Debatable Points

Some of the candidates from the first night of 2019 Democratic debates (from left): Julián Castro, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Beto O’Rourke, Amy Klobuchar, Tulsi Gabbard

Many commentators described the first round of Democratic primary debates as “the first time many voters have tuned into the 2020 presidential race.”  These people have not met me.  Whether you’d been following the race since the beginning or not, there were lots of takeaways from the two-night political extravaganza.

The debates took place over two nights: Wednesday, June 26 and Thursday, June 27, featuring a whopping twenty candidates among them.  The insane part is, that wasn’t even all of the candidates!  Four were polling or fundraising so poorly that they didn’t even meet the low bar the DNC set to get in.  These were: Governor Steve Bullock of Montana, Mayor Wayne Messam of Florida, Congressman Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, and former Congressman Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania.  Many of these candidates suffered from entering the race too late, or in the case of Messam, nobody knowing who the hell he is (even I had no idea before he announced).  While the DNC tried to group the candidates in a semi-random order to avoid having an “undercard” and “contenders” debate the way the GOP did in 2016, it still kind of ended up that way.  So, without further ado, these are my big takeaways from these debates.  I’ll go in chronological order, with my points from night 1 first:

Cory Booker had policy chops, with charisma to match.  Senator Booker (NJ) probably had the best overall performance on the first night.  He was poised, confident, and an excellent speaker (…perhaps in the mold of a certain black President? 😊).  But he wasn’t all talk, either.  His proposal for a driver’s license-style credential that should be required to own a gun was a great idea that I think he’s been the only candidate to propose so far (or at least, the only one that’s put it front and center like that).  He also showed his liberal street cred with promises to hold Big Pharma responsible for runaway drug prices and to support DACA, though his Spanish answer felt pander-y after two other candidates had already done it.

Elizabeth Warren delivered a solid, passionate performance.  She didn’t have any of those “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy”-style one-liners that every candidate hopes for.  But she proved that she knew her stuff and believed in her ideas, which helped her show why she deserves a place among the frontrunners.  Warren (MA) also had a good answer on gun policy, calling for the CDC to be allowed once again to conduct public health research into gun violence, a reprehensible policy that has prevented the country from finding solutions to this problem. Her closing statement was probably her best moment, where she talked about how the government helped create opportunity for her, and how it can help do the same for others.

Elizabeth Warren made the case for her policies very well in night 1 of the debates.

Julián Castro stood out, except for one moment.  I don’t think anyone expected Castro (TX) to stand out in the first night, but he did, especially when the topic of immigration came up.  He was particularly animated when he said that the immigration camps that President Trump has set up “should piss us all off.”  He got into the weeds of that debate more than any other candidate, calling for the repeal of section 1325, which the Trump Administration is using to implement some of their worst policies.  What kept him from having the best overall debate in my eyes was his tussle with Beto O’Rourke, who did not specifically call for the repeal of section 1325 and instead argued for a more comprehensive approach to immigration policy.  Castro interrupted O’Rourke to pressure him to call for the section’s repeal right after he’d challenged all the candidates to do it.  Most debate watchers seemed to agree that Castro won that exchange, but he came off as nitpicky and annoying to me when he butted into Beto’s answer simply to repeat himself and obsess over what felt like a technicality.  I generally think it’s a bad idea for candidates to interrupt each other during debates; it almost always comes off badly.  O’Rourke, for his part, gave a pretty bland performance overall.  He stumbled through some of his answers and generally seemed overwhelmed by the moment, which is not something you want in a presidential candidate.  Speaking of interrupting…

Bill de Blasio came off like an annoying bully.  I get that candidates trapped in 1% polling hell have to force the issue a bit, because the moderators won’t be inclined to give them speaking time.  But de Blasio (NY)’s frequent interruptions and haughty speaking style won’t help him break out of that zone.  He’s probably the type of candidate who will hang around long after it’s obvious he won’t win the nomination.

The other candidates didn’t really stand out too much.  Jay Inslee (WA) was probably the “best of the rest,” but he talked very little about climate change despite making it his signature issue.  I guess that shows his versatility, but he didn’t even name it when the moderators asked every candidate what they felt the greatest threat to national security was, instead naming President Trump.  Amy Klobuchar (MN) took an unnecessary jab at him after he talked about bills he passed as Governor of Washington to protect abortion rights, saying “there are three women on the stage who have fought for abortion rights” in a somewhat indignant tone.  She seemed to be claiming ownership over the issue simply because she’s a woman, which rubbed me the wrong way.  Her debate performance was fine aside from that.  Tulsi Gabbard (HI) spent most of the night defending her departures from liberal orthodoxy, but did come across as poised and confident.  Tim Ryan (OH) needs charisma lessons but knows his stuff, and John Delaney (MD) mainly came off as shrill and whiny.

And now, night 2:

Kamala Harris pretty clearly won this round.  She was confident without being arrogant, passionate without being shrill, and clearly understood the importance of the moment.  She was able to burnish her liberal street cred, and personalized her answers in ways that made her relatable and in tune with what’s going on in America.  And of course, she produced the most talked-about moment of either debate: her back-and-forth with Vice President Biden over racial issues.  In case you missed it, Harris (CA) called out Biden over his recent comments describing being able to work together with segregationist senators to get legislation passed.  Harris tied that moment to Biden’s stance against the federal government ordering busing African-American students in order to integrate schools.  While Harris cast that as a betrayal of the black community, I think her attack wasn’t entirely fair.  The fact is, many African-Americans of this era also opposed busing because it messed up kids’ school schedules, and many Democrats who supported it paid a hefty electoral price.  Setting that up as a binary choice is somewhat disingenuous.  Though, that said…

Kamala Harris was well-prepared for the second night of debates, and it showed.

Joe Biden was awful, full stop.  Biden (DE) has had a long and distinguished career as Senator and Vice President, and is well-liked by many Democrats, including this one.  But you wouldn’t have known it from his debate answers.  I wonder if he just scaled back on his prep because he figured he could coast and hang back as the frontrunner.  But he just looked like a deer in the headlights for most of the night, caught totally flat-footed by attacks from other candidates he should’ve seen coming.  Harris’s attack may have been the most high-profile, but it was not the only one.  Someone that’s been on debate stages as many times as Biden has should have had a ready response for it, such as pivoting to his crucial role in passing an extension of the Voting Rights Act.  He could have easily riposted her attack, but chose not to, even going so far as to concede the remainder of his speaking time after delivering a short response.  Michael Bennet (CO) also went after him for championing the compromise tax bill that made the Bush tax cuts permanent and resulted in budgetary disasters such as sequestration, which he also failed to respond to.  He also had a weird quote when he said “the gun manufacturers are our enemy, not the NRA” (um, what?).  After that, I have serious reservations about his ability to debate Donald Trump.  And there’s a part of me that really wants to see Harris debate him now.

Pete Buttigieg had probably the second-best night.  In contrast to Harris’s aggressive stance, Mayor Pete was much more measured and thoughtful.  But that doesn’t mean he was boring, either.  He did a few things that I wish more Democrats would do, such as characterizing Trump’s tariffs as a tax on working families, which they are.  He also called out Republicans for their hypocrisy on religion, saying, “The Republican Party likes to cloak itself in the language of religion.  We should call it hypocrisy, for a party that associates with Christianity to say it is OK to suggest that God would smile on the division of families at the hands of federal agents, that God would condone putting children in cages has lost all claim to ever use religious language again.”  He also accepted some responsibility for the shooting in South Bend, Indiana, where he is Mayor, saying he “didn’t get it done” with regard to relations between African-Americans and police.  While I loved his honesty, he’ll probably pay a political price for it, which is unfortunate.

Bernie Sanders was fine, but didn’t really help himself either.  Sanders (VT) repeated the same talking points we’ve heard from him ad nauseum for the past two years, contributing to the perception that he’s running the same campaign he ran in 2016.  This lack of adaptability could really cost him, given that he’s no longer running as the sole progressive in the race.  He also had a Trump-like moment where he accused moderator Rachel Maddow of mischaracterizing his position on guns, even though she was reading a direct quote of his.  He also reminded everyone that he voted against the Iraq War in 2003 while Biden didn’t.  I continue to scratch my head at how Democrats gave John Kerry a free pass on that issue in 2004, one year after the war started, but suddenly want to flay Hillary Clinton, and now Joe Biden, for those votes years later.

Andrew Yang may have been the smartest guy on stage…for three minutes.  Yang has no chance to win the nomination, but I’m glad he’s running because he’s pushing the idea of a universal basic income, or “freedom dividend” as he calls it.  His plan would give $1,000 per month to every American adult, helping working families not have to worry as much about basic needs, and freeing them up to perhaps change jobs more easily, or pursue careers that may be more fulfilling if less lucrative.  It was clear he knew his stuff well, rattling off evidence and numbers to support his plans.  As much as I hate it when candidates interrupt each other, Yang may have benefited from doing that, as the moderators only gave him three minutes to speak.

Eric Swalwell (MD) did better than expected, even if his schtick wore thin by the end.  He quoted John F. Kennedy in saying that America should “pass the torch to a new generation,” a not-so-subtle jab at Bernie and Biden.  Unlike the other obscure white men running for President, he actually was a surprisingly good speaker, though his challenge to Pete Buttigieg to fire the South Bend police chief without investigating his role in the shooting kinda felt like a desperate attempt at a one-liner that didn’t land.

Marianne Williamson needs to stop hitting the bong.  ‘Nuff said.  Though I did like it when she dropped the name of the President of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern, who is a far better leader than Williamson would ever be.

Michael Bennet was maybe the best of the rest, but that isn’t saying a whole lot.  He was one of many to land blows on Biden, as mentioned.  Kirsten Gillibrand (NY) also repeated her stump speech all night, though it was rich to hear her talk about the NRA’s greed when she sought their endorsement when she was in Congress.  John Hickenlooper looked out of place as a moderate, and should’ve talked more about the awesome gun control bill he passed as governor of Colorado, of all states.

Mayor Pete probably won’t be the nominee, but I kinda hope he gets the VP slot.