Democratic Debate: The Dems' Most Important Duty

The Democrats had another debate tonight. I'm watching the re-run now. I wonder, after the thrill yesterday of watching the news chirons and papers scream"Impeached", how much interest is there in a Democratic debate -- especially when none of the frontronners have any control over the most immediate and important duty at hand: Removing Trump from office.

My thoughts in advance of watching this debate: Neither Biden nor Bernie will be the nominee. The public has had enough of septugenarian white men. Warren and Pete B. are real possibilities.

Your thoughts on the debate?

< Donald Trump's Reaction to his Impeachment: "I Fired His As*" | Happy New Years Eve Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I'm voting for Warren (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by CST on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 06:43:36 AM EST
    But I think Biden will be the nominee.

    I don't understand the Pete appeal at all, mostly because I don't think he's earned the right to be on that stage.  He hasn't done anything in his life that makes me think he's ready to be president. He wasn't even that great of a mayor.

    Pete had a good night (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 07:46:52 AM EST
    Warren not so much IMO.

    but I agree about Biden in as far as he will be a finalist.


    Biden (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 08:01:53 AM EST
    Did have his best debate

    One other thought (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 08:04:43 AM EST
    The more they talk, the fewer there are, the better Amy looks.


    I don't see how she wins but in a sane world she might.

    (I am just watching it this morning)


    I gasped when Biden started talking about (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Peter G on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 07:02:36 PM EST
    what people say to him in the handshake rope-lines, asking him to address their very personal problems (having nothing to do with the powers of the U.S. President), and referred to the little boy with the stutter who wanted Biden to cure his speech impediment. Biden told the story with a perfect imitation of the boy's speech pattern. It was done with obvious sympathy and affection, but I can see that clip used against him like Tr*mp's mocking imitation of the spastic reporter.

    Were you surprised the future Governor (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 09:15:48 PM EST
    of Arkansas (?) semi apologized?

    Yes. She couldn't apologize if she still (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Peter G on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 11:41:18 PM EST
    worked at the White House, though. They never apologize, not for anything. Since they're always "perfect." And I hadn't realized that Biden was (or is) a stutterer. That explains, actually, how effectively and seemingly effortlessly he was able to demonstrate/imitate a true stutter. (I instantly recognized it as sounding authentic, because my mother was a public school speech therapist and taught me a lot about speech defects.)

    We will never agree on Pete (none / 0) (#8)
    by CST on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 09:52:39 AM EST
    But I know that Warren didn't have her strongest night.  It sounded like she had a cold tbh.  Although I didn't watch the whole thing I hear Amy Klobacher was channeling some of my anger.

    I agree with (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 10:01:44 AM EST
    More or less about Pete.  He is not IMO the most qualified candidate.   The thing is I don't think that matters as much as we might like in American 21st century politics.  If it ever did.

    It's a charisma contest.  And he has it.

    I just commented he had a good night.  I think he did for several reasons.  He had good answers and simply being attacked from many sides makes you look important.

    Here is IMO Warrens biggest problem.  Not the only one.  Right now the progressive vote is being split.  That benefits Biden.  And it's being split by two candidate who have plenty of ego and money to go to the bitter end.  If some how they could consolidate that support Biden has huge problems.

    I ask you, do you expect them to do that?  


    No I don't (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by CST on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 10:23:33 AM EST
    That's why I agree with you that Biden will win. The only reason he might not is if someone else rises and causes the same split in the moderate lane. IMO it's too late for that and it won't be Pete or anyone else, especially given Biden's solid base of support with minorities.

    I strongly dislike Biden. But I also think he'll be somewhat of an empty suit for the Democratic establishment given his declining mental state. I can live with that. One of the reasons I've stopped watching debates is so he doesn't talk me out of it.


    Well (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 10:28:17 AM EST
    I have said who I think will rise

    I don't want to keep saying it.  Superstitious about cause and effect.


    For someone to compete with Biden (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by CST on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 10:35:20 AM EST
    They need serious support with minorities.

    No one else has it and as Warren is discovering it's not the kind of support you can build overnight. She has the Massachusetts black community firmly in her corner but that's not good enough.  It's fundamentally about trust.  Not charisma, and not really policy either, longstanding relationships is the key.  I don't see anyone else on that stage who has that besides Biden.


    Agree Biden will win (none / 0) (#22)
    by Coral on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 12:48:08 PM EST
    I'm voting for Warren.

    Undecided whether 2nd choice would be Klobuchar or Bernie. I strongly want to see a woman nominee, and if it has to be a moderate I prefer Klobuchar to Biden. On the other hand, Bernie has a lot of charisma and I think Medicare for All is best policy, and if not enacted, rising popular appeal will push more moderate candidates to better public option, subsidies, caps on premium costs, etc.

    That said, I could accept a Biden nomination, and I think it could be very successful in general if he had a black woman, such as Harris or Abrams as VP. that would get some enthusiasm from both blacks and women.

    I strongly fear a close election, or, god forbid, a Trump victory. That would present a great challenge to the nation and the future of democracy, the international system, and maybe the planet.


    I'd prefer (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Dec 22, 2019 at 10:19:25 PM EST
    Klobuchar to Biden as well, if it came down to a moderate. I'd prefer any of them to Biden. I have been going back and forth between Warren and Bernie as the progressive candidate. I worry about Bernie's health (and Biden's) and Pete seems like a good VP candidate. He's not ready for prime time when it comes to the presidency.

    This encapsulates much of my thinking (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Towanda on Thu Dec 26, 2019 at 01:36:23 PM EST
    as I especially am with you on not wanting to have to for Biden. I have thought that for almost 20 years but now also am  upset with him as at most a one-term president,

    Any party wants a two-termer.


    Biden (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 26, 2019 at 02:11:22 PM EST
    has such a dated attitude on women that they only gain power because of what men allow them to do. If he's the nominee I'm just going to ignore the presidential election and work on flipping the senate. I don't think I could be a good advocate for him anyway.

    I actually thought Pete was awful (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by smott on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 09:22:40 AM EST
    To be clear I only saw snippets and am now going back to watch the whole thing.
    But all my sexism red flags went off: able to take criticism from the men on stage but NOT from the women. Amanda Marcotte has a good take in Salon re Pete's man-splaining.

    Still hiding his donors. Pretending he is similar to Obama for heavens sake.

    His rise is largely due to billionaires pooping themselves over the prospect of a Pres Warren.

    Yes (none / 0) (#39)
    by Towanda on Thu Dec 26, 2019 at 01:37:33 PM EST
    and I was surprised to see ven several young voters in my family who find Pete "arrogant."

    I love it when a politician (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 23, 2019 at 03:54:28 PM EST
    You have loathed for decades proves you were absolutely right all along.

    Kucinich Endorses Tulsi Gabbard

    December 23, 2019 at 2:21 pm EST By Taegan Goddard 130 Comments

    Former Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) endorsed Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) in the 2020 Democratic presidential race.

    Dennis who? (none / 0) (#36)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Dec 23, 2019 at 06:24:52 PM EST
    "I believe people in the second district deserve representation and are not getting it and they are unlikely to be able to get it over the next year. A whole lot of things are going to be going on and happening here and in Washington over the next year and to essentially deprive half the state of Hawaii of representation in that sense is unacceptable."
    - Former Gov. Neil Abercrombie (Dec. 23, 2019)

    ... and noting that my vainglorious Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has missed 86% of all House votes in Washington this past year while laboring under a self-anointing messiah complex-- uh, excuse me, I mean "running for president," former Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie (who's also a former 10-term congressman himself) has called upon her to resign her seat.

    I wholeheartedly concur.

    That is a horrific statistic (none / 0) (#40)
    by Towanda on Thu Dec 26, 2019 at 01:39:29 PM EST
    and your state ought to run her off  for that no-show record alone.

    While I am not someone who would (none / 0) (#43)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Dec 30, 2019 at 12:39:21 PM EST
    vote for Gabbard, your comment:

    Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has missed 86% of all House votes in Washington this past year

    led me to actually look at her voting record.

    Your claim about her voting record is false.

    According to this site (and a bunch of others) she actually missed around 42% of "all House votes in Washington this past year." Certainly not at all something to be proud of, but also certainly not 86%.

    She did miss about 86% in the last three months of three months 2019.

    For comparison, Booker's stats for missing votes for the same time periods are 60% and 99%.

    Klobuchar is 35% & 77%.

    Sanders 57 & 100.

    Warren 48 & 98.

    I believe that's all of them.


    You're right. (none / 0) (#46)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 03, 2020 at 05:47:44 PM EST
    "Gabbard missed 125 of the 146 votes taken in the House from October through December, according to GovTrack. She was the only member to vote 'present' on the articles of impeachment against President Trump last week. She said she 'could not in good conscience vote either yes or no.'"

    According to CBS News and GovTrack, Tulsi missed 85% of all votes in the 4th quarter of 2019. That was the source Gov. Abercrombie was citing. She only missed half of all the others over the rest of the year. My bad. When she served in the Hawaii State Legislature and the Honolulu City Council, her attendance record was similar. Over half the time, she was a no-show.

    What a fine role model Tulsi is for other young public officials, who are no doubt learning that the secret of political success is engaging a press agent, phoning in your performance, and then letting everyone else do all the heavy lifting. As somebody who's actually done that heavy lifting for legislators, absentee grandstanding by the boss is not something I appreciate.



    Right on. (none / 0) (#47)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 03, 2020 at 06:56:18 PM EST
    And, as I described above, Booker, Klobuchar, Sanders, and Warren did the same thing as Gabbard.

    Sucks for Klobuchar (1.25 / 4) (#24)
    by kdm251 on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 02:02:48 PM EST
    It's too bad Clinton nuked Klobuchar early in the process for her comments about "I'd go to Wisconsin" she might have been a serious candidate. I doubt any women will have a chance of being president as long as HRC is around.

    What? (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by CST on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 02:21:17 PM EST
    Maybe the male candidates shouldn't be taken seriously until Trump goes away.

    This kind of thing (none / 0) (#48)
    by Yman on Sat Jan 04, 2020 at 04:42:40 PM EST
    ... is more painful than listening to a trump interview.

    My money ... (none / 0) (#1)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 04:46:20 AM EST
    ...is still on Warren.

    Dem Nominee (none / 0) (#2)
    by Steve13209 on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 05:50:25 AM EST
    Biden is the frontrunner. Safe, if old and out of touch. Warren is my choice. Tough, smart, focused.

    The new media narrative is Klobuchar since she is "electable" and not an old white guy. I don't think she can overtake Warren in the primaries, since progressives are activated.

    Of course, I worry about all of them beating Trump, no matter what the polls say.

    ... especially as they pertain to Democrats. As we've no doubt noticed in many quarters this morning, nothing makes the east coast media establishment happier than a "Democrats in Disarray" meme. It's a well-shopworn old trope, to be sure, but a comforting one to them nonetheless.

    Further, that same establishment -- particularly the New York Times -- has time and again demonstrated a distressing tendency to repeat GOP talking points as though they're so-called conventional wisdom, which often results in false equivalences taking root within the general political discussion.

    We saw the result of that a few weeks ago, when Joe Biden felt compelled to push back really hard on that old guy in the town hall meeting who parroted the argument that Biden was just as guilty of corruption as Trump because he got his son a cushy job on the Burisma board.



    The New York Times (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 12:58:05 PM EST
    Has, in my opinion, gotten worse under the tenure of Dean Baquet.

    And the whole "Democrats in Disarray" thing drives me crazy.  Why don't they talk about all the Republicans who have decided not to run again?  Not to mention those few who have bailed on the GOP.


    The problem (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 04:20:01 PM EST
    Warren has is that she basically is fighting over the same voters as Bernie. I don't see how she become the nominee unless she branches out from hugging Bernie.

    After the (none / 0) (#13)
    by KeysDan on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 10:39:49 AM EST
    courage and determination of the Democratic Representatives and their leadership during the impeachment of Trump, the Democratic candidates were a let down. The comparison is no doubt unfair and one of apples and oranges, it never-the-less colored my impressions.

    Perplexingly, the thrust of the debate was to focus on the candidate who is running fourth in national polling. Sure Buttigieg is doing quite well in the early primary states, but still--this was a national debate.

    Klobuchar has received favorable reviews by some, but her resentment, if not dislike, of Pete was palpable, resurrecting fading memories regarding the treatment of her own staff. The question of her voting for Trump's Federalist judges was deflected with her back pat on the unfitness of Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court--a glaringly apparent observation.

    Buttigieg was a range of different things--a mixed bag. Some of his policy questions were handled very well, particularly those of foreign affairs. There were often dull responses to the sharp questions. Overall, he did not seem to hurt himself. Probably a status quo, which was a good outcome for him.

    Elizabeth Warren was not as good as at previous debates, but still good. She stood firm with her Medicare for All proposal, despite the political realization and recognition that it will not occur over-night. Perhaps it was she who had the most memorable line of the night, not only a sound bite, but also, one that might put the matter of her age to bed: "I will be the youngest women to be elected president.".

    Bernie was, well...Bernie.  He was more energized than at the last debate, which is not necessarily, an improvement.

    Yang, I decided, would fit well into a response to one of those questions, who would you want to have at a dinner party. Witty and smart, and someone who should consider running for Congressman somewhere, such as Palo Alto. Steyer made some good points during the night, although I kept being distracted by that l/2 inch Scotch Tape tartan tie.  Tom, please give your money to those brave Democratic Representatives in swing districts who voted for the impeachment of that Constitutional criminal.

    That brings me to Joe Biden.  I believe Biden was the winner of the debate.  As the enduring national front runner, he won by not losing ground. Indeed, it was his best debate, deploying the strategy, apparently, of saying as little as necessary---why do so when your opponents are busying themselves with each other.  A trick every graduate student learns in a pre-lim--just sit there while the professors argue with each other.

    Given the importance and stakes, it will be critical for the nation that whomever is the Democrat candidate, all of us rallying around the blue.

    Amy's resentment (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 10:44:59 AM EST
    Which I also noticed could be politically smart.  If you haven't noticed a lot of people (not me, btw) dislike Pete.

    Disliking Pete is becoming quite a thing.

    She was playing to those people.  Probably not dumb.


    Or maybe (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 10:46:13 AM EST
    She just doesn't like him.

    Also totally possible.  No judgement here.


    I have noticed (none / 0) (#17)
    by KeysDan on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 10:58:27 AM EST
    that resentment in other instances of late, such as interviews with Lawrence and Rachel. While not in Pete's corner (and, definitely not in Amy's), I do wonder if there is something deeper going on. It is not just news hot off the press that he is young and inexperienced.  Maybe, Pete was just a curiosity until he moved into the moderate lane as a viable fall-back if/when Biden falters. And, how can Pete be besting her in her neighboring state, Iowa.  She is from the midwest, you know.

    Dan (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 11:00:34 AM EST
    Here's where I have to be honest.

    I find him kind of annoying.


    Amy (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 11:02:53 AM EST
    Totally has my blessing to use him as a rung on the ladder of success.  He is young and strong .

    Mayor Pete & seasoning (none / 0) (#42)
    by christinep on Sat Dec 28, 2019 at 04:17:24 PM EST
    There is something to be said for experience, and the all-important seasoning that it brings.  IMO, Mayor Pete needs time for the full-breadth of learning that life brings.  He has years to develop ... to take his natural talents, academic brilliance, etc. and grow while contouring the theoretical edges.
    Mostly, I've been gone from here (always appreciated your comments, tho, Capt.)  I've come to grow in admiration of the resilience and breadth of experience that Joe Biden possesses He knows the scope of what can be done in the WH; he has the works on foreign policy; he has earned strong minority support--a reality needed by a Democratic nominee; he has voiced our need for building as much unity as possible as a country to pull us from the ugly setback that Trump has delivered; & his outlook for so many of us conveys TRUST.  It isn't just the smile ... it is the positive sense of a trust that we can move forward again.
    If he should win, I believe that Joe Biden will be a necessary transitional figure for one term.  From his life, he has had the "kitchen sink" thrown at him in so many ways ... and somehow prevailed with a positive outlook.  Trust & confidence in ourselves--that he exudes--could be key to our country correcting course together again.
    So endeth my sermon for today....

    A more serious reply might be (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 12:05:40 PM EST
    I like him.  I do.  More or less.  I'm really glad he is in the running. I'm sure he has a very bright future.

    Just not this year.  It's just to important.  Amy IMO could win.  Pete can not.

    Believe me when I say I wish I could get there but I can't. It's just to f'ing important.  How much I continue to think well of him will depend on when he gets out and who he gets behind.


    Oops. that (5.00 / 4) (#16)
    by KeysDan on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 10:49:32 AM EST
    "Democrat candidate" was really a typo. Make that Democratic.  Adding this correction so as not to be categorized as a Putin-loving wingnut who believes Trump is Jesus.

    Bernie did not (none / 0) (#27)
    by MKS on Fri Dec 20, 2019 at 06:07:23 PM EST
    for some reason annoy me this time.  I liked his exchange with Joe about "just waving at you, Joe."

     I could go with Bernie in the General.

    But my gal Amy sure did shine.

    Are the billionaires going to get knocked out of next round, I hope?

    I did not (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 22, 2019 at 05:49:43 PM EST
    watch but read a lot of praise for Amy.

    Bernie is such a grievance candidate that I can see people saying oh, well, Trump or the GOP addresses more of my grievances and him losing. I think what happened in the UK with Corbyn is a cautionary tale about Bernie being the nominee.


    Yes, as I (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by KeysDan on Mon Dec 23, 2019 at 09:34:46 AM EST
    noted above in my debate observations, Amy did get favorable reviews by some.  At first, mystifying, it appears that Amy is welcomed as a Pete slayer and more competitive alternative for the center lane.  

    While there is a case to be made for the idea of centrism as well as the electability of a candidate holding that ideology, I worry about candidates such as Amy (or Pete) who argue their case with tired Republican talking points. For example, undermining progressive ideas as "no free stuff" or "you know better than those faceless bureaucrats in Washington".  I am waiting for her to quote Reagan's line --I am from the government and I am here to help you.  And wait for audience laughter.

    And, for me, her votes for right wing judges is not a good omen.  Hopefully, she is not influenced by her husband's feelings for the Federalist Society.  There is a variance between centrism and admiration for splitting the difference. If I have any criticism of President Obama, it would be naïveté along these lines early in his first term.

    Senator Klobuchar often brags about her good showings in Republican districts,  I wonder how she does well in Democratic ones.  Hopefully she has noticed the present day Trumpist Republicans--- not your grandfather's Republicans.  And, unlikely to be looking for anyone but their Jesus.

    The most consequential history is not driven by bothsiderism or by playing to the fiction that we can all get along.


    Personally (none / 0) (#34)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 23, 2019 at 02:56:35 PM EST
    I think all the "free stuff" started with Bernie who literally was promising free stuff to voters in 2016. Then the GOP amplified it.

    The most amazing thing to me is the people who are unwilling to take the Reagan talking points from Mayor Pete but let Obama get away with it time and again.


    Best Ayurveda Hospital in Hyderabad, Bengalore, In (none / 0) (#44)
    by nehasharma8 on Tue Dec 31, 2019 at 02:08:11 PM EST

    KSAC is one of the most trusted multi-specialty Ayurvedic hospitals in India. For over two decades, we provides 100% Evidence based Treatments for diseases, Naturally.


    Site Violator (none / 0) (#45)
    by jmacWA on Tue Dec 31, 2019 at 03:04:07 PM EST