It was messy, but it managed not to be a train wreck, and some things were clarified. I’ve been browsing through opinion pieces on the debate, and no two people agree who the winners and losers were. What I think, from worst to best:
Tim Ryan and John Delaney should not have been there, and I fervently hope they drop out before the next round of debates in July so they don’t continue to waste space. Delaney especially must have realized he had a problem when he expressed support for Nancy Pelosi’s opposition to impeachment and the crowd, which had been cheering a lot, was silent.
Beto O’Rourke needs to re-think his decision to run for president instead of for John Cornyn’s Senate seat. And he needs to do that really soon, because as a presidential candidate his image is deflating like a leaking balloon.
A lot of commenters want Jay Inslee to drop out, but I don’t mind him staying in a bit longer to keep reminding us that climate change is the paramount issue we’re not facing.
People found Bill De Blasio either surprisingly effective or really annoying. I expect him to get a little bit of a bump in the polls, but I fervently hope not enough of a bump to put him in the next round of debates.
Tulsi Gabbard was, to me, better than expected, but she’s being tagged by many as a debate loser nonetheless. If she gets no bump from the debate she might as well close shop and go home.
I think Cory Booker helped himself, but we’ll see. A lot of debate viewers may have been seeing Booker for the first time, and IMO he’s very likable. Maybe he’s not the strongest candidate on the stage, but whenever I see him on the teevee I feel an urge to take him home and cook him a nice dinner. Don’t ask why.
Amy Klobucher is still a contender. She’s still too moderate for my taste, but she did well last night.
Lots of people are calling Julián Castro the night’s big winner. He may move into the top tier.
Liz Warren is still far and away my favorite candidate of this group, and I think her momentum will continue. Her endorsement of Medicare for All was one of the most interesting moments of the evening.
So tonight the lineup is Marianne Williamson, John Hickenlooper, Andrew Yang, Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, Michael Bennet and Eric Swalwell. It may be a very different evening from last night.
Thank you for posting this – I don't have cable anymore and couldn't bear to watch.
Your summary fit most of my feelings about what I've read about the candidates on the internet.
Jay Inslee if my state's govenor and i love Elizabeth Warren.
Jay Inslee may have the right idea on climate change but what we need to do is going NOWHERE – until we address the rule of big corporate money in politics.
Liz Warren gets that – Jay never gave a hint that he does.
Pretty much my take too.
Ryan and Delaney should exit.
Beto did not do well.
Inslee and De Blasio were interesting as unknowns, but not exciting to me.
Gabbard did not seem good to me – kind of canned responses, not authentic.
Klobucher broke even.
Booker bumped himself up; Castro bumped himself up a lot.
Warren did fine, not a big boost, not a loss either. She closed several responses with some serious intense emotion, more so than anyone else.
Hickenlooper looks loopy.
Biden is getting beat up with his voting record and previous statements. He doesn't seem to be alert to what's being said and asked.
Harris looks pretty good – slammed Joe between the eyes.
Williamson is not viable in any way nor is she remotely qualified by experience but she does express herself well.
Bernie is hitting Trump hard with the facts and actions of the POTUS.
Swalwell is a dork.
Yang does nothng for me.
Mayor Pete might be breaking even. IMO, he doesn't have the experience in the federal arena that you must have.
Bennet can start packing.
Gillibrand looks much stronger than I expected. She's expressing the Money In Politics aspect that rules everything else.
I didn't watch either debate, I'm content to glean summaries from the internet.
I am partly responsible for Marianne Williamson (you can blame me). I'm on her e-mail list, and she sent out a solicitation a few months ago for even just a dollar – to cross the 65,000 donor threshold to get in the debate. OK, count me in. I was surprised that this paid off, that she cross the line into the inner circle.
Marianne is an extremely experienced speaker when she's in front of a friendly crowd, and she does this at least weekly at free, public events in LA. I went to see her numerous times, years ago. Apparently this doesn't quite translate to rough and tumble, high stakes political debates, when she's contending among experienced politicians.
I pitched in a dollar because she and her ideas need to reach a greater audience. I also figured there's no way she'd get to the presidency, given her utter lack of experience, and shall we say unusual resume, so what's the harm?
She's been tarred as an anti-vaxxer, kind of pigeon-holed right away as a kook. It's a shame, because her views on spirituality and the way this impacts the political space are worthwhile. She is kind of a dark horse in the important fight against the right's claim to the moral high ground, their claim to have an exclusive lock on God. Marianne would be a great person to blow that discussion open, but it's doubtful that she'll get the chance. Oh well, I've thrown away greater sums on other things.
Sorry, but imo, it's too damn f'in' early for this shite.
I watched Wednesday, but not Thursday (I did record it, though – but I'm not sure I'll watch it).
Why?
Because, imo, it's too damn f'in' early shite.
Warren did well in the first debate, and I heard Harris and Mayor Pete did well.
Now, you can be damn sure I'll watch in the future.
But maybe not the next round.
In a while, yes..
Why?
By this time, I think you know…
Pingback: Debate Part II | The Mahablog