2020 Democratic Presidential Debate #1

Hey my saying Ryan had a chance to break out of the crowd was like buying a speculative stock or betting that a 4-12 NFL team makes the playoffs next year -- sometimes you get it right, sometimes you don't. 

I'm sure you had Castro as your first-night breakout candidate? 


I was listening to the WNYC call in show this morning and the overwhelming sentiment was that Castro was the break out debater.  Caller after caller said that they had never heard of him before but were blown away by his performance.

He certainly wouldn't be my first choice but I guess he is on the rise.  I'd vote for him in the General.


Smedley said:
Hey my saying Ryan had a chance to break out of the crowd was like buying a speculative stock or betting that a 4-12 NFL team makes the playoffs next year -- sometimes you get it right, sometimes you don't. 
I'm sure you had Castro as your first-night breakout candidate? 

if you're just randomly picking names on speculation, what's the point?  Being right for the wrong reasons is not really being right.  And guessing right isn't any sign of thoughtful analysis.  If I totally pulled Castro out of my *** as the breakout star without any well-supported reasoning for it, it's just a lucky guess.  So no, I didn't predict Castro would do well, because there was no information available to me that would have indicated he would.


As I said, I saw a couple recent vid clips of Ryan that I thought were reasonably impressive, and he is in the demographic lane of Biden, who seems vulnerable to a breakdown. I don't think that is "randomly picking names." 

What's the harm in stating a qualitative opinion? I freely admit when I am wrong (as I seem to have been here), and you get a few gleeful posts out of it. 

But maybe MOL and other internet message boards should have stricter criteria for posting opinions. Show your work?  


there's no harm in any of it.  But there is certainly a difference between an informed opinion and wild *** guessing.


phenixrising said:

Inslee had the BEST line of the night, "the biggest threat to the security of the United States is Donald Trump."
Bingo!

Klobuchar was a close second with "I just want to say there's three women up here that have fought pretty hard for a woman's right to choose."


ml1 said:
there is certainly a difference between an informed opinion and wild *** guessing.

 I have heard that


sac said:


phenixrising said:

Inslee had the BEST line of the night, "the biggest threat to the security of the United States is Donald Trump."
Bingo!
Klobuchar was a close second with "I just want to say there's three women up here that have fought pretty hard for a woman's right to choose."

 It was a great line but I think I could see a little bit of salad in her hair.


Smedley said:
 I have heard that

 no doubt


sac said:


phenixrising said:

Inslee had the BEST line of the nightInslee achievement in Washington State, "the biggest threat to the security of the United States is Donald Trump."
Bingo!
Klobuchar was a close second with "I just want to say there's three women up here that have fought pretty hard for a woman's right to choose."

 This made me like Klobuchar less.  Inslee is miles ahead of Klobuchar when it comes to a) having a comprehensive policy on the issue and, b) getting it passed in his state.

CANDIDATES WHO HAVE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS

https://www.axios.com/where-2020-democrats-stand-on-abortion-policy-b88ed515-4dd5-4b82-97cd-977e6c1f31e7.html

INSLEE'S ACTUAL ACCOMPLISHMENT

https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/planned-parenthood-votes-northwest-and-hawaii/press-releases/washington-state-senate-passes-reproductive-parity-act-following-six-years-of-debate


Klinker said:
Gabbard got barely any time and, when she did speak, she often seemed to be unable to address the topic.

 She struggled a bit, but she cleaned Tim Ryan's clock about war in the Middle East. 


nan said:


Klinker said:
Gabbard got barely any time and, when she did speak, she often seemed to be unable to address the topic.
 She struggled a bit, but she cleaned Tim Ryan's clock about war in the Middle East. 

 Yeah, her response to the question about equal pay left no doubt that she knows a lot about the Middle East. 

I mean, I harp a lot on this but wouldn't you say that the issue of equal pay is really quite important to progressives?  To take a question that is of vital importance to 50% of Americans and just ignore it?  I really don't know what she could have been thinking.


Tim Black analysis.  Says Castro had the best night, DeBalsio did well, and Delaney & Beto sucked.  Warren did not do anything. He thought she said she had a plan to deal with Mitch McC. but it was just "to fight."  He thought she should have done something other than be nice.  Klobuchar - LIke Delaney talk about what we can't do, not what we can do.  Uninspiring. Stop kissing the butt of the establishment.  If you are not in this to change the world, why are you in this?  He thought Corey Booker had a decent night, but sick of hearing about where lives.  Not good enough.  Inslee - climate change is arguably the most important issue. So, maybe the message is right, but the message is wrong. Something is not connecting the way it should.  He says closing statements very important.


Highlight on the Beto bombs:



Yeah, that was weird when he answered in Spanish.  I know Telemundo also carried the debate, but he should wait until a question is asked in Spanish to reply in same.


Kyle Kulinski - said Amy Klobuchar was the worst because she was flat.  Also, thought fails for Beto and Delaney, like everyone else.  Said Delaney is like nails on a chalkboard.  Smug and condescending.  He thought Beto looked nervous the whole night. Said he never settled in and always looked nervous.  He was also trying to sound like a standard politician. 

Notables - middle ground - Thought Tim Ryan started off strong until he ran in to a brick wall called Tulsi Gabbard.  Thought Inslee did well.  Thought Castro and Booker did not do any damage to their campaigns. They did well under pressure. However, he thought they still said nothing of substance. 

The biggest winners.  Tulsi, but she started out slow and not aggressive enough.  When you are in the 1% you have to make a name for yourself.  Ended super strong.  Obliterated Tim Ryan on Afghanistan. Snap polls had her winning.  She was the #1 searched candidate.  He says you can't start slow.  

He also thought Warren was a big winner.  So, she could get away with protecting her lead.  Solid performance but nothing to say she knocked it out of the park.  She leaned too much on the wonky side instead of swashbuckling populist--but that is who she is.  Does not expect her to go down in the polls. He thought she was presidential (I did not think so).  Final big winner - Bill DeBlasio.  He called this in pre-debate video. He runs as a super far lefty, but he's kind of a fraud.  He backed Hillary over Bernie.  But he did the convincing tap dance.  Except the "Russia"



nan said:
Highlight on the Beto bombs:


 Wait, avoiding a question was Beto's worst moment?  Then how would you describe Tulsi's equal pay dodge?


nan said:


Morganna said:
 Not the goal of all charter schools. Both have good and bad. I'm just for keeping an open mind.
 Yes, the goal of all charter schools.  They are free to pick the kids they want and the rest go back to the public schools and make the public schools look bad.  That's how it works.  Also, they want to break the unions.  

 The school that I taught in took students who had difficulty in public schools and we also used a lottery. 

Perhaps you could give someone the benefit of the doubt.


The Humanist weighs in -- Bernie had a presence here because his policies are being discussed.  Cory Booker got to speak the most. They called on candidates who polled higher more. But John Delaney elbowed his way in --he would not shut up.  But he did not say something substantive. 

Amy Klobuchar invoked Trump the most.  He thinks this is a good idea. He thought Warren did fantastic.  

He said the debate did not go as he thought.  4 categories:  good, OK, Meh, losers.

Losers:  John Delaney, Beto.  Probably Delaney was the worst.  Did not have a breakout moment.  Beto could not answer questions. He has nothing with platitudes.  Booker has the same problem, but Beto did worse.  This was kind of a dog pile on Beto.  Casto and DeBlasio crapped on him.  This is make or break with Beto and he did not do well. 

Meh:  Amy Klobuchar.  She did not have a breakout moment.  Boring, milktoast.  But she did not fumble or faceplant.

Tim Ryan:  Was starting to stand out talking about the middle class, but then went downhill.

Well:  Cory, Gabbard, INslee.  Booker had some good moments but nothing that stood out too much.  He does not know how to not come off like a rehearsed politician. Good on LGBTQ rights.  He did OK. Gabbard, was not doing well until so she took the gloves off and interrupted. Great highlight when she owned Tim Ryan for support for US Empire. She has to be more aggressive in next debate.

Inslee--OK. He said Donald Trump biggest enemy, but he should have said climate change. Kind of in the middle the entire time. 

Good:  Warren, Castro, DeBlasio.  He thought Bill De Blasio won the debate.  He tries to be THE progressive.  Trys to out-Bernie Warren.  Do I believe him?  No I think he's full of sh***.  Did a great job.  Warren was only dominating when they called on her. 2nd half of debate she disapeared.  But first part she did an outstanding job. Especially on M4A.

Casto: breakout start.  Strong on race and gender.  Dominated the debate on immigration.  But still think Bill did the best. 




Morganna said:
 The school that I taught in took students who had difficulty in public schools and we also used a lottery. 
Perhaps you could give someone the benefit of the doubt.

 No, I have done lots of research on charter schools and the purpose of them is to destroy public education.  They may have a lottery, but if the kid is a problem, they can kick them out. Some of them work for well for certain groups. They have also increased school segregation.  So, some of them work well for some groups, but often at the expense of another group. The school can appear successful and still be a negative entity. Have you read Diane Ravitch's books?


nan said:
Tim Black analysis.  ...
nan said:
Kyle Kulinski - ...
nan said:
The Humanist weighs in -- ...

None of them have demonstrated in the past that we should consider their opinions about this last debate, or the one tonight. 


nohero said:
None of them have demonstrated in the past that we should consider their opinions about this last debate, or the one tonight. 

 Then don't watch them! I put them in as an alternative to the putrid crap that is on the MSM.  I just watched 5 minutes of Mika and Joe and mother could do better than that. 

Anyway, on to #2.


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.