1st DEM Debate Thread: June 26 & 27, Miami, MSNBC & NBC & Telemundo (9-11pm)

[Grassroots]

https://twitter.com/KBeds/status/1144454404952604672

wait what??

That moment when Biden-bashers finally realize Biden's performance was positive.

Dude I am a Biden supporter. If anything I am happy about this.

My bad, enlightened one.

[Crumpets]

I'm sure everyone on stage had a good fundraising night. Heck, I bet Trump probably had a good fundraising night.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

I'm sure everyone on stage had a good fundraising night. Heck, I bet Trump probably had a good fundraising night.

That's good. Shows that his supporters saw strong candidates and it scared them.

[NOVA Green]

I am frankly baffled that anyone legitimately believes that Williamson’s performance will garner her any support beyond her existing cult following. She gave zero substantive commentary on policy and was terribly scatterbrained (talking about the moon, the power of imagination, children in New Zealand, etc.). I get that eccentricity can draw some viewers in, but...

Don't believe the hype....

Williamson is NOT running for President, but rather to sell a message, and additionally as an Author has a few things to say about politics from a Female Democratic perspective....

That being said, recommended by the Oprah Book Club, she did provide an interesting perspective which actually appealed really well on TV when it came to a critique of DEM and PUB parties alike....

My wife just spent $16 buying a few of her books (not as a political candidate) but rather because of her writing....

We can do 9-9-9 or buy some books from Gingrich on the 'Pub side.

Still, pleasantly surprised about how a "joke candidate" actually was able to point out some of the absurdities within the current US Political system, with no intention of ever becoming a competitive candidate who raised interesting questions and comments was able to attract those who have spent a Year or more focusing on their "Big Day"...

(Whom actually threw out some interesting lines).

[Progressive Pessimist]

I guess I'll do what I did yesterday and go candidate by candidate and how I think they did in this much more fiery and somehow messier debate, even as there weren't any technical difficulties:

Biden: Biden started off really strong to me. It was nice to finally hear him talk some policy and entertain more relatively progressive ideas. I also appreciated that he came off as passionate about something for once when it came to healthcare and how he recounted the numerous tragedies he's faced over his life. I was under the impression that he would be this debate's Warren where he remains stable by not making many waves or drawing much attention to himself, especially as Sanders, who I expected to criticize him the most, avoided doing so. But then came that moment with Harris. Of all the people to absolutely whoop Biden, I really didn't think she would do it, I thought she would be more conciliatory towards him. Sanders and nearly every other candidate, other than Bennet and Swalwell, missed a real opportunity to weaken the obvious front-runner. He started in a passable way, but he did not end very solidly. He seemed to become frazzled and incoherent after that exchange with Harris. Hell, he even ceded that he was going over time as a way out of it. All that said, I don't see his position improving after tonight, and I could see him finally hemorrhaging some black support to Harris, but I don't think his performance will harm him irrevocably.

Sanders: What the hell is there to even say about him? He did exactly what I expected him to do, and what he always does: his stump speech. Yes, yes, I agree but could you actually try to answer the direct question or go into more detail for once? What I didn't expect was for him to get more of the brunt of criticism than Biden and from more candidates. He was on the defense most of the night even as he turned it all around slightly with his closing statement. Again, that statement just being a derivation of his stump speech, which works much better as a statement than as a rebuttal in a debate. He didn't do what he needed to in order to revitalize his campaign, and like in 2016, the hype around him is still alien to me.

Buttigieg: He too did what he usually does. He is possibly the most well-spoken of all the candidates and it works to his advantage. He had some solid answers on a lot of questions until he had to address the recent policing controversy in South Bend. He avoided the question over the diversity of its police force, and I am writing him off since it seems like he is just the diametric opposite to appealing to black voters which is beyond essential in both a Democratic primary and a general election. Overall though, he still did well.

Harris: She has always been in consideration as the candidate I wanted to support, but her weak polling and my fears over her "electability" always steered me away. But I think I am finally ready to admit that she might be the candidate for me. She is often hand-waved as being weak on policy and just being an "identity politics" candidate, but tonight she was fantastic with her answers and her overall performance. I think she may be underrated for the general election and in this primary. If anyone from both nights is going to see a surge in the polls, it's her. She took this debate by the horns and wrestled it into submission. This was her opportunity to differentiate herself and stand out, and she took it for all its' worth. Her reputation sort of hinges on how prosecutorial she is towards Trump Cabinet officials and others, so a weak debate performance would have undermined that, but she did not let that happen. I'm still not quite 100% professing my support for her, but I am leaning the most towards her of anybody now!

Yang: I was never much into the "Yang Gang" hype, but he really did get the shaft in this debate. That was not fair for him to be so ignored. But from what I got out of hi, I'm not particularly impressed. He seems very knowledgeable and smart, but he is also awkward, stiff, and probably should have taken more opportunities to interject himself into the discussions. His cult status will remain just that. His support is not going to expand beyond the internet.

Gillibrand: A lot of what I said about Harris could be said about her too. I think she is underrated. The only reason I am putting Harris above her is because I think Harris would perform better in a general election due to being able to better connect with voters of color. Otherwise, I think Gillibrand is great too and staked out a position against corruption, which I think she articulated better than Sanders. It's close between her and Warren as the number two candidate that I'm considering. The women in this race are heads and tails above their male counterparts overall, and especially in these debates (I'll get to Williamson though).

Bennet: If he didn't have an exchange of his own with Biden, he wouldn't have left an impression on me. But I still think his performance was better than some of the other more forgettable generic Democrat-like candidates in the race. He needs an overall theme to his responses or something, and then maybe he could become more formidable. He is not the worst white man in this race.

Hickenlooper: The other Colorado politician did just as I expected him to. He was this debate's John Delaney without the interruptions and sense of entitlement. His only schitck seemed to be complaining about Socialism and staking out the usual "I was a Governor and did these things" rhetoric. I will say though, he had an exchange of his own that was slightly overlooked when he basically said that Pete Buttigieg failed at reforming policing where he succeeded. That was Hickenlooper's best moment of the debate, and maybe of the whole campaign.

Swalwell: I was almost shocked at how well he started with the "pass the torch" line against Biden. That was really good! But that moment went to his head and it's all he really talked about throughout the debate, other than gun policy. Hell, it even backfired eventually when Williamson clapped back at him. H's an empty suit and while the theme around "passing the torch" actually isn't a bad one, someone like Buttigieg does it better. He has no reason to be in this race.

Williamson: Okay...what the living hell!? I was barely able to follow anything she said or why she was saying it. She wants to taunt Jacinda Ardern? She's against policy proposals? What?! You're running for President, even Trump sort of proposed things. It was especially maddening because in between her incoherent stream-of-consciousness rambling, came a few good points like when she brought up how American foreign policy affected the contemporary refugee crisis. That should have been discussed more, but it was lost in her absolutely air-headed tirades. She was entertaining as hell though, I won't deny that. I can see people contributing to her campaign just to keep her in the debates and giving us more of this wacky, New Age babble. Maybe she'll be our Trump? At this point, why not? In all seriousness though, I have no idea why she's running for President and I have no will to support her (my updated signature mostly implies that I will support one of Gillibrand, Harris, or Warren).

I am eagerly looking forward to this field finally narrowing and seeing future debates, with all this said now. I am mostly satisfied of where the party is at: even our most white-bread moderate candidates seem to agree with the more progressive candidates. That tells me that the party is more united in its goals than it may appear. I am especially calmed by the fact that candidates are actually discussing the Supreme Court and winning back the Senate. Those are two massive concerns of mine. It's rare that I take anything positive away from anything, so these debates might just be worth their weight in gold when it comes to making me feel slightly better about the future. I still don't know who would do the best against Trump, and I still don't know who I am wholeheartedly supporting, but these debates have helped in spite of the relative bedlam.

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/KBeds/status/1144454404952604672

This is because 95% of the people who supported Biden going into the debate are still in his camp, whereas anybody who was gonna be most incensed by Harris' attacks on Biden (mostly young people & progressives) already didn't support Biden.

[indietraveler]

Random thoughts for both nights:

-Donald Trump won here with how some of the immigration questions were posed. And I say that as someone who would vote for any of the 20 over him. There has to be some middle on this issue.

-I'm not sure if either debate changed the narrative of the race too much, mostly due to the format.

-Biden looks frail compared to just a few years ago. It sort of looked like he didn't want to be there. How many times did he say "oh my times up." And it didn't come off as doing it out of respect, it came off as he was rambling, didn't know where he was going so it was an easy excuse to stop talking. That's the last thing I want to see in someone going against Trump.

-Sanders says the same thing over and over which I think is going to hurt him in the end. His speech feels like old news by now and if he couldn't get it last time by being the one alternative to the frontrunner, I'm not sure how he'll even come close this time.

-Harris is the overall winner of both nights. I was always so-so on her but she has my interest now. It's just not clear who she takes support from to reach a top tier status at this point.

-Warren did what she needed to do on her night, which was to not have a bad moment to kill her current momentum. I'm a big believer that debates generally can hurt you way more than they can help you.

-Castro won the first night.

-As a younger person myself, I thought Swalwell came off as a dick with his "pass the torch" thing. I thought it was the most cringe worthy line of both nights and way worse than anyone speaking in Spanish.

-Tim Ryan trying to appeal to the midwest felt oddly inauthentic.

-Does Beto even want to be in this anymore? I was initially on board months ago, but what was that? He's lucky the field was so crowded and that it's early.

-I liked Marianne's answer on healthcare, but other than that she feels like a hallucination you have at a music festival or something. At least she was the most entertaining.

-I'm still just as undecided as ever after watching. I don't think anyone has really emerged yet as being the best knockout against Trump.

-Half of these people should really just drop out in the next few months.

[Mr. Smith]

My grades for this debate:

Harris: A-
Buttigieg: B+
Bennet: B
Sanders: B-
Yang: C+
Biden: D+
Hickenlooper: F
Swalwell: F
Gillibrand: F
Williamson: F-

Will post grades for everyone overall soon.

[Possiblymaybe]

Random thoughts for both nights:

-Donald Trump won here with how some of the immigration questions were posed. And I say that as someone who would vote for any of the 20 over him. There has to be some middle on this issue.

-I'm not sure if either debate changed the narrative of the race too much, mostly due to the format.

-Biden looks frail compared to just a few years ago. It sort of looked like he didn't want to be there. How many times did he say "oh my times up." And it didn't come off as doing it out of respect, it came off as he was rambling, didn't know where he was going so it was an easy excuse to stop talking. That's the last thing I want to see in someone going against Trump.

-Sanders says the same thing over and over which I think is going to hurt him in the end. His speech feels like old news by now and if he couldn't get it last time by being the one alternative to the frontrunner, I'm not sure how he'll even come close this time.

-Harris is the overall winner of both nights. I was always so-so on her but she has my interest now. It's just not clear who she takes support from to reach a top tier status at this point.

-Warren did what she needed to do on her night, which was to not have a bad moment to kill her current momentum. I'm a big believer that debates generally can hurt you way more than they can help you.

-Castro won the first night.

-As a younger person myself, I thought Swalwell came off as a dick with his "pass the torch" thing. I thought it was the most cringe worthy line of both nights and way worse than anyone speaking in Spanish.

-Tim Ryan trying to appeal to the midwest felt oddly inauthentic.

-Does Beto even want to be in this anymore? I was initially on board months ago, but what was that? He's lucky the field was so crowded and that it's early.

-I liked Marianne's answer on healthcare, but other than that she feels like a hallucination you have at a music festival or something. At least she was the most entertaining.

-I'm still just as undecided as ever after watching. I don't think anyone has really emerged yet as being the best knockout against Trump.

-Half of these people should really just drop out in the next few months.

[Reformicon]

In terms of the debates' impact on the various candidates...

Up: Harris, Booker, Buttigieg, Gabbard

Down: Biden, O'Rourke

No change: Warren, Sanders

Everyone else was forgettable.

[Possiblymaybe]

In terms of the debates' impact on the various candidates...

Up: Harris, Booker, Buttigieg, Gabbard

Down: Biden, O'Rourke

No change: Warren, Sanders

Everyone else was forgettable.

Castro is definitely on the up.

[bilaps]

Harris is such a phony and audience was stacked for her. If these were debates without audience in the hall, people would see through her.

[eric82oslo]

Harris is such a phony and audience was stacked for her. If these were debates without audience in the hall, people would see through her.

Why would the audience be stacked for her? As far as I know, she's not latina, nor does she speak Spanish.

[QAnonKelly]

Lmao Swalwell is such a clown.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Lmao Swalwell is such a clown.

Someone here said he has the most punchable face in politics. I tend to agree.

[NOVA Green]

Hickenlooper would have been a great candidate in the 90s.

Exactly what me and my wife were discussing as part of a post-debate debriefing.

[QAnonKelly]

Lmao Swalwell is such a clown.

Someone here said he has the most punchable face in politics. I tend to agree.

Looks like someone on the stage agrees with that sentiment

[NOVA Green]

Harris and Swalwell are too anti-gun for me for sure but I'm not surprised by their responses. I knew this going in.

Agreed.... although I'm not a Gun Nut and we have no firearms in our household and believe in closing gun loopholes in many areas to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, there is no reason to go OTT when it comes to legacy gun ownership (One of my son in laws owns an AR-15 as do many co-workers at the same Factory in which we work), and agree we should close Gun Show Loopholes and Universal Background Checks, ban imports of Military assault rifles from overseas (AK-47 gets banned from Russia and now we get Chinese Clones).

Gun violence is real and it's not just about getting guns out of the hands of "criminals".

Folks that have committed Domestic violence account for a huge chunk of gun murders in the USA, but yet the NRA protects the rights of those who have committed domestic violence....

Most murders in the US are not random violence, but committed at the hands of immediate family members, neighbors, and co-workers....

Why can't we identify these patterns earlier and let me buy an AR-15 for target shooting, or at least let me rent one on the shooting range for target shooting?

[PSOL]

Harris and Swalwell are too anti-gun for me for sure but I'm not surprised by their responses. I knew this going in.

Agreed.... although I'm not a Gun Nut and we have no firearms in our household and believe in closing gun loopholes in many areas to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, there is no reason to go OTT when it comes to legacy gun ownership (One of my son in laws owns an AR-15 as do many co-workers at the same Factory in which we work), and agree we should close Gun Show Loopholes and Universal Background Checks, ban imports of Military assault rifles from overseas (AK-47 gets banned from Russia and now we get Chinese Clones).

Gun violence is real and it's not just about getting guns out of the hands of "criminals".

Folks that have committed Domestic violence account for a huge chunk of gun murders in the USA, but yet the NRA protects the rights of those who have committed domestic violence....

Most murders in the US are not random violence, but committed at the hands of immediate family members, neighbors, and co-workers....

Why can't we identify these patterns earlier and let me buy an AR-15 for target shooting, or at least let me rent one on the shooting range for target shooting?

This is literally what Warren responded in the face of her time to discuss gun control, in that she wants to treat it like by the scientific method for that the best possible efficiency.

[John Dule]

Lmao Swalwell is such a clown.

Someone here said he has the most punchable face in politics. I tend to agree.

Looks like someone on the stage agrees with that sentiment

Most memorable moment of the debate for me. I hated Swalwell before it was cool; now Mayor Pete agrees.

[Famous Mortimer]

What's the point of illegal immigration even being a civil offense if all the candidates have pledged never to deport anyone unless they've committed a major crime? Illegal immigrants will just keep accruing fines for as long as they are here? Will they be put in jail if they don't pay fines? Every single candidate in the debate took this position but it doesn't appear any of them even thought it out.

[eric82oslo]

Wants the point of illegal immigration even being a civil offense if all the candidates have pledged never to deport anyone unless they've committed a major crime? Illegal immigrants will just keep accruing fines for as long as they are here? Will they be put in jail if they don't pay fines? Every single candidate in the debate took this position but it doesn't appear any of them even thought it out.

What do you have against immigrants? They are human too, unlike you.

[Famous Mortimer]

Wants the point of illegal immigration even being a civil offense if all the candidates have pledged never to deport anyone unless they've committed a major crime? Illegal immigrants will just keep accruing fines for as long as they are here? Will they be put in jail if they don't pay fines? Every single candidate in the debate took this position but it doesn't appear any of them even thought it out.

What do you have against immigrants? They are human too, unlike you.

We don't have infinity resources and thus cannot share our resources with an unlimited number of people. Simple as.

[John Dule]

Wants the point of illegal immigration even being a civil offense if all the candidates have pledged never to deport anyone unless they've committed a major crime? Illegal immigrants will just keep accruing fines for as long as they are here? Will they be put in jail if they don't pay fines? Every single candidate in the debate took this position but it doesn't appear any of them even thought it out.

What do you have against immigrants? They are human too, unlike you.

I think his point is that if immigrating illegally is only a civil offense, and you won't deport anyone for a civil offense, then there's basically no penalty whatsoever for illegal immigration and therefore no point in having meaningful border security or immigration policy.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Something that seemed obvious to me after these debates is how much the Bernie phenomenon really rested on the unique situation present in 2016 where he could act as the foil to an undisputed frontrunner who didn't sit well with a sizable portion of the most passionate segment of the party base. Now that the rest of the Democratic party has moved closer to his positions and he has to share the debate stage with a lot of different people, he doesn't seem to have anywhere near the same type of pull. It's also extremely apparent just how one note he is and the ugly stumbles he had just trying to answer moderator questions ("that's a mischaracterization" on a quote and his bizarre attempt to tie abortion guarantees into Medicare-For-All) demonstrates how easy it will be for him to get shredded by an actual opponent.