• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    William on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    Catscatscats on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    Catscatscats on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    riverdaughter on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    Sweet Sue on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    Sweet Sue on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    Propertius on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    Catscatscats on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    William on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    William on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    HerstoryRepeating on Brief observations, Hillary Cl…
    Catscatscats on There are some days…
    bojang bugami on The Video
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    June 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « May   Jul »
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Open Thread
      As usual, feel free to comment here on topics unrelated to recent posts.
  • Top Posts

  • Advertisements

Long Debate Night

The first culling of the herd of Democratic Presidential candidates is tonight. You can watch it on MSNBC, Telemundo and probably Youtube. I’ll try to add some links as the hour grows nearer.

It still seems too early but we have so many contenders that we’ve got to do an early elimination round or two. Tonight’s big draws will be Warren, Booker and Beto. Will Tulsi Gabbard steal the show? Unlikely, but she does look good on camera. Julian Castro and Jay Inslee are also on tonight.

Most of them seem overqualified. I mean, compared to who is president now. Trump will probably spend his time tweeting what he considers to be clever names for his competitors. Let’s ignore him for now. What am I saying?? The media can’t ignore him. It’s like some kind of mutualism. They’ve got to cover every stupid tweet and Trump has to over supply. They complete each other.

So, what are you interested in hearing? Will Lester Holt ask Warren about being part Native American? It’s the most pointless, uninteresting question out there so for sure someone is going to ask.

Will Beto get all wispy eyed and channel his best Robert Kennedy before he chirps, “This is fun! I can do this jumping on a countertop!”

Will Booker say anything not maudlin or overly sincere?

How long will it take Tulsi to self-eliminate?

What questions do you want them to ask? Who do you want to succeed? Will Amy bring her eating comb?

Have at it, people.


8 Responses

  1. I like Beto, and I want to see him do well. I think that he has been dismissed by many in the media, because he is easy to caricature, with his enthusiasm and hand gestures. But I think that he does evoke some of RFK or Bill Clinton, and I don’t think it’s an affect. I think that he is a very decent guy who wants to help the country; and that while some might prefer another candidate, he deserves serious consideration. But it will be hard or him to somehow vault over the five frontrunners, particularly in a large field.

    I like Inslee pretty well; I think he is what he appears, someone who is a capable governor who cares deeply about climate change. I would have liked to have seen a future debate just about climate change, but Perez nixed it.

    I cannot stand Tulsi Gabbard, who being backed by Russian and Syria, most likely. She is in there to sow discord, demonize the Democratic Party, and any candidate that Russia/Trump do not want.

    I will be interested to see how Klobuchar does. She is capable; she was really damaged by the NYT article about her being mean. The NYT seems to be on a crusade to damage every Democratic candidate, in the same way that they attacked Hillary. I don’t know how she can climb out of the deficit. My hunch is that she will get good reviews for this debate, as she is being underrated. I think that the media story of the evening will be finding someone who surprises; could be Klobuchar or Inslee. Finally, I would like to see someone question Warren about how she thinks that her various plans will ever get through Congress. She should be able to answer this, if she hopes to win. Every time Sanders was asked this, his stock reply was, “There will be a revolution.” Dramatic policy proposals are fun, but they can be shot down in a general election campaign, when people find out that their taxes will go up to pay for them.

  2. Everyone so far is doing well. However, my heart went a bit pitter patter with Beto’s response in espanol 💕

  3. I thought that the most interesting question was the one about what would they do if elected, and they nominated a Supreme Court Justice, and McConnell wouldn’t hold hearing again ? No one answered it directly. I know it is a difficult question, but a legitimate one, because it is a reality. Otherwise, I agree with Kathleen that everyone has done pretty well. I thought Klobuchar has been impressive, and she is certainly knowledgeable and poised.

  4. Some quick and obviously personal thoughts after watching all of the debate. I thought Klobuchar may have done the best, got a chance to show that she is knowledgeable and has a command of issues. Inslee’s focus on climate change is essential, and he does it in a compelling way. I initially thought that it was a bit forced for Beto to make his first comments in both English and Spanish, but i this was a Telemundo audience as well, and Booker and Castro and I think DeBlasio did it, too. I thought that Castro made a point to attack Beto, probably trying to win the Texas primary and to garner more Hispanic votes. I thought it was unpleasant, Castro seemed angry, for no legitimate reason.

    Warren started strong with wheelhouse questions, then didn’t say much after that. There is an issue, at least for me, about her command of non-economic topics, but she’ll have opportunities to dispel that. I do not think that tMedicare for All is a winning general election issue, and I think that Klobuchar has the better idea, at least electorally. Booker did pretty well, but varies between passion and almost tears, it seems. Ryan is a jerk. Deblasio tried to talk over people. Gabbard is dangerous. Delaney is harmless. There are just too many people on stage, and no one can really articulate anything detailed. It still beats watching any Republican debate ever. . If I were to score it, which is a silly idea in itself, I’d say, 1)Klobuchar 2)Inslee 3)Beto . Four of the top five i n polls are in the debate tomorrow night.

  5. Elizabeth Warren was my favorite. Never went off message, was concise. Shes the smallest on that stage and arguably most vulnerable yet she’s the bravest of the bunch. Amy Klobuchar & Cory Booker did well too. Tulsi ”conversion therapy” Gabbard needs to go away as does the former Mayor of Maryland and Ohio congressman… didn’t like the guys piling on Beto. Lots of showboating from the male candidates.

    • Seagrl,

      Yes, I noticed the showboating by the male candidates too. They do than because they didn’t do their homework like Warren and Klobuchar and it showed!

      Booker and Castro tried to monopolize the time by being allowed by the moderators to go at each other for far too long. Did you notice that none of the women interrupted or tried to monopolize the debate, which they should have! In fact, the moderators were much harder on the women by the way they talked over the women and didn’t allow them to finish their thought when their time was up. I felt the moderators allowed several of the men to talk far longer than they allowed the women. Why is that? Easier to order women around than men?

      I like O’Rourke, but it was clear that he was in way over his head with regard to policy. Yes, he speaks Spanish very well, but that’s not the primary qualification for the presidency and it showed in how he answered or rather, didn’t answer the questions! I like Castro too, but he doesn’t have the experience and command of the issues in the same league as Warren and Klobuchar. He is someone I would consider in the future, if he makes the effort to get experience and knowledge on the issues (other than immigration).

      I felt the frontrunner, Warren, had the right to bulldoze her way into the conversation, like many of the lower tiered men did, but I’m sure she would have been skewered by the press if she had. You know, she wasn’t being NICE! Nonetheless, she proved that she is the most well-versed on the many issues that are in dire need of attention than the other candidates. Clearly, having better prepared women on the stage shows the glaring differences between doing the hard work of actually learning the specifics on all of the issues as opposed to relying on long winded responses to cover up for not being prepared.

      I liked Amy. She is well prepared, just like Warren. I wish she had been as direct and powerful as she was when she said in response to Inslee “I know 3 women on this stage who have worked hard on a woman’s right to choose…” However, I can support either Warren or Klobuchar because of their “qualifications” (as opposed to being cute or charismatic). It’s been a long time since we’ve had a qualified person in the WH (Bill Clinton with the assistance of Hillary were the last) and we cannot afford another personality with very little substance in the Oval Office after the demage that will have been done by trump.

      • The interrupting and posturing and the “I’m the only one who did this this this me me me” from the male candidates was so out of touch and archaic and strange to me. It won’t work this time around. It’s why Warren is doing so well, she transcends that.

  6. Hillary Clinton ran on the most progressive platform since at least FDR. But Eddie Glaude today tells us that Biden “cannot do what Hillary did last time, in the primary debates, think that she was sure to win, so pivot toward the center.” She never did. Glaude and people like him who either did not vote, or reluctantly voted, but gave no support to Hillary, are why we not only have Trump, but a Supreme Court which has now mandated the most extreme gerrymandering imaginable.

    Note that the states which have passed laws to have independent commissions draw the districts, are all blue states, which actually makes it worse, because they now can’t gerrymander for Democrats. It is now very conceivable that a state like North Carolina will draw districts where all the Democrats are in one district, thus one Democratic Congressperson per red state. This would mean perpetual control of the House by Republicans. This is what Glaude got by sneering at Hillary, and stupidly thinking that “she pivoted to the center to play it safe.” This is why we are where we are now, and not just because of Trump, but also because of GW Bush, who also won because people didn’t think he was liberal enough, so they voted for Nader instead. That’s four of the far Right justices who voted to uphold the most undemocratic gerrymandering imaginable, which is tantamount to the end of popular democracy. Somehow, Glaude got a professorship at Princeton, even though he obviously has no idea how governance works. Or maybe he doesn’t care, he just wants to be angry, and think that his personal top issues are going to be favorably resolved by a Congress which has been perpetually gerrymandered in favor of Republicans. This whole thing, all of it, is absolutely unbearable.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: