2nd DEM Debate Thread: July 30 & 31, Detroit (MI), CNN

[NOVA Green]

Biden butchering his own phone instructions is the perfect representation of the type of candidate he is/would be.

Yeah---- I wondered about that when I saw it in the debate.....

[CookieDamage]

I'm gonna go ahead, save the humility, and throw out this old Kirsten 2020 hat. It's not gonna last much longer after tonight.

What a disappointment.

Can I have It?  I thought she did well.

I thought she did brilliantly. And she looked even better today than Gabbard. Gabbard did better in the first debate, while Gillibrand improved so much from her rather lackluster first debate. She was one of the stars tonight.

I hope she at least starts to poll in like the 5% range.

[NOVA Green]

Gabbard leading all 50 states in searches during the debate.

Russian Troll farms at it again.....   

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

In case you were wondering where Joe303030 got you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7KKM9RLNV4

[Crumpets]

In case you were wondering where Joe303030 got you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7KKM9RLNV4

That is such a perfect post-Joe Biden-debate video to watch, I almost have to wonder if he is actually a genius of ironic post-modern comedy.

[Gracile]

I think last night's debate was far better from a substantive policy standpoint, as well.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Tulsi is really hot

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

She’s Kawaii or as we spell it here in the states, Kauai.

Kawai’i.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

I think the first debate was far better from a substantive policy standpoint, as well.

These debates just remind me of how insane the 2016 GOP primary debates were.

[NOVA Green]

Gabbard is a babe. Many GOP pervs likely googling her too.

So what are you saying ReaganFan.....

If DEMs run a "Hot White Blond" then we will see a significant defection among "Conservative Older White Republicans" and have a 60-40 PV win?   

Maybe we need a stealth operation and run a "Hot White Blond" in the PUB Party as part of a Black Bag gig to help steer the PUB party out of the insanity and political wilderness since '16, so we can get back to getting s**t done in Washington, since apparently this is what the once proud party of Lincoln and Eisenhower has been reduced to in just a few short decades in American History.

[eric82oslo]

In case you were wondering where Joe303030 got you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7KKM9RLNV4

Did he misspeak and wanted to say Joe2020? I understood literally nothing when he asked us to Google Joe303030.

Maybe he's in the early stages of Alzheimer as well.

[John Dule]

Oof! Assad is trending in the US.

How bitter will Harris and her backers get by the next debate? She put people in prison for smoking weed while she lit up a joint at home! Tulsi has exposed the hack fraud for what she is, and Harris' pathetic supporters must now suffer the HUMILIATION of being taken down several pegs by a far more intelligent (and much more attractive) candidate. The embarrassment continues. Sad!

[Saint Milei]

Oof! Assad is trending in the US.

How bitter will Harris and her backers get by the next debate? She put people in prison for smoking weed while she lit up a joint at home! Tulsi has exposed the hack fraud for what she is, and Harris' pathetic supporters must now suffer the HUMILIATION of being taken down several pegs by a far more intelligent (and much more attractive) candidate. The embarrassment continues. Sad!

They are probably googling to see if Assad separated parents from their kids for truancy and then laughed about it

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

In case you were wondering where Joe303030 got you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7KKM9RLNV4

Did he misspeak and wanted to say Joe2020? I understood literally nothing when he asked us to Google Joe303030.

Maybe he's in the early stages of Alzheimer as well.

He did screw it up. He meant to tell people to text Joe to 30330, but instead just told people to go to  Joe30330.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

That post-debate interview with Gabbard was a trainwreck. She refused to condemn Assad three times.

She even falsely said Biden apologized for the Crime Bill. It's clear she's gunning to be Biden's side-chick.

[eric82oslo]

In case you were wondering where Joe303030 got you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7KKM9RLNV4

Did he misspeak and wanted to say Joe2020? I understood literally nothing when he asked us to Google Joe303030.

Maybe he's in the early stages of Alzheimer as well.

He did screw it up. He meant to tell people to text Joe to 30330, but instead just told people to go to  Joe30330.

lol, that's hillarious. His age is clearly showing. He's usually in bed way before that debate ended.

[eric82oslo]

Yang once again got the least speaking time of all ten contenders, though it was really close this time. Got in just 14 words less than de Blasio, 21 words less than Inslee, 30 less than Bennet and 107 less than Gabbard.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/second-democratic-debate-night-two/

Obviously the two front runners who got constantly attacked got a lot more speaking time, as it should be frankly.

While MSNBC was really unfair against half of all the debaters, and against Yang in particular, CNN was extremely fair to all 20 candidates. I'd give CNN an A+ for night number two and an A overall. (NBC/MSNBC however I'd give an F.)

[Progressive Pessimist]

Wow! In reading all the posts I had to catch up on in this thread I might be the hot-take king tonight!

1. Biden massively improved. Sure, he still slurred a few words but he instilled a little bit more confidence in me if he ends up being the nominee...which is probably as likely as ever. He will not suffer any drop in support like last time. He defended himself adequately enough and dished out a little offense too. Also strangely, he got as much support from other candidates as he got flack. Bennet and Gabbard managed to disrupt some of the attacks on him. Gabbard sympathizing with Biden "being lied to" was especially surprising. I thought she was going to tear Biden a new a**hole for that. Biden clearly can, and so far has benefited from a competitive primary. Unlike Clinton I think he can end up being a better general election candidate because of it. He cannot get complacent again though. Maybe those are low standards, but I'll take any reassurance that I can.

2. Gabbard was fine, and going after Harris was clearly a good move on her part. I doubt she gains much support out of it though and everything else out of her was fairly generic and forgettable.

3. Harris was never going to top her last debate performance, especially in becoming more of a front-runner, and therefore a target, since then. But she performed well everywhere outside of Gabbard's criticisms. This forum really does have an irrational hate-boner for her. She will not suffer much for this, and will still be in the top four. Granted, she probably won't see another bump like last time either.

4. This forum also has an irrational hate-boner for Gillibrand. What did she do that was so wrong? I'll agree that her campaign is probably done as she is unlikely to make the September debates since her candidacy just doesn't seem to be clicking with many, but I still like her and I think she deserves better. Perhaps you may not be gung-ho towards her, but to see such vitriole (as with Harris) is really kind of baffling to me. I'm not a Gabbard fan, but I was fair to her in acknowledging that she won in an interaction with a candidate that I prefer.

5. Booker won the night overall, and if anyone is going to gain in the polls, it will be him. He may have a bump like Harris did, albeit a smaller one. It might not be enough for him to enter the top five though.

6. As for everyone else-Bennet, Inslee, and Yang all improved as well. De Blasio did about as well as last time and stuck to his offense strategy, but to more mixed results with this debate. One way or another, this will probably be our last debate with all of them, save for Yang, so how they did almost doesn't matter.

So there are my most recent thoughts, if anyone cares. I also want to add, that the numerous interruptions from the crowd were especially interesting. Was all of this coordinated or just coincidence?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

In case you were wondering where Joe303030 got you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7KKM9RLNV4

Did he misspeak and wanted to say Joe2020? I understood literally nothing when he asked us to Google Joe303030.

Maybe he's in the early stages of Alzheimer as well.

He did screw it up. He meant to tell people to text Joe to 30330, but instead just told people to go to  Joe30330.

lol, that's hillarious. His age is clearly showing. He's usually in bed way before that debate ended.

Funny enough, some troll already registered joe30330.com.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

In case you were wondering where Joe303030 got you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7KKM9RLNV4

Did he misspeak and wanted to say Joe2020? I understood literally nothing when he asked us to Google Joe303030.

Maybe he's in the early stages of Alzheimer as well.

He did screw it up. He meant to tell people to text Joe to 30330, but instead just told people to go to  Joe30330.

lol, that's hillarious. His age is clearly showing. He's usually in bed way before that debate ended.

Funny enough, some troll already registered joe30330.com.

LOL it redirects to a college student named Josh running for president.

[GM Team Member and Deputy PPT WB]

WB rankings for night 2

Biggest winners:
Booker: Did a good job attacking Biden. Not much else other than that.
Gabbard: Did decent, and considering that mostly everyone sucked in this debate that's enough to put her here.
Yang: Was much more able to articulate his plans, but he did have a kinda messy answer when he basically said "just evacuate the coasts we can't do anything"

Biggest "meh"s:
Biden: Did way better than last time, but still has serious foot-in-mouth issues.
Castro: Did good, although he could have definitely done better.
de Blasio: He was very mediocre.

Biggest losers:
Gillibrand: She tried so hard to get a good attack in against Biden but managed to fail. She isn't going to make it past this month imo.
Harris: She did a bit worse than I expected her to. Nothing absolutely debilitating, but she certainly unperformed.
Bennet: Still sounded medicated. Next.
Inslee: Just wasn't able to articulate his ideas well.

[eric82oslo]

So there are my most recent thoughts, if anyone cares. I also want to add, that the numerous interruptions from the crowd were especially interesting. Was all of this coordinated or just coincidence?

Yeah, I have questions about those interruptions too. They seemed to be targeting Booker and Biden, right? I couldn't hear what they were screaming.

[eric82oslo]

Yang: Was much more able to articulate his plans, but he did have a kinda messy answer when he basically said "just evacuate the coasts we can't do anything"

When did he say that? I never heard him say anything like that. Do you have a clip?

However, in relations to the climate crisis debate, he did say that we need to lift higher, to lift everyone up with a universal basic income. He didn't say it in this debate, but he's said it dozens of times earlier in his campaign that poor people can't manage to worry about climate change as long as they're constantly distressed and in fear of financial ruin and personal bankruptcy. Thus in order for Americans to start really caring about fighting climate change and making it a huge grass roots movement, even on the Republican side of the isle, lifting people up to and into the middle class is absolutely crucial in order to hit that groundswell of support which it will need in order to change policies on the local, regional, state and federal level.

[Pericles]

On the issue of the filibuster, I don't actually see that being a prohibitive obstacle if Democrats do win a trifecta. I think Democrats will probably eliminate it eventually, or maybe use reconciliation to get around it on parts of their agenda and weaken it further. Perhaps under a moderate like Biden the filibuster would remain partially in place, but even then I'm unsure. The reason most Democrats aren't outright promising to scrap it right now is that when the Republicans do try to use it and they need to eliminate the filibuster, the Democrats can try and score political points by making it look like Republicans forced them into it, rather than that they were definitely going to eliminate it anyway (not that actual voters care either way of course, but politicians like to maximize positive appearances for themselves at every opportunity).

[Ogre Mage]

I feel that my prediction about this debate back on July 20th mostly came true:

I think both Biden and Harris got bad draws.  Biden because he is going to be under fire all night from aggressive lower polling candidates, many of whom are quite progressive and have nothing to lose. After stumbling on race he will be on the debate stage with every candidate of color in the field.  Harris because at this point, going after Biden a second time puts her in significant danger of raising her disapproval ratings.  It would be better if she could just project her own positive message, similar to what Warren did in the first debate.  But if Booker and Castro score hits on Biden while Harris stands passively by, do they start to siphon black and Latino support from her?  While most of the field will be going after Biden, Gabbard is a potential irritant for Harris.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Predictit odds with changes from before the debate

Biden 27 (+2)
Warren 22 (-1)
Harris 17 (-6)
Sanders 14 (+2)
Buttigieg 11 (0)
Yang 8 (-1)