barefooted's picture

    Democratic Debate - Afterthoughts

    Webb and Chafee are gone; one too complaining and strident, the other just oddly weird.

    O'Malley helped himself by being present and forceful, a friendly lefty who turned Baltimore mayoral issues into neighborhood crime control success.

    Sanders held his own and then some - he stuck to his platform without being defensive, didn't buy into the moderator's desire for conflict and came across as genuine and compelling.

    Clinton was surprisingly relaxed and unsurprisingly prepared. She wasn't too wonkish, stayed mostly out of the weeds but managed to be informative and (shockingly) approachable.

    My take? She "won". Barely. Numbers won't move much for Sanders and Clinton; O'Malley gets a bump and it's now officially a three person race. Unless ...


    O'Malley's Baltimore police were heavy-handed, leading to the riots after the death of Freddie a Gray while in police custody.

    Yes, a common hit against him which I think he deflected well. At least for those not too familiar with his Baltimore policing policies.

    I think we have to acknowledge that Webb was screwed time wise in the debate. He rarely got a chance to articulate his views and was never involved in any of the substantial debates others had. He might have looked better to some voters if he had some back and forth with Hillary or Sanders. Totally unfair though I can't care much since I want him out of the race.

    I think we also have to acknowledge the reality that network time goes to those who matter. Equal time among candidates is a myth at best. He got much more time (though through demanding and ignoring time limits) than Chaffee. Shame he wasted it that way.

    Lawrence Lessig likely would have been more interesting than any of them.

    Bernie's comment on email was appreciated - don't need Democrats re-treading GOP attack points.

    My guess (not having seen it) is that both Bernie & Hillary won - by eliminating Biden. The Hillary slide seems over - the current standings seem like the status quo for the near-term.

    Now that things are stable, it'd be nice to agree that 1) arming Libya and Syria is about as dumb as going into Iraq for no reason, and 2) a President should understand computer security more than to run his/her own server and ignore Russian & Chinese hack attacks - we should actually be discussing national & business security, not going through basics about a home modem and port scanning.

    [to return to point 2 above, the only reason security is in the papers is because there's a Hillary next to it. We did little to nothing to beef up internet security after 9/11, after Bradley-Chelsea Manning, after Eric Snowden, and after the numerous hacs such as State Department, Sony, et al. In fact, we've used almost every security breach as a way to further encroach on personal privacy and abet government snooping, while approving US hacks and destructive Trojans and snooping against other countries that we regularly cry foul about - will Hillary pull back from the government canards that haven't worked but the "grownups" in Washington keep pushing? since I'm assuming she'll win, I hope these debates and other pressures are a learning experience at least]

    And BTW,  Bernie should have at least "evolved" on gun control after a few more school shootings - how much cover did he need? His fans aren't following him for gun policy, so throw it under the bus. He could have even gone for a twofer, exclaiming "I did it for the minority children!"  Oh well. Sometimes "authentic" doesn't play so well.

    Lessing would have come across as a loon. Having a single issue for running and then resigning office after the issue is addressed makes him a nonviable  candidate. His plan has no chance unless the Congress is in the hands of Liberal Democrats. Leasing has no real plan for getting his idea passed. Clinton and Sanders can merely say that they support campaign finance reform as well as other important issues like gun control. They can also note that they will stick around to see that a host of issues are addressed. Lessing would have been a distraction. Campaign finance reform is important but Lessig is not a good messenger. Lessig performed poorly explaining his plan when Lawrence O'Donnell interviewed him after the debate last night.

    Fair enough.

    Thanks B.  Good pithy analysis.  Sadly (from my perspective as a BernieBot), I think the debate helped HRC most.  Biden may be less inclined to run a this point.  Some of those who were considering Bernie but feared he might not be Presidential may have been convinced by his strong performance.  But, my guess is more undecided and leaning Biden folks will "come home" to Hillary.

    The debate was designed to help her.  I watched how she was given the first shot on questions about left issues that she has just embraced that really belonged to Sanders.  It was Sanders that brought them to the table.  I hope to get to see the debate again and take a closer look at that. 

    The fact that there was not personal attacks and finger pointing, shows the leadership of Sanders in effecting the Democratic Party.  He has brought back the new deal style of campaigning. The media don't want this because they are addicted to the easy ad money from campaign air wars. In fact Clinton made me chuckle when she said in the middle of the debate that she was a "new deal Democrat."  I am sure Eleanor Roosevelt rolled her eyes on that one from the grave. Hillary has a long way to evolve to become a New Deal Democrat.  She will have to cut her ties with Wall St.  I also thought her statement about going to Wall St. and "telling them to cut it out,"  in 2007 was very weak. 

    This clip is from the Young Turks.  I guess they picked up on it too. 

    Many of Bernie's natural constituency did not see this debate because of the fact it was on CNN. I finally went through CNN's face book page and was able to get to watch it. I also did not have access to the the bobble heads before and after.

    O'Malley will get a bump because this was the first time many have seen him. He will probably pick up Biden support.  

    Hillary started out strong, showed a little weakness in the middle but ended strong.  She was a very polished and embraced the left issues that was brought to the table by Sander's campaign. Many of those policies she has just released since the first of October. Will she stay there later and not pivot back to center?  

    What you see is what you get with Sanders.  He is not a beautiful gift wrapped over managed politician. He had the line of the night with going after the media for the their email meme.  I am sure this will get ignored in the media. But for us that watched him do that, it was a demonstration that he is not afraid to take on the established right and call them out. I would not count him out yet on gun regulation.  It took him more then a couple of weeks to evolve on black lives matter.  

    It was really a great debate.  It sure makes the GOP look pathetic and stupid. I would say the GOP lost this debate.   


    The media realizes that neither Trump or Carson have any real substance. Carly Fiorina is unable to tell the truth about her business career or her lies about a "Planned Parenthood"video. The media will prop up Rubio as the next great Republican hope. He will be promoted as having expertise in some area, just like Paul Ryan was glorified as a fiscal expert even though he has never presented a viable budget. 

    The first Democratic debate focused on policy rather than personality that was the focus in the GOP debate.

    It won't last long because Rubio will screw it up. His head is pretty empty. 

    Rubio has Dreams. He Dreams so much he capitalizes American Dreams everywhere it is in his book American Dreams to show how serious he really really is About It.

    He is constructing an agenda.

    He knows the middle class has had it tough and wants to ensure the government does even less for them.

    He laments the poor.

    Jim Webb really disappointed. What ​ he might have said:

    "Political enemies" is a Nixon concept. Democrats have opponents, Republicans create enemies.  But soldiers have enemies. I fought my enemies. The one who wounded me in Viet Nam is no longer around.

    I once asked a Wall St. friend who was semi-retired if he was trading stocks. "I'm not in the game", he said, "I don't see the deal flow". Webb's been out of the game, which showed clearly. I don't see how he recovers, even for a V.P. slot but I'll give him another chance.

    Biden lost.

    Hal's "pithy" support of Bernie may have waned.

    Clinton's performance was a huge, huge, relief.

    Thanks, Bernie. Vermonters are known as fair people. Along with Kevin McCarthy's gift, Hillary is on a roll.



    My support for Bernie Sanders has not waned.  Did I imply that?  I'm not sure where and/or how.

    I made it up. Sorry.

    All good ;-)

    Good debate for Clinton and for Sanders, in different ways. I think each solidified their existing position: one as front-runner, the other as main challenger/voice of the party base.

    The two former Republicans are have also consolidated their positions as non-candidates. Webb did get less time (part of the rules gave more time to candidates who got attacked, and no one bothered rolling up on Webb), but nearly every time he opened his mouth he damaged himself, so I don't see that talking more would have helped. Webb would have done best not to speak at all.

    O'Malley did a very credible job of making a case for himself as a plausible running mate. He's not exciting enough to be many people's first choice, but he's a very acceptable surrogate and emergency backup (and seriously, either Clinton or Sanders would be well advised to have a younger VP).

    Most impressive to me was the party unity: wiping away the BS scandals, and explicitly commenting on how different this debate was from the GOP's circus. That did my heart good.

    Great summary

    I'm in a crappy mood. It's irritating to me that the headliners here consistently acknowledge each other even on very marginal work, instead of encouraging the people who try to keep this site interesting and viable. it's kind of insulting to note Doc when someone else took the trouble to put up the post.  ​

    I'm in a crappy mood cause I just realized our Brainiacs think overthrowing Qaddafi was a good idea. Still. Can't we bring anything less self-destructive to Democratic foreign policy? Why are Democrats still supporting fucking Petraeus rules? He sucked and everything he touched turned to shit. Bring back Al Gore - police it until military action is actually required. Most times it isn't except to back up someone's skewed agenda.

    Feeling better, whole carton of Cherry Garcia.

    I have to admit that the humanitarian crisis pretext convinced me.

    Apologies, Michael. Textbook transference.

    To the dagblog community:

    It has come to our attention that certain bloggers have been receiving excessive and undeserved praise for marginal contributions to the blog. Some have even been commended for comments shorter than 200 words.

    This behavior will stop today. From now on, every blogger shall receive praise in proportion to his or her word count. Anyone caught over-praising or distributing praise unevenly will receive a ToS warning (along with praise proportional to the word-count of the praising comment, naturally).

    Comments may not be praised unless the post itself is first praised, as well as every comment in the thread longer than the comment selected for praise. If a longer comment is added to the thread or an existing comment lengthened, all prior praisers will be notified and required to praise the new or modified comment.

    Dick Day's Line of the Day is exempt from the comment requirement in order to avoid an unhealthy proliferation of Line of the Day awards. However, Mr. Day will be required to distribute his award evenly over the blog community. If he fails to do so, Management will hack into his computer and infect it with a buttload of North Korean viruses.

    Thank you for your cooperation. You may begin your new responsibilities by praising this comment for its fairness and sincerity.

    The Management

    PS Most excellent comment, Oxy. I'm glad you're feeling better. ;)

    This is the first time I have really understood how it feels to be a schmuck.

    Don't you DARE hack into DD's computer. You would have mass mutiny on your hands. Don't be so evil to even suggest that. 

    Fabulous comment.

    You don't even want to know how many undercover members of Dag it would take to fix a buttload of viruses in DD's computer.  

    Getting, receiving, and obtaining praise, commendation, kudos, and congratulations based on the total amount, number, and quantity of words, logos, and vocabulary used or utilized in a blog, post, or comment is not just the wisest most intelligent decision you've made here but it is also the most well advised, judicious and prudent choice, selection, alternative action, and option you, and I assume, presume, and take for granted that all of the others on the masthead agree, could have taken.

    I'm not just pandering or sucking up when I say, assert, avow, aver, maintain, and affirm that this new, fresh, and novel approach to commenting will basically, fundamentally, and essentially change, modify, and alter the nature of people's, both men, women, children, and any dogs, cats and any other animals both wild and domesticated that happen to  post here, behavior, manner, mode and style of commenting.

    Stupendous comment. I am amazed, astonished, astounded, ass-on-the-floor-awestruck by your erudite acuity. Bravo, sir. Carry on.

    What can I say? Look, my father had just died, it was my first vote, it was going 95-1 anyway and I had just arrived. Did I say it was my first vote? OK? Otherwise I'm a block of granite.

    Best sub-thread ever!

    Send my check to the usual address.

    And did I say, "thanks, bafefooted".





    This is highly SCANDALOUS behavior, I would like to add. 

    Can I get a variance on praise-filled comments if they are in the form of a haiku?

    See what I mean? Ten god damned minutes and no praise.

    Got any samples?


    It's offensive to say Webb shouldn't have spoken, or anyone else on that stage. And Chafee was in a class all his own as far as hurting himself. 

    Webb gave the best answer on the immediate threat, contrasting it with the long term, the operational and the immediate.

    I couldn't disagree more on O'Malley.


    Chafee was in a class all of his own in hurting himself.

    But Webb repeatedly damaged his own chances. Even when his positions were smart, he highlighted his distance from most Democratic primary voters.

    I don't mean he should not have been allowed to speak. I mean what he actually chose to say damaged his already marginal chances.

    Right. I was way over invested in the guy.

    Based on what I thought I knew about him I considered him to be way more Hawkish that I liked but not really more so than the other candidates and quite possibly smarter about it. He really disappointed me last night. I was also way over-invested in him even with little investment.

    I just don't want to lose this election because white working guys and veterans simply cannot stomach another buttoned up establishment ticket. And knowing my ilk in Appalachia, Bernie won't do it for them nor would the Latino mayor of San Antonio, say as a VP pick.. Experts say this election will be won in Cleveland, the city, and I think we must add to that equation Zanesville and Steubenville.


    Trump loves Cleveland so much that I expect him to announce he is building Yuuge building next to the Scripps Howard Building in downtown Cleveland. 

    Trump seems to have the Republican party on its knees.

    Wow. So very literally the last thing we need.

    My sense of the "election will be won in Cleveland" theory, and I might be wrong, is that the Democratic path to victory is to crank up turnout in Cleveland's super-democratic neighborhoods in order to offset and outdo the Republican voters in other parts of Ohio. My understanding was the "win in Cleveland" thing is about the mechanics of the ground game.

    Trump is covering all his bases.  He has already announced an new building on the water front in Sarasota near Ringling.  

    Barefooted, I accidentally tuned in CNN on Sirius, and guess what, it's wall to wall Schmuck-face who has been gassing out all day about the debate, mainly trying to tear down Bernie, can't trade, weak, etc, let Hillary off the hook (a twofer).

    Then I switch to MSNBC, Matthews is airing all of Trump's gas.

    CNN webpage has comments by that jerk Mark Halprin on how Bernie was unprepared.

    So what's going on here, I ask myself.

    Look at it this way. As long as Sanders is in the race he is generating enthusiasm, which imo, ultimately leads to more interest in Democrats in general and probably a larger turnout even if Bernie is not the nominee. So killing enthusiasm seems to be the goal. Or maybe they are egging Bernie on, so in responding he takes the limelight away. What do you think?

    I'm disgusted the way the media is playing to Trump.

    The media is cash starved.  Kos made a comment to his cranky readers about why there was so many Trump articles on the Daily Kos front page.  The regulars wanted more about Democrats and their issues then the going ons of Trump.  Kos said Trump generated eye balls and clicks and that was how he paid the bills. 

    I am sure that is why media is playing to Trump.  Everyone like to slow down and gawk at a wreck.

    This is really weird to me as Trump doesn't appeal to me even in a limited "slow-motion train wreck" kinda way.

    Hal, I guess it's about ratings.

    In any case, having dealt with my neuroses overnight, I am now of the clear headed opinion that Bernie is transformative and tried to explain it over on LisB's post.

    Thanks Oxy.  Will recheck out.

    Regarding Sanders and skewed coverage, this NYT piece is odd, at best. He did a fundraiser at a wealthy person's home and raised alot of money from a somewhat more "elite" group. And? That's even slightly unusual why? His campaign has said that they are planning more small appearances now that the large rallies have garnered so much attention and support, so I wonder why it's supposed to be news. Perhaps Bernie is going to be tagged as hypocritical if he raises money from any wealthy people ...

    Trump still draws eyeballs, so he's covered grotesquely. Though at least we're not being subjected to the spectacle of every single speech!

    I apologize in advance for satirical silliness, but it does apply to the debate ... sort of. Honestly, Larry David on SNL's cold open as Bernie was so spot on, reportedly Sanders wants him on the campaign trail as a backup.

    Not so sure Hillary feels the same about Kate McKinnon (I mean, really?), but I've no doubt Bernie's campaign totally loved David's portrayal - if for no other reason than a beloved fellow "did" a beloved fellow. Fabulous!

    (Now about that Trump hosting thing ...)

    Latest Comments