Democratic primary debates for 2020

[blastula]

4 down and 8 to go after tonight.

Here's rcp current polling average.



And here's Iowa.



Good luck to us all.

 

[blastula]

I like Warren a bit less after that, she couldn't give a straight answer to the raising taxes for her healthcare plan question. She was asked several times but danced around it every time. Just say it! instead of looking like some asshole political consultant spinmeister. On the other hand, Sanders admitted it right away. Point for Sanders. Heart attacks agree with him.

Good to see the others going after Warren, and I don't like how she handled it, mostly doing the answering a different question thing. I wish someone would challenge her on the Cherokee issue to see if she can cut it for the general where it would surely come up a lot. Doesn't have to be at a debate.

385 days to go.

 

[PyramidHead]

Firstly, the polls are meaningless right now because primaries aren't voted on at the national level. Probably the only one that could mean something is Iowa, or some of the other early states perhaps, but as you say it's still early.

Warren is being stress-tested now, and is displaying a tendency I picked up on in the past: when challenged, she talks about the details. I don't know if this strategy is going to fly with people other than policy wonks and upper-class technocrats. By comparison, Sanders argues from moral principles when pressed, which of course has its own advantages and disadvantages, but it's comprehensible to people in a way that contrasts the moral vacuum of Trump's presidency (and the proposals of most of the other Dem candidates, for that matter).

 

[Harry Bosch]

Firstly, the polls are meaningless right now because primaries aren't voted on at the national level. Probably the only one that could mean something is Iowa, or some of the other early states perhaps, but as you say it's still early.

Warren is being stress-tested now, and is displaying a tendency I picked up on in the past: when challenged, she talks about the details. I don't know if this strategy is going to fly with people other than policy wonks and upper-class technocrats. By comparison, Sanders argues from moral principles when pressed, which of course has its own advantages and disadvantages, but it's comprehensible to people in a way that contrasts the moral vacuum of Trump's presidency (and the proposals of most of the other Dem candidates, for that matter).

Polls are very important because many people voting in local primaries will vote based on perceived electability rather than personal likability.

 

[PyramidHead]

Firstly, the polls are meaningless right now because primaries aren't voted on at the national level. Probably the only one that could mean something is Iowa, or some of the other early states perhaps, but as you say it's still early.

Warren is being stress-tested now, and is displaying a tendency I picked up on in the past: when challenged, she talks about the details. I don't know if this strategy is going to fly with people other than policy wonks and upper-class technocrats. By comparison, Sanders argues from moral principles when pressed, which of course has its own advantages and disadvantages, but it's comprehensible to people in a way that contrasts the moral vacuum of Trump's presidency (and the proposals of most of the other Dem candidates, for that matter).

Polls are very important because many people voting in local primaries will vote based on perceived electability rather than personal likability.

Unfortunately that's true, which is depressing because electability should be determined in retrospect by who people vote for, not the other way around. That said, the national polling probably won't have as big an effect as the Iowa results will.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Harris: Gets sporadic applause for a comment and what does she do? Pauses and looks wide-eyed out at the audience like a dog waiting for her treat. This lady has character issues.
Yang: Still sounds like he’s translating information from the mothership. You’ll never perfect your Yang Human Interface.
Booker: Good speaker with little to say. Scolding other candidates for arguing and not focusing on Trump is a cheap tactic. It’s a debate. A little back and forth is expected.
Biden: I said it before and I am more sure of it now, he is not long for this race. He is in cognitive decline. This guy sounds worse than Trump, except with facts and stuff.
Bernie: Performed well enough but if someone starts calling you on your pie in the sky positions, you’re screwed. No way on God’s green earth this man gets a fraction of what he wants through any congress.
Warren: You do yourself no favor talking like a politician and like Bernie, unicorns fly out of her ass. Unlike Bernie, she is immensely knowledgeable on everything Bernie hates and would likely get rolled on. Elizabeth isn’t going to get rolled.
Buttigieg: Still my favorite. Pragmatic. Uniting. Knows he’s in line to pick up Old Uncle Joe’s faithful. Fine but he needs to publicly distance himself from corporate America.

 

[Treedbear]

I thought the debate was run extremely well. There were several broad topics and each candidate was asked to address some particular issue around it. Not all candidates were given the chance to respond on every topic though. It gave the candidate the opportunity to interact with the other candidates, as in a debate, while addressing specific concerns about their policies.

Here's my contemporaneous impressions of their responses. I tried to ignore the occasional criticisms of Trump and focus on how their policies differ from one another without injecting my own opinion. But there were a few times when that was all they had to offer and I took that as a sign of weakness on the issue. The only other general observations I have are that Sanders looked completely reinvigorated after his operation, which was a good thing. Biden gave solid responses except for his mis-speaking more often usual. Although he was quick to correct himself. Warren had the most energy of them all and was very convincingly a fighter.

1) On Trump impeachment.
Warren - Presented a very succinct view on why needed.
Sanders -Not as well laid out as Warren.
Biden - Cites lots of things that Trump did but no arguments.
Harris - Very good analysis of Trump’s actions. Comes down very hard on him.
Booker - Process needs to be fair. Seems to cast doubt on how it's proceeding.
Klobuchar - Unfocused, scattershot attack on Trump.
Castro - Unfocused and vague.
Buttigieg - Dismisses the importance of impeachment.
Gabbard - It's a mistake to try to impeach Trump.
Steyer – I was the first to call for it.
Yang - Trump isn't the problem. Job creation is.
O'Rourke - We owe it to America to impeach Trump.

2) Biden's son in Ukraine.
Biden - Deflects to talk on Trump and Giuliani. Proud of his son.
Sanders - Lists all the other problems that need to be addressed but doesn't comment on Biden.

3) The economy and their healthcare plans.
Warren - Healthcare cost will go up on the wealthy and down for the middle class. Must support the middle class.
Buttigieg - Warren doesn't explain how to pay for Medicare for all. Should have option to stay in existing plan.
Sanders - All out of pocket expenses are gone. Taxes will increase for everyone but will cost less than current plans. The health insurance and drug industries are crooked.
Klobuchar - Says Sanders is honest about costs and Warren isn't. Best idea is the ACA but with public option plus control drug costs.
Biden - Agrees with Klobuchar.
Harris – Talks about abortion rights and women's rights.

4) Jobs, automation, etc.
Sanders - Public works projects + infrastructure + fixing climate change.
Yang - $1000 per month and trickle-up economy.
Warren - Regulate multi-national corps. Place workers and union reps on BOD's. Strengthen social security.
Castro - Infrastructure and green new deal.
Yang - Deal with the problems caused by technology.
Gabbard - UBI a good idea. Fix bad trade deals. Having a job is not that important. (huh?)
Booker - $15 min wage better than $1000/mo. Fix bad trade deals. Stronger unions.
O'Rourke - Need better trade deals. Public education. Unions + apprenticeships.

5) Income inequality.
Sanders - Eliminate the billionaire class (in no uncertain terms).
Steyers - Wealth tax. Break power of corporations.
Biden - Don't demonize the wealthy. Raise capital gains tax. Raise taxes on wealthy and decease on poor. Attacks corporations.
Warren - Wealth tax. Income tax increases not enough. The wealthy owe it to us.
Buttigieg - For a wealth tax but nothing will convince voters because nothing ever changes.
Klobuchar - Repeal Trump tax breaks.
Harris - Tax credit for working families.
Yang - Wealth tax will fail as elsewhere. Need value added tax.
O'Rourke - Lift people up rather than pit people against each other with wealth tax.
Castro –Need a "wealth inequality tax."
Booker - Democrats should not be criticizing each other.

6) Foreign policy. Syria.
Biden - Turkey is the real problem. Would send troops back in to protect Kurds.
Gabbard - Slaughter of Kurds due to US efforts for regime change starting in 2011. End regime change wars and sanctions. Not willing to keep troops there indefinitely.
Warren - Get out of the middle east, but not like this. There is no military solution.
Buttigieg - Go into Syria to stop genocide. Gabbard is dead wrong. We betrayed our allies. Send small number of special forces. Need to keep our word. US credibility is paramount.
Klobuchar - Need to work with our ally Turkey. Continue humanitarian aid. Attacks Trump.
Harris - Attacks Trump.
Castro - Attacks Trump. Need stronger sanctions.
Booker - Attacks Trump.
Biden - Attacks Trump. Says Gabbard is wrong about regime change ever having been the goal. It was always to prevent killing of millions and to prevent ISIS from coming here.
O'Rourke - Work with allies against Putin. Negotiate rather than send troops.
Steyer - Work with allies to control Putin. Also fix climate change.
Yang - Retaliate against Putin if he continues to interfere in the US.
Klobuchar - Secure our elections. Control social media companies.

7) Gun violence.
O’Rourke – Somehow buy-back all assault rifles. Expects Americans to do the right thing.
Buttigieg – “We can’t wait.” The NRA is the problem.
Booker – Doesn’t know what to do. Not about leadership. Very scary.
Klobuchar – We have the opportunity to do something, but don’t blow it by being too aggressive.
Warren – Register assault rifles and charge a heavy fee, like we did for machine guns. It’s an illusion that we’re “so close” to a solution.
Harris – Will take executive action.
Biden - He’s beaten the NRA twice before. Take back exemption from gun makers of not being able to be sued.
Castro – Impractical to confiscate assault rifles. It would encourage police to violate people’s rights.

8) The opiod epidemic.
Klobuchar – Big pharma should be taxed to pay for treatment.
Steyer – Need more government resources.
Yang – Decriminalize possession of small amounts of opiods. Need more government resources. Open safe consumption sites.
O’Rourke – Agrees with Yang on decriminalizing. Hold big pharma responsible.
Harris – Send big pharma execs to jail.
Castro – Send big pharma execs to jail.
Sanders – It’s the result of “unfettered capitalism”.

9) The candidates health status.
Sanders – He feels good and is holding a big rally in NYC. (BTW he actually looks and sounds fine.)
Biden – The importance of acquired wisdom. Will release full health records plus tax records before Iowa.
Warren – Promises to out-work anyone else Dem or Repub. Wants to make real change.
Gabbard – Stays fit and has lots of experience in foreign affairs and national security.

10) Concerns about big tech companies.
Yang – Breaking up big tech won’t solve our problems. Need new solutions. Make data personal property.
Warren – Break up big tech companies. Amazon gets too powerful by collecting personal info. The problem is money in politics.
Steyer – Break up and regulate. Attacks Trump.
Booker – Need regulation and “reform”. Enforce anti-trust laws.
O’Rourke – Better rules and regs. Treat big tech like publishers. Don’t break them up simply as a matter of policy.
Sanders – Prosecute price fixing.
Harris – They should be held accountable (or was that behead the accountables?).
Klobuchar – Enforce regs and also break them up.
Castro – Crack down on monopolies.

11) Reproductive rights.
Harris – Prosecute states that violate the law. Abortion is totally a woman’s right.
Klobuchar – Make Roe v Wade the law of the land.
Booker – Create Office of Reproductive Freedom in the White House.
Gabbard – Codify Roe v Wade except for third trimester.
Biden – Codify Roe v Wade. Having the right to privacy is of primary importance.
Buttigieg – Place 15 judges on Supreme Court (but not in order to pack it).
Castro – Term limits on Supreme Court judges. Codify Roe v Wade.
Warren – There are many options for supporting Roe v Wade.

12) Short vision statement.
Biden – Level with people. Be specific.
Sanders – Have the guts to stand up to big corporations.
Warren – Dream big and fight hard. Many Americans are already in a fight everyday.
Buttigieg – Need to look past the fight.
Klobuchar – Need to rally the Dems so they can be winners.
Sanders – Need bold action. Not the status quo.
O’Rourke – Need grass roots work.

13) Cite an unconventional friendship.
Like when they asked Donald and Hillary to say something nice about each other. Blah, blah, blah.

 

[Treedbear]

Well. My own opinion is that it's about time the field got winnowed down. So I looked at the responses that seem to me to reveal some sign of weakness in terms of lack of knowledge or concern on the issues I think are paramount, and placed them all together by candidate in order to see which ones had the most going against them.

Booker -
On Trump impeachment: Process needs to be fair. Seems to cast doubt on how it's proceeding.
Income inequality: Democrats should not be criticizing each other.
Foreign policy. Syria: Attacks Trump.
Gun violence: Doesn’t know what to do. Not about leadership. Very scary.

Booker is clearly out of the mainstream on what's happening in Congress regarding the impeachment process. And he shows a lack of faith or confidence in the Democratic party at the moment. That seems to be how he assesses the other candidates as well. He seems to lack solid understanding of foreign affairs or at least what's happening with Syria. He lacks imagination about the gun violence dilemma or else he's just overwhelmed with it. Not inspiring at all.

Klobuchar -
On Trump impeachment: Unfocused, scattershot attack on Trump.
Foreign policy. Syria: Need to work with our ally Turkey. Continue humanitarian aid. Attacks Trump.
Short vision statement: Need to rally the Dems so they can be winners.

Substitutes an attack on Trump rather than ideas on how to deal with him. Same on the Syria situation. Her vision statement is more about what she needs to do as a candidate than what the nation needs to be concerned with. Just not much sustance in what she has to offer.

Castro -
On Trump impeachment: Unfocused and vague.
Foreign policy. Syria: Attacks Trump. Need stronger sanctions.

Little sign of concern for Syria situation or how to proceed with impeachment.

Buttigieg -
On Trump impeachment: Dismisses the importance of impeachment.
Reproductive rights: Place 15 judges on Supreme Court (but not in order to pack it).

Seems to have his head in the clouds on these two issues. Not grounded in reality.

Gabbard -
On Trump impeachment: It's a mistake to try to impeach Trump.
Jobs, automation, etc.: UBI a good idea. Fix bad trade deals. Having a job is not that important.

She swears she's not a Trump acolyte she seems to follow in his footsteps. She's not in touch with the voters if she thinks they don't need to have jobs.

Yang -
On Trump impeachment: Trump isn't the problem. Job creation is.
The opioid epidemic: Decriminalize possession of small amounts of opiods. Need more government resources. Open safe consumption sites.

He simply ignores the giant orangatan in the room. Decriminalizing opioids is not akin to decriminalizing marijuana. Crazy talk.

Harris –
The economy and their healthcare plans: Talks about abortion rights and women's rights.
Income inequality: Tax credit for working families.
Foreign policy. Syria: Attacks Trump.
Gun violence: Will take executive action.

Her concerns about healthcare or health insurance are apparently overwhelmed by those for abortion rights. Tax credits for working families are of relatively small effect to what is needed to fix income inequality. No ideas offered on fixing foreign policy. Brushed off the gun violence issue.

Sanders -
Income inequality: Eliminate the billionaire class (in no uncertain terms).
The opioid epidemic: It’s the result of “unfettered capitalism”.

I strongly supported Sanders until he had the heart attack, so I should consider going back to him now that he's shown an excellent recovery. At the debate he seemed even more alert than before along with being less gruff and glowering. But he seems to have taken a more aggressive stance on capitalism to the point of possibly using any means (eg, executive action) against the wealthy, big corporations, and maybe anyone else who stands in the way of unions. I can't imagine what "eliminate the billionaire class" could mean other than actual old-fashioned socialism.

O’Rourke –
Gun violence: Somehow buy-back all assault rifles. Expects Americans to do the right thing.
The opioid epidemic: Agrees with Yang on decriminalizing. Hold big pharma responsible.
Short vision statement: Need grass roots work.

The ""This is fucked up." statement he made on CNN was an indication that O'Rourke hasn't a clue on what to do next about gun control. He's stuck his head in the sand. The same with decriminalizing opioids. The presidency is not about doing grass roots work. This is not a deep thinker.

So my first appraisal is that Booker, Klobuchar, Castro, Harris, and O'Rourke lack the vision and essential knowledge required to compete aganst the others or for that matter with Trump in the general election. That leaves 7 who can still bring something to the next debate. Hopefully them to give more complete explanations of their views on issues.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

So my first appraisal is that Booker, Klobuchar, Castro, Harris, and O'Rourke lack the vision and essential knowledge required to compete aganst the others or for that matter with Trump in the general election. That leaves 7 who can still bring something to the next debate. Hopefully them to give more complete explanations of their views on issues.

I'm with you on cutting those 5. They all bring pretty much the same things to the table, or nothing to the table. I think those who keep in the race should be those who have something substantial and at least somewhat unique to offer. Tulsi and Yang do. Bernie does. Biden is the one to represent the establishment, with Buttigieg as his backup. Warren is the compromise candidate between Bernie and Biden. I'd also like to see Williamson back up on the stage just to make it more interesting, since she brings something so unique to it. So I'd have Biden, Buttigeig, Warren, Bernie, Tulsi, Yang and Williamson at the next debate were it up to me. All of them would add something watchable.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Biases laid out, I fully support Yang in this election, but I realize he has hardly a shadow of a chance of winning.

I was impressed with how Yang managed to get some of his issues front and centre in this debate. He actually got them talking about automation, UBI, etc. There is no way they would have had segments on these without his involvement. That's impressive for a guy who has never been in politics before and came out of nowhere. He's been quoted saying "I'll either win, or the other candidates will start sounding a lot like me". I think he's right and I look forward to more of it.

 

[fromderinside]

I like Warren a bit less after that, she couldn't give a straight answer to the raising taxes for her healthcare plan question.

So dancing around now includes "I won't sign a bill that increases taxes on the middle class" after she said that taxes would go don for the middle class.
Naw, You're not in someone's corner.

Sure you are. It's name starts with 'B'. Hows that for dancing around. Pretty good, eh.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I like Warren a bit less after that, she couldn't give a straight answer to the raising taxes for her healthcare plan question.

So dancing around now includes "I won't sign a bill that increases taxes on the middle class" after she said that taxes would go don for the middle class.
Naw, You're not in someone's corner.

Sure you are. It's name starts with 'B'. Hows that for dancing around. Pretty good, eh.

She did dance around. She's firmly keeping one foot in the establishment, while putting the other in with the progressives. She's straddling the line expertly. Biden is establishment. Bernie is progressive. Warren is the compromise candidate. Sadly, if she wins for that reason, she's also got a great chance of losing to Trump on the Pocahontas thing. I agree with whoever mentioned that above (sorry I can't remember who that was) that I would like to see her grilled on that in the primary to see how she handles it, because Trump will bash her over the head with it and it could be a knock out blow.

 

[blastula]

I like Warren a bit less after that, she couldn't give a straight answer to the raising taxes for her healthcare plan question.

So dancing around now includes "I won't sign a bill that increases taxes on the middle class" after she said that taxes would go don for the middle class.

She said she will not raise "costs," not taxes. She wants to lower overall costs even if taxes go up, but she won't say the word tax. I support her and her plan but I don't like the word games she's playing.

 

[Treedbear]

... Biden is the one to represent the establishment, with Buttigieg as his backup.

But what about his plans to add 6 more justices to the SCOTUS, but "not packing it"? Hmm?

... I'd also like to see Williamson back up on the stage just to make it more interesting, since she brings something so unique to it. ...

I think she would only side track the discussion with the promise of miracles if only Mitch McConnell will open his heart.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

... I'd also like to see Williamson back up on the stage just to make it more interesting, since she brings something so unique to it. ...

I think she would only side track the discussion with the promise of miracles if only Mitch McConnell will open his heart.

We could use more such moments of levity. Every election cycle should have a Williamson in it to bring some peace and love amongs all the bickering back and forth.

"Mr. Trump, you fight with hate and I fight with love. Love will win". That's what she said in the first debate.

How can you not want this on the debate stage? They can do a group hug at the end of every debate too. Beautiful stuff.

 

[Treedbear]

... I'd also like to see Williamson back up on the stage just to make it more interesting, since she brings something so unique to it. ...

I think she would only side track the discussion with the promise of miracles if only Mitch McConnell will open his heart.

We could use more such moments of levity. Every election cycle should have a Williamson in it to bring some peace and love amongs all the bickering back and forth.

"Mr. Trump, you fight with hate and I fight with love. Love will win". That's what she said in the first debate.

How can you not want this on the debate stage? They can do a group hug at the end of every debate too. Beautiful stuff.

I think if you really want to generate some heart-felt honesty they should have them all sitting down at a roundtable with their choice of beverage. After 2 or three hours we'd have a pretty good idea of where they stand and everyone goes home happy.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

We could use more such moments of levity. Every election cycle should have a Williamson in it to bring some peace and love amongs all the bickering back and forth.

"Mr. Trump, you fight with hate and I fight with love. Love will win". That's what she said in the first debate.

How can you not want this on the debate stage? They can do a group hug at the end of every debate too. Beautiful stuff.

I think if you really want to generate some heart-felt honesty they should have them all sitting down at a roundtable with their choice of beverage. After 2 or three hours we'd have a pretty good idea of where they stand and everyone goes home happy.

That would be SO MUCH BETTER than the debates as they now are.