Some feel that the first series of Presidential Nomination Democratic debates where useless…
Not me…
Although the polling average ‘s show little change from the pre-debate ones?
Several good things have come from the 4 debate sessions…
Joe Biden is STILL the 2-1 leader in the race for the nomination
That is good for Biden But?
Joe Biden needs to get MUCH better….
Kamala Harris and Cory Booker chewing on him is nothing compared to what he would get from Donald Trump…..
Biden also had to stand on stage with everybody else…Some media people questioned that…But it’s good for the party….
The left vs center Democratic thing was on full display….
Particularly on healthcare plans and policy
Warren and Sanders did their thing in the Tuesday debate….
That’s ok…
But as long as Biden leads in the polls and support ?
Those two are actually helping Biden by splitting the left going into the actual primary voting…
Kamala Harris has little staying power…
Her first debate slap down of Biden is gone…
She’s back in 4th place…
Her second debate featured Biden and Gabbard throwing back at her….
Even Harris always overtaking her answers seem to point to someone trying too hard…
Having 10 people on stage fighting for the scant airtime is ridiculous ….
The moderator’s are NOT supposed to be the stars…
The contestants are…
Anybody notice that there was little talk of impeachment and Robert Mueller?
The media has made the count of Democrats coming out for impeachment their daily horse race story..
The people on stage hardly mentioned it…
When they did?
Most where mindful of the fact that Nancy Pelosi simply is NOT gonna indulge in something that will actually HELP Donald Trump’s efforts to get re-elected…
There will be another debate in mid-September…
It will be one night….Because only 7-10 people will make the cut….
We’ll see what the dynamic will be 6 weeks from now…
For most people the debates so far have been entertainment mumble/jumble…
That said?
They do serve a purpose…..
image…Vox.Com
Yeah all this will soon be forgotten
Williamson’s kookiness, deBlasio’s annoying yelling, Yang’s lack of a necktie.
See ya!
We don’t have to agree on everything Jack…
Your basic about the places in the polls IS correct…
But this post lists the good things from the debates also…
They are here to stay and will comntinue….
But the cutting down of the group is natural and good…
Besides?
Joe Biden needs the pratice….
And THAT IS one of the good things about the early debates Scott…
We get to see the lower tier people on stage….
The DNC has a answer for those who would say where excluded from the process….
I’m gonna add something else guys….
Last night’s debate actually HELPED Joe Biden in that attacks on Obama policy by Sanders, Warren and even Harris and Booker….
Obama IS REALL popular among Democrats…
Obamacare is popular among Democrats and even some Republicans…
Obama immigration policy was NEVER as punitive as Trump’s….
The story across the media this morning and this afternoon is about attacks on Obama to get at Biden…
THAT is just gonna cement Biden in place…
The message coming thru is for the remaining contestendents to tell us what THEY would do to counter the screwing Trump is putting on us…
And stop promising big ticket shit that will cost middle class voters MORE damn money…
I guess all this isn’t important, eh?
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Thursday warned Democratic presidential candidates not to become so focused on the internal differences over health care that they lose sight of fighting against President Trump.
In an interview with SiriusXM’s Joe Madison, Schumer cautioned against candidates turning into a “circular firing squad.”
“If we get all focused on the differences between, say Bernie [Sanders] and Cory [Booker] and Mayor Pete [Buttigieg] and [John] Hickenlooper, we’ll lose sight of the fact that it’s Donald Trump who’s now trying to reduce health care, destroy health care, get rid of it for everybody,” Schumer said.
“That’s a trap that we shouldn’t fall into. No circular firing squads,” he added…
More…
That’s why I don’t care about these “debates.”
Who cares that Tulsi Gabbard “got” Kamala Harris?Only a blazing Idiot would believe that Tulsi Gabbard is going to be the Democratic nominee.Harris?She is in the mix.
In a few days nobody is going to remember this.
These are nothing but reality show “gotcha” moments.
The New York Times noted today that they have really done nothing to change the nomination race in any significant way.
First poll out post second debate has polling
order REMAINING THE SAME….
Biden
Sanders
Warren
Harris
Post later….
Maybe everyone’s catching on…
These are not “debates,” rather they are political reality shows, complete with a cheering section (and lately even a “spontaneous” eruption from a member of the audience), Inquisitors to ask loaded questions ,not to elicit information, but hopeful for a sound bite for later use and ,of course ,the behind the scenes “handlers” who send their respective combatants(candidates) out with rehearsed lines hoping for a”gotcha” moment with another combatant.
Then, political junkies argue endlessly over “winners and losers,” while the public’s views seem to change little at all.
A show,nothing more,
Everything in politics is a “show” these days. Things are not what they used to be, in many aspects of American culture.
Four years ago, Trump was roundly criticized on the substance after every debate, but a lot of people liked his performances and what he said and how he said it.
I suspect the same is holding true for Elizabeth Warren this cycle and that is likely to continue, especially as she is the one standing next to Biden for the first time. That is for those who are being reasonably pragmatic about Bernie.
Warren knows exactly what her party base wants to hear and is so, so, so much better at sounding sincere about it as compared to Hillary.
The degree in which most of them turned on Obama was pretty staggering though. I thought it was incredible enough how the party has completely cut ties with Bill Clinton, or how my party moved on from the Bushes, but even Obama is “old news” now for today’s Democrat base, at least the white people… He is not going to have the Reagan nostalgia role apparently. (Despite the fact that many Trump fans are convinced the party will turn to Michelle Obama in the end and this is all pre-ordained.
That got a pretty negative reaction from a lot of party faithful.
I imagine that line will soften ,or even be dropped, as the campaign progresses.
As Trump has proven, totally repudiating past positions is no longer a negative.
Obama is still a saint among southern Black voters who dominate the southern primaries.
Those who persist in this may pay a heavy price in Dixie.
The party faithful/insiders/pundit class, etc, everyone on the GOP side who was shocked by Trump last cycle and was certain that something would eventually backfire on him in a way that he could not recover.
He knew what enough people wanted to hear though and Warren is playing to that same factor. She actually clashed with Obama a bit too when he was still in office over TPP, etc. He made some dismissive comments about her at the time, but clearly, the party is an anti-TPP party.
Is Obama going to somehow get involved to defend his legacy against Democrats who want the job he used to have? My sense is that he is happy to be done with politics and never really like any politicians to begin with.
I think older black voters will continue to feel a special affinity for Obama the way that conservatives held on to Reagan for years after he left office.
I don’t know if this will be as rooted among younger African-American voters now, including some that were in grade school when he first was elected.
The first two contests are outside the South and in places with low black populations. If the same candidate wins both of them, (or a widely perceived frontrunner loses both of them) they have a huge leg up.
Despite what you want to believe, Obama’s is still very popular among the party faithful and my analysis of the southern Black vote will stand.
In my view, Warren is going to face great difficulties among southern Black voters in general.Being perceived as anti Obama will only add to her woes, possible victories in Iowa and New Hampshire ,almost totally White states ,notwithstanding.
I still think you will see her tone down attacks on Obama in the future,
Except for Sanders and Warren following him?
The others mainly do not turn on Obama
Castro and others complained a out immigration, but not to level of Sanders and Warren on healthcare…
as Jack points out and myself….
messing with Obama right now will get you nothing but grief ….
Sanders has been doing it for 6 years
He ain’t gonna be the nominee
he ain’t even a Democrat ….
Harris and most of the others on Night 2 were very critical of Obama.
I mentioned the exception of older African-American Democrats, and I will add the political junkie blog folks here (which have to also acknowledge that everyone here who identifies as a Democrat is considered an “older white male.”) , I just do not think that there is going to be that much enduring loyalty to Obama.
For Democrats it’s never been about “who’s next in line” but “who’s knew” and who is “change.”
The line is going to be used that “Obama gave us Trump.”
Just like right-wingers took to saying, “Bush gave us Obama.”
And Biden is not going to ultimately be able to have it both ways, in which he brags about the ways he advised Obama when he agreed with him but demands he cannot possibly be expected to answer as to when he ever disagreed with him.
of course Biden had disagreemnets
but for now at least?
being Obama’s VP gives the guy a shield wether u or others like it or not…..
It also might be demonstrative over the fact that Vice Presidents have very rarely gotten elected President throughout our nation’s history. They are not seen as their “own man.”
The exceptions are those who served under very popular Presidents like Eisenhower or Reagan, who were more popular in office than Obama ever was.
“Billionaire Tom Steyer’s campaign said Sunday he has qualified for the October Democratic presidential primary debate, giving his campaign a much-needed opportunity for publicity as he looks to break out of the bottom of the Democratic field,” CNN reports.
“The longtime Democratic donor, now the 11th candidate to qualify for the DNC debate, made the cut on Sunday after a CBS News/YouGov poll found him polling at 2% in the early voting state of Nevada.”
Politicalwire…
I was especially frustrated last night by the choppy and incoherent interchanges (in no way to qualify as debate) about major policy questions such as health insurance, college finance, and the environment. With only a minute or 30 seconds to present and compare approaches, let alone plans, nearly everything any of them said was a very-low-resolution caricature: unsupported assertions about their own views, and unsupported attacks on their opponents’.
If the fact-checkers weren’t working overtime last night, I’d be very surprised.
Much of the blame falls on the format, and also on the moderators who weren’t specific and limited enough in their questions.
At least on the first night, moderate candidates like John Delaney, Tim Ryan and Steve Bullock could be quite vivid, specific and articulate in their attacks on (for example) the loss of private insurance under Medicare-for-All, while Senators Sanders and Warren could be quite clear about what they were proposing.
Why are there live “audiences”( e cheering sections for these events?
What’s the point of them other than to add to the “reality “ aspect of the “show.”They’ve even added people jumping up in “spontaneous” outbursts of indignation!Whats next?Actual physical tussles among the competing cheering sections?
i agree they aren’t really debates…
but as i point out?
they DO have a role and function for Americans, the DNC, contestants and the media
I know that Democrats have been having this format of debates with multiple candidates on stage and live, cheering audience since at least the 1976 cycle (and Republicans since 1980, when many were impressed by Reagan taking advantage of a moment about a microphone he paid for), so it’s not like this stuff is brand new.
I just can’t believe that nobody objected to CNN having them out their for the anthem. Tim Ryan had to apologize for not having his hand on his heart. He said he was too nervous about the debate to remember to do that.
Beto had to at least have considered taking a knee during the anthem. His campaign had a big press release about how High School athletes who had taken a knee during the anthem would be his special guests in the debate audience.. and he didn’t do what they did…
test
What “ role?”
The polls( which you place such emphasis on) show there is been no net effect on anything.
It’s like they never happened.
Amusingly, you concede the point.They are “media events”(i e shows).
I’m hoping they become even more outlandish,How about signs?Shouted insults ? Betting markets?More moans and groans.More and more silliness.Maybe even circus clowns to warm up the crowd?
Weeee!!
Will they continue?
Of course we are all living in Trumpland.
Here’s a revolutionary idea.
When we get down to the two candates for the General Election?
Go back to the Kennedy/Nixon format.The candidates in a tv studio, no audience,just them and three or so questioners
At least that would mimic a real “debate”
Alas, won’t happen…
The “show”must go on!
We can also make kids walk to school, up-hill, both ways…
Would look too much like (yawn; low ratings) Meet the State of the Nation with George Staphanopoulos (played by Matha Raddatz).
In fact that’s what Face the Nation and Meet the Press used to look like, more than one questioner but no round-table afterwards.
Raddatz HAS put her combat reporter time in…