Yang 6.3
Steyer 4.8
Focus group of one, my wife who does not pay too much attention to politics but always votes. First debate she watched at least most of.
Impressed with Klobuchar.
Annoyed by Warren. (“She reminds me a pixie, the way she talks and spreads fairy dust.”)
Disliked Steyer intensely.
Thinks Sanders is very likable but wouldn’t ever vote for him.
Buttigieg is too young.
Yang is likable but … no.
Biden, no Obama but he can beat Trump.
My impression was that Klobuchar did very well, much better than she has done before. Biden looked more like his younger self. I’m thinking Buttigieg will drop off some, Warren too but level off, Sanders hold steady, and both Biden and Klobuchar move up a wee tad. Steyer and Yang, don’t care.
And as for Klobuchar focusing on the Midwest? That is exactly what she should keep doing. First of all the primary is not a national election: she needs a solid performance in Iowa to pass into the next level. Second, her argument is electability: she has the experience; the proven track record of getting things done; the ability to win in the Midwest states and with the swingable voters that matter to the electoral win; and she is the age that most would like a president to be, not too young and inexperienced like mayor Pete and not as old as Warren, Sanders, and Biden. Warren had her swing and whiffed … she’s looking to be the second choice for if/when Biden finally really stumbles.
I used to look at debates in terms of who won on substance, but over the years I’ve realized that this is not at all what the debates are really about. And in terms of primary debates, it’s not even clear who’s watching them anyone. And these days, you also have to wonder if everyone’s watching the entire debate or just snippets - likely the latter, given all the digital distractions that the debates are competing with.
I’m sure the editors of Vox on the NYT enjoy their little academic exercise of analyzing the content and substance of the debate arguments and rebuttals, but ranking the winners and losers is a pointless exercise. Bottom line: for the candidates who are doing well, it’s about avoiding the Rick Perry “Oh shit, what a moron!” moment.
There were moments when Buttigieg and Warren looked uncomfortable, but I don’t think either of them slipped up so badly in this one debate that it’s a difference maker. I do think that since their ascent in the polls (Warren’s occurring earlier than Buttigieg), their campaigns as a whole have been pummeled and they’re finding out that it’s not easy to be near the top. Warren already started coming down to earth, and I suspect that Buttigieg will too, if he hasn’t already. But I doubt this one debate makes or breaks either candidate.
OTOH, if you’re lagging in the polls or people don’t know who you are (Klobuchar, Steyer, and Yang), then this is your chance to make a name for yourself with memorable one liners and some charm. I thought Klobuchar was strong on substance, which is probably why the NYT and Vox picked her as their winner. However, as superficial as this sounds, she came across as having a pretty bland Midwestern accent and seems like a pretty boring person to be around. I don’t see anyone being fired up by anything she said at all. Andrew Yang and Tom Steyer, OTOH, clearly have this TV thing down, regardless of what you think of their ideas and campaigns. I thought that they took advantage of this opportunity as well as any of the candidates.
Joe Biden, in some ways, may have come out the winner, a beneficiary of low expectations and concerns about his cognitive performance. I thought Joe was vintage Joe last night. A little feisty and he seemed to be more in command of his performance. I think fewer candidates helped him, and will continue to help him going forward because it enables him to focus on a narrower field and a narrower range of topics.
I agree that to the key voters substance is less important than impressions from moments, either strong ones or Perryesque d’ohs.
Again, just one person, but my wife was responding on those impressions and heard Klobuchar’s coming in as Warren and Buttigieg were bickering as a very strong one, a “preach it sister!” moment. No impression of blandness or being boring at all. (I think she would have gotten that impression in past debates though.)
I think the pundits are mostly right here. I think Buttigieg punched back decently enough, but that “wine cave” (and there are pictures of it online and it does look pretty damned fancy) thing is going to follow him around. Even Yang jumped onto that. I do think Klobuchar did well, and I think she had to go after Buttigieg a bit because Klobuchar wants to be in 2nd place in that moderate lane.
I get that “wine cave” is an annoying name for whatever that place is - and I did laugh when I saw a meme (posted by the Sanders campaign, not any of these other people) referencing it - but is nobody allowed to have fundraisers with rich people now? Are Democrats required to wear hairshirts and rattle a tin cup?