Half time report: Warren won 1st quarter, Castro won 2nd quarter. Honorable mentions to De Blasio and Inslee overall and Gabbard for her Iran answer. Biggest losers were Beto, Booker, Klobuchar, and John Delaney’s time.
What’s your take? Open thread.
Please share widely!
The debate just finished.
For me, Elizabeth Warren really stood out from the crowd. I was appalled by the technical snafu that distracted attention from her in the opening of the second half, and I was disappointed by her lack of airtime in the first half. Nevertheless, she persisted.
For me, the first runner-up was Cory Booker. I like his passion, I like his answers, I like his policies.
The candidate who most surprised me is Hawaii’s Tulsi Gabbard. I liked pretty much all of her answers, and I absolutely loved the way she demolished Tim Ryan in the exchange about Afghanistan.
My vote for most underrated goes to Bill de Blasio. I’m acutely aware of the negatives he brings to the campaign, and I still liked him much more than I expected to.
I think the loser of the night was Tim Ryan, followed closely by John Delaney. I’ll try not to say more, so that I don’t dwell on negativity.
For me, the others were bland and unremarkable. I really don’t get the buzz about Mr. O’Rourke. I just don’t get what people see in him. I thought Mr. Castro handled himself fine, I just don’t resonate with him. The others just dissolve into a blur of faceless talking heads for me.
My bottom line? Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker are the two President’s I saw tonight, and Mr. deBlasio was very impressive.
We are almost in complete agreement Tom. I think Ryan had some good organic moments about jobs in his part of the country, but he really did poorly on the Taliban question. DeLaney and Klobuchar are just running in the 1992 or 2004 primary. Democrats stand for more now.
De Blasio was too aggressive muscling in without being recognized. Still don’t like Gabbard’s isolationism. I think Klobuchar has improved since last I paid much attention to her. I think Castro and Booker may have broken out.
We agree on the last sentence. I thought Gabbard kept her weirder views on Assad and Putin out of the conversation and had the best foreign policy answers of the night. This Iran crisis is entirely Donald Trumps fault and the front runners should feel emboldened to say so. We’ve had three presidents in a row promise us they’d leave Afghanistan and they are still there-even though Al Qaeda is not. She’d also cut the Saudis loose. I think that’s not only a smart policy agenda but it’s one who’s popularity cuts across party lines.
I sided with Tim Ryan in the Afghanistan exchange. While I do think it’s time to wrap it up, Gabbard I think protesteth too much regarding the Taliban’s role in 9/11. Yes, technically al-Qaeda rather than the Taliban attacked us, but the Taliban gave them safe harbor and refused to give them up when given the chance.
To the extent that any nation was responsible for 9/11, surely that dubious honor goes to Saudi Arabia. We shoveled that under the carpet just like we’re now busy ignoring their role in the brutal murder and dismemberment of Jamal Khashoggi.
The US helped create the Taliban during the 1980’s while they were “freedom fighters” working to “liberate” Afghanistan from its “Soviet Occupier”. Apparently the lessons that might have been learned from the history of Ho Chi Minh was lost on the Reagan administration.
I think Ms. Gabbard nailed it. The Taliban are not going to be defeated by American combat troops. The US presence in the region serves to strengthen, rather than weaken, Taliban influence.
We walked away from a seemingly endless war in Vietnam in 1973. North and South Vietnam were unified in 1976. The formal deployment of US troops in Vietnam occurred in 1964. The Vietnam war lasted 13 years.
Our analogous entry into the war in Afghanistan happened on October 7, 2001 — more than SEVENTEEN YEARS AGO. Our endless war in Afghanistan has dragged on longer than the war in Vietnam. You and Mr. Ryan are making the same failed argument in Afghanistan that kept us in Vietnam long after we should have left.
It is long past time to leave Afghanistan. Whatever benefits might have come from “engagement” are long gone.
I am aware of our role in destabilizing Afghanistan, though I thought it was al-Qaeda rather than the Taliban we helped create. Also, I know the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, but is there evidence that Saudi Arabia as a polity contributed to those attacks? I thought they were among our strongest Arab allies (and will spare you the rant about why they shouldn’t be IMO for now).
Disagree on the “weird” thing… This is the narrative the media gives to anyone who is especially anti-war, that they have an inexplicable love for authoritarian dictators. Gabbard’s not particularly radical in her anti-war views either (she has taken some flak for supporting drone warfare). I see her as the world-wise realist that we thought we were getting with Obama.
The single best thing Beto can do to revive his 2020 campaign is announce that it’s for the Senate and not the presidency.
I really just don’t see it. He strikes me as a lightweight.
Oh I agree, but a lightweight has won a statewide race in Texas once or twice before…
Elizabeth Warren impressed me as the most electable progressive on the stage tonight. “I will fight for you as hard as I fight for my family.” I believe her.
What surprised me the most was hardly a mention of the ‘God Emperor’ and no mention of the frontrunner, Joe Biden.
Best line from Klobuchar : “I don’t think we should conduct foreign policy in our bathrobe at 5 o’clock in the morning.”
“I wanted to talk about bigger things than Trump.” Senator Warren to CNN post debate
And she most certainly did!
Tulsi Gabbard was the most google-searched candidate. I don’t think she was mentioned once in the CNN post-debate analysis (Klobuchar got a fair bit of attention and an interview). It’s an interesting disparity, that will get more interesting if Gabbard sees a bump in actual support.