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

[Pericles]

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)

Yang at 8 lol.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

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.

YANG: The important number in Vice President Biden's remarks just now is that he United States was only 15 percent of global emissions. We like to act as if we're 100 percent, but the truth is even if we were to curb our emissions dramatically, the earth is still going to get warmer.

And we can see it around it us this summer. The last four years have been the four warmest years in recorded history. This is going to be a tough truth, but we are too late. We are 10 years too late. We need to do everything we can to start moving the climate in the right direction, but we also need to start moving our people to higher ground

[eric82oslo]

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)

Yang at 8 lol.

Way too low of course. The CNN panel went absolutely nuts over him, including David Akselrod, Jennifer Granholm and Anderson Cooper, but especially Van Jones. Van Jones is totally part of the Yang Gang now. Like 110%.

[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.

YANG: The important number in Vice President Biden's remarks just now is that he United States was only 15 percent of global emissions. We like to act as if we're 100 percent, but the truth is even if we were to curb our emissions dramatically, the earth is still going to get warmer.

And we can see it around it us this summer. The last four years have been the four warmest years in recorded history. This is going to be a tough truth, but we are too late. We are 10 years too late. We need to do everything we can to start moving the climate in the right direction, but we also need to start moving our people to higher ground

I heard that. But what followed was his economic message of giving people a freedom dividend. Thus I'm pretty sure he meant it in a figurative way, although I agree it sounded confusing even to me. However what he said following that removed all the confusion for me. He meant to a higher ground economically speaking of course.

[NOVA Green]

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)

Yang at 8 lol.

Well predict odds aren't actual odds....

Even bookies across from neighborhood pubs typically with names including words such as Horse, Fox, various Royal terms of addressing the aristocracy.

Gambling on sports betting (Including Election Betting) is not illegal in many countries in the world.

I can only imagine the revenue accruing to the Russian Oligarchs as a result of illegal mafia style "rigging the online online sports betting market".

Some 15+ Years back when we would play on online poker websites that were safe and secure, but illegal under policies of the Bush Jr. regime and his AG that tried to ban online poker.

We worried more about the 'bots than the players as we would roll in $50 buy in tournies with $50 Add-Ons.....

Predict doesn't amount to  "Hill of Beans in this World".

Hollywood 1942 blockbuster Movie released right after Pearl Harbor.

Casablanca: "We will always have Paris"

"Maj. Heinrich Strasser: What is your nationality?
Rick Blaine: I'm a drunkard.
Capt. Louis Renault: That makes Rick a citizen of the world.
 
Rick Blaine: Last night we said a great many things. You said I was to do the thinking for both of us. Well, I've done a lot of it since then, and it all adds up to one thing: you're getting on that plane with Victor where you belong.
Ilsa: But, Richard, no, I... I...
Rick Blaine: Now, you've got to listen to me! You have any idea what you'd have to look forward to if you stayed here? Nine chances out of ten, we'd both wind up in a concentration camp. Isn't that true, Louie?
Capt. Louis Renault: I'm afraid Major Strasser would insist.
Ilsa: You're saying this only to make me go.
Rick Blaine: I'm saying it because it's true. Inside of us, we both know you belong with Victor. You're part of his work, the thing that keeps him going. If that plane leaves the ground and you're not with him, you'll regret it. Maybe not today. Maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your life.
Ilsa: But what about us?
Rick Blaine: We'll always have Paris. We didn't have, we, we lost it until you came to Casablanca. We got it back last night.
Ilsa: When I said I would never leave you.

Rick Blaine: I died young, of lung cancer.
 
Rick Blaine: Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, she walks into mine.
 
Rick Blaine: We'll always have Paris.
 
Capt. Louis Renault: Round up the usual suspects.
 
Ilsa: Play it, Sam. Play 'As Time Goes By.'
 
Rick Blaine: Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.
 
Rick Blaine: Here's looking at you, kid.
 

Maj. Heinrich Strasser: What is your nationality?
Rick Blaine: I'm a drunkard.
Capt. Louis Renault: That makes Rick a citizen of the world.
 
Rick Blaine: Last night we said a great many things. You said I was to do the thinking for both of us. Well, I've done a lot of it since then, and it all adds up to one thing: you're getting on that plane with Victor where you belong.
Ilsa: But, Richard, no, I... I...
Rick Blaine: Now, you've got to listen to me! You have any idea what you'd have to look forward to if you stayed here? Nine chances out of ten, we'd both wind up in a concentration camp. Isn't that true, Louie?
Capt. Louis Renault: I'm afraid Major Strasser would insist.
Ilsa: You're saying this only to make me go.
Rick Blaine: I'm saying it because it's true. Inside of us, we both know you belong with Victor. You're part of his work, the thing that keeps him going. If that plane leaves the ground and you're not with him, you'll regret it. Maybe not today. Maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your life.
Ilsa: But what about us?
Rick Blaine: We'll always have Paris. We didn't have, we, we lost it until you came to Casablanca. We got it back last night.
Ilsa: When I said I would never leave you.

Rick Blaine: I died young, of lung cancer.
 
Rick Blaine: Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, she walks into mine.
 
Rick Blaine: We'll always have Paris.
 
Capt. Louis Renault: Round up the usual suspects.
 
Ilsa: Play it, Sam. Play 'As Time Goes By.'
 
Rick Blaine: Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.
 
Rick Blaine: Here's looking at you, kid."
 

[wbrocks67]

Harris was definitely off from the first night, but she wasn't *bad* - I think her descriptions of her health care plan were actually more concrete and forceful than they've ever been. The discussion really got muddied with her and Biden going back and forth. When she spoke about immigration or climate change, I thought she shined - and in her closing statement. She DOES have to more forcefully defend her AG record, however, there's only so much time for that when Gabbard is listing off like 5 falsehoods about her record. She'll have to come up with a quick answer when someone brings something like that up. I did like the part about how when you are in an actual *job* and not just on stage you have to make real choices. I think Harris may have focused a lot on making sure she could defend her healthcare record and maybe didn't prepare as much for the chance of Gabbard coming after her on her record.

Gabbard really just needs to go away; she doesn't deserve to be on that stage and it's mesmerizing to me that anyone would be feeling good about her after last night. Every time she spoke it sounded stiff and scripted. The best was when Harris totally ignored and said 'well Gabbard is WRONG' and then just moved back on to Biden.

Biden was better initially, but then he fell back into feeling like he was too old and confused a lot. Then when he was trying to remember opposition research, it felt like he had written it down somewhere and was trying to remember what to say.

Booker was good, but I just don't see it happening for him.

Gillibrand, Inslee, De Blasio, were all forgettable. Castro gets some good one-liners in but once again I don't see it happening long term for him either. I really don't get anyone who thinks Yang was good either. All he does is just connect everything back to robots and technology, instead of actually talking about his vision for the country.

[KaiserDave]

CNN poll on who won yet?

[The Free North]

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

1. Booker
2. Gabbard

3. Yang
4. Biden
5. Castro

6. Harris
7. Inslee
8. Bennet

9. Gillibrand
10. de Blasio

[President Johnson]

Why did Harris call Biden "Senator", when he actually should be referred to as "Mr. Vice President". That's kind of ridiculous.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I was veryhigh for most of the debate and went out to take multiple smoke breaks. But from what I saw, and from the post debate coverage, I've come away with this ranking. I'm grading them from purely my perceptions and in strategic terms, not on their content.

1. Gabbard: I thought she missed a great opportunity for a Ron Paul moment when Kamala whined about being "under fire," but I otherwise thought Gabbard was by far the most interesting and articulate candidate on night two. She stood apart, she seemed serious, and she didn't buy into the petty bs that the other candidates were horned up on (ie, talking about busing in 2019). I think she raised a solid argument against Trump in regards to his support for Saudi Arabia, though I thought her phrasing "Trump is pro Al-Qaida" made her sound like circa 2002 Sean Hannity. Hopefully in the future she won't articulate such a fantastic position on such a critical issue in such a hilariously bad way.

2. Andrew Yang: He got a lot more time, and thus a lot more attention, which was exactly what he needed. He pivoted back to UBI on almost every question, which was good considering how little time he got last time. A rational person would assume from the last debate that he'd get similarly shafted again, so it was a pleasant surprise to hear more from him this time. I liked that he raised automation and the dangers of AI, which are the issues of the future. Kinda got a bit dramatic on the Climate Change issue, but still, not bad.

3. Kirstin Gillibrand: She's only here because of the chlorox joke. I thought that was freaking hysterical. One of the funniest debate lines ever, honestly, and if she can pump out more zingers like that then she'd actually might be able to go toe to toe against Trump when it comes to the entertainment factor. Otherwise, she's still the same boring bitchy Senator she's been from the start, but hot damn was that a good one.  

4. Cory Booker: I thought using the phrase "sh!thole" was a good move. Most candidates are afraid to say and dance around it, but he reminded the public exactly what Trump said. And Trump did say it (he wasn't wrong either, but that's just Sanchez speaking), so I think that when he actually used the term he showed that he's willing to "offend."......of course, he's not and he's a total fraud, but still, I saw what he was trying to do and it made sense until I remembered that he's Cory Booker. Otherwise, his performance was bland, but he still came across better than the others.

5. Jay Inslee: I don't know where Inslee falls, but considering how lame and bland the others were, I'd say it was a good night for him. He had a bit more time and used it, though not nearly as effective as Yang did.

6. Bill Bennett: I mean, he was there, right?

7. Joe Biden: Better than last time, but still not great. He's the second weakest frontrunner I've ever seen, but even Jeb! beats him out in that category. I guess he'll always just be a great number two to an even greater number one right? Let's hope it stays that way.

8. Julian Castro: I thought he looked desperate going after Biden considering he was also in the Obama administration, and was far less visible in his role compared to his successor. He got like five minutes of fame from the first debate, not even fifteen seconds. I think that gave him an ego boost but in the end he was punching above his weight. He's a dream opponent actually.

9. Wilhem Werner: "deBlasio" is such a stupid asshole. I can't get enough of this guy. He's always acting like a dick, he's constantly interrupting, and he takes the most left wing positions possible in the most politically reckless way possible. Like, when Bernie takes the exact same stance on an issue, I see a well thought out position that is in line with his forty year record as a left-wing activist. Than I see deBlasio take it, and all I see is some washed up eighties leftist trying to relive the genuine hippie experiences that Bernie did. In other words, I see deBlasio as a phony, bougie prick.

10. Harris: She seemed far less likable than she already was (ie, she wasn't likable to begin with), which is an impressive achievement considering she shared the stage with deBlasio. Her big mistake  was in this department. I think Tulsi could've really gotten in a good shot at her tonight, but the opportunity was missed. You could tell she was unnerved by her performance considering her attitude in post debate interviews too.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Gabbard really just needs to go away; she doesn't deserve to be on that stage and it's mesmerizing to me that anyone would be feeling good about her after last night. Every time she spoke it sounded stiff and scripted. The best was when Harris totally ignored and said 'well Gabbard is WRONG' and then just moved back on to Biden.

The rest of your analysis was awful and reflective of why the rest of America hates the hardcore Democratic establishment shills like you, but this portion was particularly hilarious.

The reason Hillary lost, particularly among white women, is because she's a bitch. She is. A good example is my mom, who is pro-abortion, pro-LGBT, and very turned off by Trump's vulgar nature. She voted for him enthusiastically in 2016 because she just thinks Hillary is a downright bitch. She thinks she has a bad personality on top of literally everything else. A lot of white women share that view. And a lot of people in general share that opinion. And it's because it's true: Hillary is a bitch. She's mean. She's nasty. She's unlikable. And she's a horrible, horrible person. That's the only transparent thing about her.

Kamala Harris, as we saw in her interview where she claimed that voters should listen to her rather than Tulsi because, and I quote literally, "I'm a top tier candidate and she's not," is of the same vein that Hillary is.

And don't claim the sexism card. Tulsi Gabbard isn't unlikable. Amy Kloubuchar isn't nasty. I'm finding Elizabeth Warren to be increasingly endearing on a personal level. Even Gillibrand can be funny, as her clorox joke from last night proved. But Harris? Nah.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

^ You're disgusting, Sanchez.

[ElectionsGuy]

^ You're disgusting, Sanchez.

No, he's not. He has a point. Why don't we actually contest points instead of emotionally reacting to statements?

[John Dule]

I really can't understand why this site clutches its pearls if Harris or Clinton is called a "bitch," while basically everyone on here calls Trump a "fat rapist pig daughterf**king man-baby a**hole douchebag" on the reg. I mean, both are true, but I don't see how one is any more offensive than the other.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

^ You're disgusting, Sanchez.

No, he's not. He has a point. Why don't we actually contest points instead of emotionally reacting to statements?

Oh cut the bs. Most of the attacks against Harris from g*bbard were flat out bogus and you were like “YAS QWEEN!”

[lfromnj]

I'm gonna say this. I can say that Warren actually believes what she states in a debate. I can laugh at her ideas but unlike Harris I do get the feeling she is genuine. Warren actually has legitimate policy proposals that are fleshed while Harris just tries to piggy back on whatever is the most woke.

[ElectionsGuy]

^ You're disgusting, Sanchez.

No, he's not. He has a point. Why don't we actually contest points instead of emotionally reacting to statements?

Oh cut the bs. Most of the attacks against Harris from g*bbard were flat out bogus and you were like “YAS QWEEN!”

First, lmao at that censor. More importantly, was anything Gabbard said untrue? I just googled Tulsi Gabbard fact check real quick and got this from an ABC article

Gabbard's claim that over 1,500 people were put in jail for marijuana violations is likely based on data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehab, that shows "at least 1,560 people were sent to state prisons for marijuana-related offenses between 2011 and 2016," the same years that Harris served as attorney general of California.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

^ You're disgusting, Sanchez.

No, he's not. He has a point. Why don't we actually contest points instead of emotionally reacting to statements?

Oh cut the bs. Most of the attacks against Harris from g*bbard were flat out bogus and you were like “YAS QWEEN!”

First, lmao at that censor. More importantly, was anything Gabbard said untrue? I just googled Tulsi Gabbard fact check real quick and got this from an ABC article

Gabbard's claim that over 1,500 people were put in jail for marijuana violations is likely based on data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehab, that shows "at least 1,560 people were sent to state prisons for marijuana-related offenses between 2011 and 2016," the same years that Harris served as attorney general of California.

Politifact talks about how it was.blatantly misleading because Harris never dealt with those cases, it was lower offices.

[eric82oslo]

Why did Harris call Biden "Senator", when he actually should be referred to as "Mr. Vice President". That's kind of ridiculous.

It's more ridiculous that he told her "go easy on me, kid" before the debate.

[GeorgiaModerate]

I'm gonna say this. I can say that Warren actually believes what she states in a debate. I can laugh at her ideas but unlike Harris I do get the feeling she is genuine. Warren actually has legitimate policy proposals that are fleshed while Harris just tries to piggy back on whatever is the most woke.

Indeed.  Warren not only comes across as believing in her policies, she's very good at articulating them.

[RI]

^ You're disgusting, Sanchez.

No, he's not. He has a point. Why don't we actually contest points instead of emotionally reacting to statements?

Oh cut the bs. Most of the attacks against Harris from g*bbard were flat out bogus and you were like “YAS QWEEN!”

First, lmao at that censor. More importantly, was anything Gabbard said untrue? I just googled Tulsi Gabbard fact check real quick and got this from an ABC article

Gabbard's claim that over 1,500 people were put in jail for marijuana violations is likely based on data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehab, that shows "at least 1,560 people were sent to state prisons for marijuana-related offenses between 2011 and 2016," the same years that Harris served as attorney general of California.

Politifact talks about how it was.blatantly misleading because Harris never dealt with those cases, it was lower offices.

Sure, and Biden never deported anyone, but he's tied to Obama's record nonetheless. If Harris wants to claim she ran the "second largest justice department in the country" as a strength, she has to take all that comes with that, including the actions of her underlings. You can't pick and choose, and the buck stops with you.

[John Dule]

I'm gonna say this. I can say that Warren actually believes what she states in a debate. I can laugh at her ideas but unlike Harris I do get the feeling she is genuine. Warren actually has legitimate policy proposals that are fleshed while Harris just tries to piggy back on whatever is the most woke.

This is what grinds my gears about Harris supporters. Sure, you can support her because you think she's the best candidate to beat Trump, but do any of these people actually think she's an honest person? She comes across as completely disingenuous every time she speaks; she refused to get into the specifics of her health care bill and dismissed all criticism as "right-wing talking points." All of her talking points sound rehearsed, arrogant, and inauthentic.

[President Johnson]

I'm gonna say this. I can say that Warren actually believes what she states in a debate. I can laugh at her ideas but unlike Harris I do get the feeling she is genuine. Warren actually has legitimate policy proposals that are fleshed while Harris just tries to piggy back on whatever is the most woke.

Indeed.  Warren not only comes across as believing in her policies, she's very good at articulating them.

Agreed. I think Liz is sincere, even though I don't agree on everthing or how she wants to get there. She's certainly better in articulating than the Bern, who comes across like an old guy angry all the time at everything.

[Saint Milei]

I really can't understand why this site clutches its pearls if Harris or Clinton is called a "bitch," while basically everyone on here calls Trump a "fat rapist pig daughterf**king man-baby a**hole douchebag" on the reg. I mean, both are true, but I don't see how one is any more offensive than the other.

They literally claim Tulsi apologizes for someone killing civilians, ignoring the fact that she's by far the most anti-war Democrat candidate since Dennis Kucinich. Atlas has been batsht crazy when it comes to it's devotion for candidates.