Underachievers Please Try Harder
As a friend suggests, the general post-debate analysis is "my candidate definitely won that".
The second debate didn't have that shock of the first, but the idea solidifies- this is what 2020 looks like. The Daily covered some of the changes and the current scenario turns candidates into salesmen trying to get as many donations as they can. National candidates see that national TV show appearances like Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews do more to swell the coffers than to travel to Iowa and talk in front of 50 people. In short, you need to be established as a national candidate to compete, and the fact that Pete Buttigieg has broken through, only means it's the exception that proves the rule.
In any case, no one probably watches this stuff but die-hard politicos, but here goes. The second series of debates will go down as the one where Marianne Williamson went from kook to serious contender. Hard-core politicos gasp at this idea, but perhaps they think the 2016 election was won by Donald Trump because he was a policy wonk.
Williamson was a bit nutty, sure, talking about "Dark Psychic Force" but she ended the night by making an appeal that we need to move toward making a bigger change by being better people. It was a strong message that set her apart. I had talked to someone who had seen her when the race had first begun. I thought she might be a Jill Stein-type out for herself and to take away what she could. What she told me, and what we learned from the debate was that Williamson does want to make the Democratic party a better place.
The first debate featured Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, I will get heat for it, and I know their supporters will claim victory, but I don't think they moved the needle any.
Better to be level headed in their approach, Beto O'Rourke and Pete Buttigieg stood out in contrast. Beto ultimately didn't seem to have anything to say, and so his performance was a bit of a wash. Mayor Pete got some pretty solid ground in, and his comment on the possibility of a solider dying in Afghanistan who hadn't even been born on 9/11/01 was strong stuff. Buttigieg appeared to me as someone who would surgically strike Trump in a debate, while Liz and Bernie would lose their cool.
Moderates took hits. John Delaney was drubbed by Warren. Tim Ryan was slapped by Bernie, and to quote a friend, his position looks like 90s-era GOP. Superficially, I felt Ryan must have let his hair go grey for this one to look older. Ryan was smacked with criticism for not holding his hand on his heart for the national anthem (Isn't the hand on the heart for the Pledge of Allegiance, anyway?).
By the way, I am not suggesting that they cut the Anthem- but I did notice it was about 14 minutes into a jam-packed short-for-time show before the first candidate spoke. Wouldn't they be better served to get started and cut out the movie reviews (Extra Extra That Enzo dog from the Costner movie is now polling ahead of DeBlasio and Bennet).
Western Governors did not perform well in the first night. I was excited to see Gov. Steve Bullock, but his performance lacked. I personally thought Amy Klobuchar was great, but she almost seems too level headed to be up there. What irony in that she might be the best suited to be President, but she is not 'flashy' enough. Granted, I am not sure how much is attributed to the moderators not giving her much time.
So John Delaney probably should have looked at his performance on the first night and dropped out. He didn't. So you can still go to his website and buy John Delaney koozies, poker cards, stress balls, dog collars and "memory" erasers.
While we did see Inslee and Gabbard ads on the first night, they were in person on the second night. Gabbard's "pledge of allegiance" ad is striking and patriotic. Gabbard, at this point, will likely be a Ron Paul character with an extremely devoted audience. She will, however, not be the Democratic nominee.
Gabbard attacked Harris, which is probably a good thing. If Harris is going to be a major candidate, she is going to need to know what it feels like it is to be on the defensive.
Some media outlets claim Biden was a winner, but I didn't see it. It started out bad enough when he joined Harris onstage and told her "Go easy, kid".
From there, the moderators let Booker go after him. If this had happened under other circumstances, John Delaney might have been there been to interrupt, but without him, no such luck.
Biden (and DeBlasio) also lip-synced the Anthem, which is probably the wrong choice. Lip sync or stand silently? Those are the kind of questions they don't ask you in Political Science class. Future politicians, you're going to be glad you read me.
DeBlasio may be the most unpopular candidate ever, and protestors were there to yell "Fire Pantaleo", though at home, it sounded like gibberish, and wasn't particularly effective.
My son watched Michael Bennet and said he looked sad. Reports vary, some say Bennet was a winner, but I would say Kamala got the best of that exchange, and Bennet was one of the losers of the night.
Kirsten Gillibrand had a great joke about the need to Clorox the White House. Still, I think she is not being taken seriously and that was the last thing I would have suggested for her to do.
Corey Booker was a winner and I suspect we will finally see a bounce. I keep hearing how great he is as a speaker, and am a bit shocked he hasn't polled better to date.
If anyone else might have got a bounce, I would say Jay Inslee made the best performance of the so called "second tier". I can't quite write Inslee off, even as I begin to lose faith in that whole "Western Governor" group.
Some ideas to lively up the next debate
1- Such a crowded stage- 2 nights of 10 candidates. How about 4 nights of 5? 5 nights of 4? Maybe, ten nights (!) of one-on-one debate.
2- I think the moderator could ask the question to Michael Bennet. He could whisper his answer to Gillibrand and so on down the row a la the "Telephone" game and then once it gets to Bill DeBlasio on the other age, he could provide Michael's answer. Perhaps the Democratic platform could be drawn up that way.
3- People loved Jake Tapper and many at home opined if they could get someone like him at work to run their business meetings since he was such a task master.
As for me, can we go the other way? I have seen those panel talent shows with "good guy" judges and Simon Cowells. Maybe the next debate, add Mary Murphy, and every fourth question could be "Do you prefer Hot Dogs or Hamburgers?"
Ok, that's the end of my list, but the first debate hard transitioned into an ad for The Hunt. An intense ad that scared my 5 year old who watches the debate as intensely as I would have at the age. He's met Beto and said "We met him at the ballgame and now he's President!" ("Running, son, running")
The Hunt is a story of 12 strangers who don't know where they are or how they got there. It appears that they are being hunted for sport.
Clever for CNN to run it as a teaser for what might happen when they returned from break, but no such luck. Life in 2019 may be crazy, but we are not quite that depraved yet.
Thankfully.
The second debate didn't have that shock of the first, but the idea solidifies- this is what 2020 looks like. The Daily covered some of the changes and the current scenario turns candidates into salesmen trying to get as many donations as they can. National candidates see that national TV show appearances like Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews do more to swell the coffers than to travel to Iowa and talk in front of 50 people. In short, you need to be established as a national candidate to compete, and the fact that Pete Buttigieg has broken through, only means it's the exception that proves the rule.
In any case, no one probably watches this stuff but die-hard politicos, but here goes. The second series of debates will go down as the one where Marianne Williamson went from kook to serious contender. Hard-core politicos gasp at this idea, but perhaps they think the 2016 election was won by Donald Trump because he was a policy wonk.
Williamson was a bit nutty, sure, talking about "Dark Psychic Force" but she ended the night by making an appeal that we need to move toward making a bigger change by being better people. It was a strong message that set her apart. I had talked to someone who had seen her when the race had first begun. I thought she might be a Jill Stein-type out for herself and to take away what she could. What she told me, and what we learned from the debate was that Williamson does want to make the Democratic party a better place.
The first debate featured Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, I will get heat for it, and I know their supporters will claim victory, but I don't think they moved the needle any.
Better to be level headed in their approach, Beto O'Rourke and Pete Buttigieg stood out in contrast. Beto ultimately didn't seem to have anything to say, and so his performance was a bit of a wash. Mayor Pete got some pretty solid ground in, and his comment on the possibility of a solider dying in Afghanistan who hadn't even been born on 9/11/01 was strong stuff. Buttigieg appeared to me as someone who would surgically strike Trump in a debate, while Liz and Bernie would lose their cool.
Moderates took hits. John Delaney was drubbed by Warren. Tim Ryan was slapped by Bernie, and to quote a friend, his position looks like 90s-era GOP. Superficially, I felt Ryan must have let his hair go grey for this one to look older. Ryan was smacked with criticism for not holding his hand on his heart for the national anthem (Isn't the hand on the heart for the Pledge of Allegiance, anyway?).
By the way, I am not suggesting that they cut the Anthem- but I did notice it was about 14 minutes into a jam-packed short-for-time show before the first candidate spoke. Wouldn't they be better served to get started and cut out the movie reviews (Extra Extra That Enzo dog from the Costner movie is now polling ahead of DeBlasio and Bennet).
Western Governors did not perform well in the first night. I was excited to see Gov. Steve Bullock, but his performance lacked. I personally thought Amy Klobuchar was great, but she almost seems too level headed to be up there. What irony in that she might be the best suited to be President, but she is not 'flashy' enough. Granted, I am not sure how much is attributed to the moderators not giving her much time.
So John Delaney probably should have looked at his performance on the first night and dropped out. He didn't. So you can still go to his website and buy John Delaney koozies, poker cards, stress balls, dog collars and "memory" erasers.
While we did see Inslee and Gabbard ads on the first night, they were in person on the second night. Gabbard's "pledge of allegiance" ad is striking and patriotic. Gabbard, at this point, will likely be a Ron Paul character with an extremely devoted audience. She will, however, not be the Democratic nominee.
Gabbard attacked Harris, which is probably a good thing. If Harris is going to be a major candidate, she is going to need to know what it feels like it is to be on the defensive.
Some media outlets claim Biden was a winner, but I didn't see it. It started out bad enough when he joined Harris onstage and told her "Go easy, kid".
From there, the moderators let Booker go after him. If this had happened under other circumstances, John Delaney might have been there been to interrupt, but without him, no such luck.
Biden (and DeBlasio) also lip-synced the Anthem, which is probably the wrong choice. Lip sync or stand silently? Those are the kind of questions they don't ask you in Political Science class. Future politicians, you're going to be glad you read me.
DeBlasio may be the most unpopular candidate ever, and protestors were there to yell "Fire Pantaleo", though at home, it sounded like gibberish, and wasn't particularly effective.
My son watched Michael Bennet and said he looked sad. Reports vary, some say Bennet was a winner, but I would say Kamala got the best of that exchange, and Bennet was one of the losers of the night.
Kirsten Gillibrand had a great joke about the need to Clorox the White House. Still, I think she is not being taken seriously and that was the last thing I would have suggested for her to do.
Corey Booker was a winner and I suspect we will finally see a bounce. I keep hearing how great he is as a speaker, and am a bit shocked he hasn't polled better to date.
If anyone else might have got a bounce, I would say Jay Inslee made the best performance of the so called "second tier". I can't quite write Inslee off, even as I begin to lose faith in that whole "Western Governor" group.
Some ideas to lively up the next debate
1- Such a crowded stage- 2 nights of 10 candidates. How about 4 nights of 5? 5 nights of 4? Maybe, ten nights (!) of one-on-one debate.
2- I think the moderator could ask the question to Michael Bennet. He could whisper his answer to Gillibrand and so on down the row a la the "Telephone" game and then once it gets to Bill DeBlasio on the other age, he could provide Michael's answer. Perhaps the Democratic platform could be drawn up that way.
3- People loved Jake Tapper and many at home opined if they could get someone like him at work to run their business meetings since he was such a task master.
As for me, can we go the other way? I have seen those panel talent shows with "good guy" judges and Simon Cowells. Maybe the next debate, add Mary Murphy, and every fourth question could be "Do you prefer Hot Dogs or Hamburgers?"
Ok, that's the end of my list, but the first debate hard transitioned into an ad for The Hunt. An intense ad that scared my 5 year old who watches the debate as intensely as I would have at the age. He's met Beto and said "We met him at the ballgame and now he's President!" ("Running, son, running")
The Hunt is a story of 12 strangers who don't know where they are or how they got there. It appears that they are being hunted for sport.
Clever for CNN to run it as a teaser for what might happen when they returned from break, but no such luck. Life in 2019 may be crazy, but we are not quite that depraved yet.
Thankfully.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete