Still like Amy...Impressed with Cory Booker, who I have previously
thought a bit of a dud. DeBlasio is an ass. Dellany and Inslee (fake
smile) both made their points well, but they're not candidates. Beto was
very lame (exhaustion?). Miss Haiwai!!? what's she doing there, pretty
and nice smile, but woefully unpresidential. Castro made a splash, but
probably unelectable. Ryan definitely unelectable. Warren becomes more
likable, but she has that school marm persona that did in Hillary; she
is policy-smarter than Hillary but not clear to me she has the political
chops to be president. So imho...nobody last night is likely to be the
democratic candidate, booker could be VP... And I like Amy Klobuchar
reminding us of foam with no beer.
UPDATE: I'll have to take it back. Night one was the better debate. Cory Booker? Peter Buttigieg? Both looking like the adults in the platoon.
I just got finished watching the debate. I recorded it; I can't watch that stuff late at night and stay awake. Agree with you about Cory Booker. I was favorably impressed. Likewise with Amy Klobuchar. About Warren, mixed feelings. I don't necessarily feel that a school marm-ish president would be a bad thing. Warren has one thing going for her that Hillary Clinton didn't. Warren wasn't married to one of the three presidents in history who were impeached. Not to mention the baggage of the sketchy Arkansas politics that preceded the Clinton White House years. But she has a hard sell to do with going after the corporations. Not that it doesn't need doing.
ReplyDeleteI called Gabbard another pretty face and got told by my better half that I wasn't being fair. That's probably true.
Will see what happens tonight, if Biden and Sanders go after each other hammer and tongs. I am curious to see what Marianne Williamson says, not that I think she's remotely qualified. Just wonder what made her decide to run. Tried to get through one of her books once. Didn't make it.
My bad, Nixon was not impeached. So Bill Clinton was one of two.
DeleteBetter Halves!! like to be more feminist than us...as Amy Klobuchar reparteed....on a subject that shouldn't serve as anybody's bragging rights!!
DeleteI guess I should watch the next debate with Biden and Sanders in the same pit. Debates seem to me to be about appearances and grandstanding. No time for anything in depth. I'm still with Warren or Sanders because the corporations hate them. It's like bacteria hating penicillin.
ReplyDeleteI found last evening only the moderators were grandstanding! The candidates behaved themselves on that score (well, maybe De Blasio didn't, but one of the moderators grandstanded him).
DeleteI can believe that, Margaret. Ofttimes the moderators are the worst. Another thing that makes it hard to watch. I'll overcome my prejudice and try to watch the next one.
DeleteI should recuse myself. I was sound asleep for the fireworks and scrambled mics. My wife watched and thoroughly disagrees with the pundits, podcasters and poseurs who said it was a good night for Castro, though.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to like Booker, but he keeps hitting a note in the back of my head that says it's as if he was manufactured to run for president. Log cabin, check,. Resume, check. Sound bites, check. It's too perfect. Like Marco Rubio, who is much better in theory than up close. Booker talked the most -- 11 minutes and 6 seconds over runner-up Beto's 10:33, according to the NYTimes stopwatch -- and complained afterward that he did not have time to explain his total and complete solution to climate change.
Inslee, who had the fewest seconds, is the only one of the bunch that I feel might take a bullet to do the world some good on the subject of climate change. And, fwiw, Warren is the only one who sends the Donfather slobbering, twitching, frothing and sputtering. If he is told he has to debate with her, he just might emigrate to Saudi Arabia to avoid the dishonor. Just sayin'.
"...the Donfather slobbering, twitching, frothing and sputtering." That would indeed be a sight worth seeing!
DeleteJust turn on your need any day of the week, Katherine.
DeleteI actually learned something from part of the debate. That was the exchange between O'Rourke and Castro regarding section 1325 of immigration law. I did not previously know what section 1325 was; that it defined illegal entry at a spot not designated, as a criminal offense, rather than a civil one. Castro favored repealing it, O'Rourke did not, citing human trafficking as the reason for retaining it. To which Castro answered that trafficking was covered specifically under other statutes. I have an idea that O'Rourke and Castro had to answer to different electorates. That O'Rourke was throwing a sop to the crowd that would say he favored open borders if he wanted to repeal 1325. Warren mentioned 1325 too.
ReplyDeleteMy take:
ReplyDeleteAlpha males who proved they're willing to interrupt and smack down Trump decisively in a one-on-one debate: DiBlasio, Delaney, and Castro.
Of those who have actually worked out policies on a broad spectrum of issues, in case voters still care about that, there's Klobuchar, Warren, and Delaney.
Of those talking about the need to bring the working class back to the party, which will be crucial to theMidwest, you have Ryan and DeBlasio (who no credibility here, being an East Coaster).
The best talkers were Booker, Warren, and Klobuchar (despite her laconic style, she manages zingers and brevity well).
Low points:
Identity politics. Booker is competing with Kamala Harris for the "black vote," so I guess he had to make a lot of African-American and Trenton references. He actually has broader appeal. Castro was good on immigration but less passionate about non-Latino (Latinex?) issues. Ryan talked about nothing but Rustbelt issues, even though I appreciated his being a Midwest schlub who has not forgotten about Flint.
The pro-choice clack in the audience: The screaming women every time abortion was mentioned, and the way most of the candidates threw in abortion whenever they needed an applause line.
Guns: Nobody knows what to do about gun violence.
Those I'd like to see leave now: Ryan, Gabbard, O'Rourke, DiBlasio, Inslee.
Re: Castro...Tom what put your wife off about him?
ReplyDeleteOne miscellaneous note: Per the photo in today's Times, Castro was the shortest male in the line-up. According to tall sociologists that means he can't be elected.
His 1345 intervention was impressive in that most people have never heard of it. But he went on banging that drum like the fourth grader who has the right answer and wants his "A" right this minute. Of no importance, however. Now we know 1345, BAD.
I also found out that 1345 has been in effect since 1929. Strange that nobody has heard about it until now. Makes me wonder if somebody like, oh, I don't know, Stephen Miller or Jeff Sessions dusted it off for more active use. Makes it easier, you don't have to enact a law that's hiding in plain sight.
DeleteMargaret, I do not know what it was. It's just some sort of woman thing. All she will say is that she was NOT impressed.
DeleteSo anybody care to comment on last night's debates? I recorded it again, but I'm tempted to try and find a Cliff Notes version. The news sites say that Harris went after Biden with knives.
ReplyDeleteThe Washington Post coverage is pretty straight forward. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democratic-rivals-attack-biden-with-harris-leading-the-way-on-race-issues/2019/06/28/1fc34b02-98fb-11e9-916d-9c61607d8190_story.html?utm_term=.b869f1e94144
DeleteHarris did go after Biden. Biden came back but did not really deal successfully with her claims. some might say they couldn't be dealt with, but if he been a bit quicker on the uptake, he might have done all right.
DeleteThe subject was busing, which as we can all remember was a complicated problem in some places including violence. Harris did some rewriting of history in her complaint against Biden and I don't think it will help her with the white, suburban vote. Not even sure it will help her with African-Americans alive at the time.
Buttgieg was calm and modest and the real adult in the room. Bernie redid Bernie 2016. I found the whole thing pretty depressing and definitely not as good or useful as Debate 1.
Harris went after Biden on his opposition to federally imposed bussing while stating that bussing personally helped her on her way to success. She also hit him on his support for crime bills that hammered the black community. Biden was attacked for his support for the Iraq war by I forget who. Sanders subsequently contrasted with his history of opposition to the war from the start. The debate didn't change my preferences at all. I still like Sanders and Warren. They stand where they always stood. They are the tried and true opposition to corporatism.
DeleteThanks for the WaPo link, Margaret. It was pretty straightforward. I also read Michael Sean Winters commentary on the NCR site. Somehow I am not inclined to spend a sunny Friday morning listening to two hours worth of the debate. Sounds like at least half the candidates need to go away.
DeleteExiters: Start with Marianne Williamson. Who is she? Why is she there? I'd say the survivors from Debate 2 are Harris, Sanders, Biden and Buttigieg (must learn to spell that name).
DeleteI didn't know who half of them were and I still don't know. Extremely annoying clutter.
DeleteRight! Declutter. Who's that lady from Japan who clears clutter. Could she help here?
DeleteBusing - I shouldn't be surprised that is back.
DeleteI heard a radio host yesterday (relatively non-partisan) note that the answering-questions-in-Spanish schtick is probably not going to win over the independent/undecided votes in the upper Midwest, i.e. in the states Democrats need to win in order to unseat Trump. In my opinion, proposing busing will be even more of a political liability from that point of view. We upper-Midwesterners tend to skew older. We remember what a political debacle busing was back in the 1970s.
It's interesting that Harris thought that busing helped her. My question to her would be: what about the kids who weren't bused? What's your solution for them?
Ha ha! Marie Kondo: Which candidates spark joy?
DeleteJim, I agree that the answering questions in Spanish thing is probably not going to impress anyone. Especially since the Spanish sentences didn't really answer anything.
DeleteAbout the busing, is anyone really proposing bringing it back? Or was Harris just saying that she benefited from it. Yes I do remember what a debacle busing was. It was massively unpopular with just about everyone when they tried it in Omaha. What seemed to help a lot more was when they enacted open enrollment here. Students can go to a public school which isn't in their home district. Also magnet schools, which are part of the public system and students can opt into them.
"Which candidates spark joy?" Haha, that would weed out a whole bunch of them! (Would there be any left?)
DeleteRe: answering questions in Spanish. Bret Stephens (NYT) agrees with you Jim and Katherine.
DeleteStationed here in Fort New York, I found the Spanish chat amusing. De Blasio and O'Rourke both had bad accents, I could tell that much. But it reminded me that English-speaking New York Pols often have a splash of Spanish during campaigns. Apparently whatever De Blasio said outraged Miami's Cubans...a saying of Che Guevera???
Anyway, it is common to hear Spanish spoken in the neighborhood (Puerto Rican or Dominican or, as some say Spanglish). But lately--get ready for this--Spanish is being replaced by Chinese. Columbia U. up the street has imported presumably wealthy Chinese young people to pay full freight. They often travel in pairs chatting in Chinese. Get ready! Unless the trade war sends them to Canada!
Correction: De Blasio used the Guevara quote after the debates in a rally in Miami. Don't know what he said during the debate.
DeleteWhat a dimwit. Know your audience, dude.
DeleteNight II: Most of these candidates need to go.
ReplyDeleteAs I opined on an earlier thread, Biden and Bernie need to bow out. Biden did an inadequate job defending his record, and was not himself. In forums like this, Biden is usually a gracious elder statesman and consensus builder. Last night he.was angry and easily nettled. He only addressed us "folks" once or twice.
Bernie simply repeated general talking points. At times he had trouble hearing. Frankly, so did I.
Neither can be two-term presidents based on what I saw.
Yang and Bennet have nothing to contribute.
Williamson and her "Return to Love" schtick came off as flakey, though I think she raised some good big-picture questions a few times (ex how has past foreign policy in Central America exacerbated problems in Central America).
Gillibrand talked about more than just reproductive issues (nationally funded elections), but I don't see her pulling the party together. Personally, I would rather listen to a dentist's drill than to Gillibrand, but that's my personal problem.
Swalwell was rude and needed to be slapped.
That leaves Hickenlooper, Harris and Buttigieg, who have the best grasp of a wide range of issues. Harris came off as the strongest debater.
Except for Bernie, Buttigieg and Hickenlooper, the candidates were at each other's throats too much and lost sight of the real foe: Donald Trump. Tom's famous circular during squad was on full display.
Low moment: Harris seemed to be waiting for her moment to zing Biden about busing and segregationists. These issues are decades old. We have more pressing issues than Wounded Feelings from the Past, and the moment was so calculated as to be devoid of any real emotional impact. Harris is best in her prosecutorial, not persecuted, mode.
The bussing thing may be antiquated but the crime bills have an effect to this day evident in the high incarceration rate of blacks and their extreme treatment by police to the point of street execution. Biden helped make this.
Delete"Biden helped make this." So did African-Americans who lived in high crime areas.
DeleteWill the high incarceration issue could come back to bite Harris, who was District Attorney in San Francisco 2004ff and then CA Attorney General 2010 until she was elected to the Senate in 2017.
Should we suspect the Republican opposition researchers are looking into her statements and records in those positions?
In fact, the Republicans OPO could read her Wikipedia entry. She was a tough prosecutor, probably why she kept being re-elected.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris#Violent_crimes_and_conviction_rate
I'm sure that's her vulnerability. District Attorneys are expected to be tough on crime which means street crime. I don't know how tough she was on white collar crime. I want a change in the Democratic Party. I don't think she is it.
DeleteRe Harris as a prosecutor: https://religionnews.com/2019/06/26/victims-question-kamala-harris-record-on-clergy-abuse/
DeleteDan Balz of the Wash Post captures the back and forth from last evening. Here in the Stanford Advocate
ReplyDeletehttps://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/On-crowded-stage-senator-from-California-stands-14057705.php
I just came across a really interesting article with a bunch of colorful graphs. The graphs are based on which topics the candidates address the most often on their twitter feeds. Revealing. It's from the Bloomberg site, but I don't think it's behind a paywall.
ReplyDeleteDavid Brooks has a piece in the New York Times today begging the Ds to offer him a candidate he can vote for because he can't vote for Trump. David just can't stop being a conservative. Do you think any D could be so bad that Paul Krugman would plead with the Rs to offer him a candidate he can vote for? Do you think he'd get one if he did? But, as David points out, there is no comfortable bench for the middle-of-the-roaders to sit on. Trump-McConnell are waaaaay over there on the right, and the Ds have one candidate for each individual group that feels like a put-upon minority but no candidate for everybody. That makes it hard for any of them to talk about "America," so Trump can get away with saying "AmericaAmericaAmerica," all the while meaning "I,Trump."
ReplyDeleteAs a more or less middle of the roader, I feel Brooks' pain. I don't think any of them are as scary as a second Trump term (except maybe the vanity ones who don't know jack), but some would do a lot better than others.
DeleteThey criticize Sanders about not being concerned enough about race. But everybody is being screwed over by BigCorp and that's one negative we all have in common. Maybe that's getting to be an old talking point but it's true. Climate ignorance? Look to propaganda funded by fossil fuel companies. Lousy medical coverage? Insurance companies. Bloated military spending? Raytheon and Boeing are getting ready to merge. That can't be good. To rehash a quote by a late demented president, big corporations aren't the solution to our problems, they are the problems.
DeleteSpeaking of climate ignorance, Stanley, I heard the figure of 15 minutes as the amount of time given to climate change in the four hours of the two "debates." Sigh. I wonder if anyone counted the minutes given to "women's reproductive rights."
DeleteYeah, Tom. I guess that was a function of the MSM moderators focus. Let's give it mention but get it out of the way fast.
DeleteAbout "women's reproductive rights", the meme that appeared on my Facebook feed this morning was, "100% of the Democratic candidates think it's okay to kill babies." Not a great recipe for picking up swing votes.
DeleteI admit I haven't watched either evening. On Wednesday I was traveling and busy with something that went well into the evening. On Thursday I watched the first 5 minutes or so and got so turned off by the canned talking points that I flipped to something completely different. We had a PBS nature special on the DVR - it was about the evolution of crocodiles and elephants. I found it more edifying, and better for my sanity.
ReplyDeleteI'm down on debates. Donald Trump was elected via a political process in which debates played an important role. I think it would be better for the country if candidates would agree to a series of Meet the Press-style segments. Give each candidate 10 or 15-minute to mix it up with seasoned journalists on seven or eight key issues. A network probably could work its way through even the overstuffed Democratic field in two evenings, just like they did with the debate format this week. And it would be a playing-field-leveling exercise, so the Jay Inslees or Tulsi Gabbards of the world could get some extended exposure, and we could judge whether they merit being considered alongside Biden, Harris, Warren and Sanders.
The News Hour has done that type of sit-down with all the candidates. I agree it is useful.
DeleteBut seeing how the candidates respond to pressure and make themselves heard in a debate is also useful.
There will be debates with Trump. He will not play by the rules. He will loom and scoff and interrupt and tell lies.
I am looking for the candidate who can calmly say, "You, sir, are are a fraud and a menace to our national health security."
Someone needs to either give him the deer in the headlights moment, or goad him into a rant so crazy that it exposes all the toads twisting in his brain.
Not surprised Republicans might enjoy spending time with crocodiles rather than Democrats given the party's preference for reptiles right now.
*national health and security
DeleteA nature special would be more enjoyable no matter what one's political preference is. My husband watched a PBS thing on Einstein last night. Too deep for me. My preference for something mindless is "Hawaii Builds", the brother and sister contractor duo who rescue people from ill advised do it yourself projects.
DeleteIn the wake of the debates, I'm ready to follow Margeret's advice in her article
Deletehttps://www.commonwealmagazine.org/stepping-back
I really can't do anything until I vote in the primary anyway. Time to put another layer of paint on the front doorway. Figure out where to stick the birdhouse.
Yes Stanley, I should follow my own advice! I am expecting we'll have to turn to an exorcism.
DeleteI knit. It helps.
Delete"Margaret", I meant to spell.
ReplyDeletePete is indeed an adult in the room. Too bad that he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hades … either as POTUS candidate nor VPOTUS candidate (he is not the right gender nor the right race. And we all know that in a substantial portion of the electorate, a gay man will NOT get their vote). I wish he would run for Governor of or Senator from Indiana. Then in 4+ years he will be very kickassable.
ReplyDelete