The more these candidates propose their agendas, the more material team Trump has to knock them down. These debates are simply fodder for his reelection campaign. For the rest of us, their policies are often confusing and overlapping. I won't be tuning in to the next and will just wait to watch their individual townhalls which are far more effective.
3
Bernie needs to cool it with the impersonations of Christopher Lloyd's character in "Back To The Future".
2
Yet another missed opportunity. Instead of uniting to attack Trump as the most incompetent and dishonest president in history, they attacked each other and there is no doubt Trump watched gleefully. There is only one objective and that is to decide who has the best chance of defeating Trump and tonight's debate which was reduced to a bashing-of-each-other session left that answer up in the air. I'm waiting for one of them to focus exclusively on how he or she can demonstrate what it will take to defeat Trump. So far they have not heeded the sage warning from Obama to not engage in a circular firing squad.
2
Let's be real. All the grandiose promises made by these debaters are so unrealistic if they have a Republican majority Senate. They should get on with determining a candidate who can beat Tump soon instead of dragging out this divisive primary. The otbers should get behind that person and campaign rigorously for all Democratic candidates running for the Senate.
3
This is the hour of the debate in progress, Sep. 12, 2019, 22:00 hr EDT. My wife, an incorrigible supporter of the Democrats, is watching the debate. I, a fairly apolitical and non-practicing progressive liberal of the center, nod along with her uxoriously.
My impression is that the candidates blow a lot of hot air, use highfalutin words, and show a lot of wishful thinking on issues, that are socially and morally important, but they do not the touch the cords in the souls of the Redneck Trump's supporters.
The next battle for the White House will be fought on the Great Plains in the South-West, not in the urban intellectual enclaves of the littoral East and North-East.
2
To the NYT:
You seem to be treating all of this like a joke.
It isn't.
Stop with fun-poking and get serious. It isn't just the USA suffering from your malignant President. The whole world needs him gone.
4
Trump just commented on the debate: "I hit Pocahontas way too early. I thought she was gone. She's emerged from the ashes and now it looks like she could beat Sleepy Joe, he's falling asleep. He has no idea what the hell he's doing or saying." Trump has just begun his nasty name calling and attacks on his opponents. Imagine how many
more he will tweet out between now and the big debate. I'd hate to be anyone of them when Donny really gets going. Wonder if any of these ten Democrats are really ready and able to take him on? Is it too late to find someone else to jump into the race who can inspire and fire up the electorate while fighting the bully at the same time?
3
Watching the debate. The Dems are all in on socialism. They want open borders. I think they want the US to take in all of Venezuela. Their climate regulations will make no difference but will destroy the economy. Realistically, these positions will not beat Trump.
1
It's not a debate.
What it is might be better, since we've yet to actually hit the 2020 primary season: In with a lot of sloppy short answers and candidates attacking each other is a spark that ought motivate at least some of those millions of Americans to vote in 2020. It's mostly lazy, indifferent Democrats who've chosen it out election day on the couch every 2 and four years for the last 2 decades
2
This is not a debate. It is gladiatorial wordfighting in 1 minute intervals where the viewer roots for one to humiliate the other.
The paradigm of "if there is a winner, there must be losers" is why American politics and society has devolved into a tribal win/lose ritual of governing.
Any viewer can go to a candidate's website and read their platform, uninterrupted, and make up their minds. The president is not a king and does not need to prove congeniality bonafides worthy of an affable gameshow host with whom you'd like to get drunk with.
Americans are hopelessly aggressive, uninformed individuals and these preposterous cage-match themed "debates" do nothing more than culture an already intolerable, regressive and violent society.
5
Sorry, guys. Three hours of Debating Dems looses out tonight to a Sneak Preview showing of Downton Abby. So my vote, for tonight, is the Dowager Countess, Violet Crawley.
2
I get the feeling that everyone is just waiting with baited breath for Joe Biden to fall on his face. You've got a president who lies about everything and you don't seem to care. Do you WANT another four years of chaos?
5
I'm spending my time on more fruitful sources of information about the candidates. These so-called debates are a waste, and to top it off, apparently financed tonight in part by Partnership for America's Health Care Future ads peddling lies about Medicare for All, Medicare for Some and the public option. There's an example in this piece that should earn the maximum number of pinocchios from the Washington Post: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/09/12/industry-coalition-launches-seven-figure-ad-blitz-flood-democratic-debate-attacks
2
In contrast to this silly and shallow piece, a delight to see Amanda Ripley's thoughtful suggestions in the Wash Post opinion page today on how to restructure debates to put voters in the center and around what they want from candidates. What they want - surprise - is someone who can unify the country, but a systemic lack of trust in institutions and politicians is a huge challenge.
2
Each one morally superior to Trump and capable of hiring the best minds to fill in areas they may be weak on which would be refreshing compared to Trump who scribbles on weather maps and feels he knows more than anyone on anything .
5
Gail has solved it for me! I’m going to vote for the grumpy old man in the primary. The one with vision, not the Republican one. Candy cane socks are a definite no-no and so is using expletives in public. I like many of Warren’s policies (and we certainly need tax reform) but she has a monomania directed against business and the wealthy. Who she classifies as “rich” is certainly eye opening. Small businesses owners could suffer disproportionately.
But come Nov 2020, I’m voting a straight Democratic ticket. I will never and I mean NEVER vote for a Republican again. I have occasionally in the past. But not after what they’ve put us through with Trump and these absolutely awful policies.
8
Too bad DaBlasio dropped out. He would’ve made the perfect president. He would’ve stayed in the gym all day working out, missed meetings, never tweeted, and got nothing done. I’ll miss him.
1
I still think Gail should inaugurate a William Henry Harrison Award (The Willie) for Trump Administration Cabinet Level Official with Shortest Tenure. It should be annual.
I had no idea John Bolton had been with us for seventeen months before he resigned/got the axe. ars long; curriculum vita brevis.
3
Oh, Gail. Delightful humorous piece. Won't be able to see Round 3 of the Dems as they get closer to finding their guy/gal to go up against our current President of the United States of America. Sad but thanks to the NYTimes which I can still read here in China I can keep abreast of how things are going in my country of birth. There's a show going on here too but since I speak not a word of Chinese it's hard to comprehend . . .
I hope every single one of the candidates tonite never once says 'Trump'. 'This administration' or 'the current administration' or even better 'the Republicans', yes. Don't say the name. His head will explode.
2
I'm not understanding the sidelining of Amy. The big excitement around her was several months ago when there was a big scandal over her salad bullying. So, the first polls drive the media, which then drive the following polls, and we have four front runners. So depressing. This wasn't funny, Gail. Not right now.
6
I know that the candidates will try to mix it up a little and give some knocks to each other but, I am hoping that several of these candidates who don't become the nominee will have a place in the administration of the one who beats Trump. They each have their strengths and, from what I can tell, they are honest, decent, people. We should expect support and cooperation from all who don't become the Democratic candidate. Unity, that's how we win.
3
The adjacent article is titled, "How Did the Top Four Candidates Perform Last Time?" Unintentionally, that precisely describes these non-debates: performances.
These shows are merely the Democrats' version of The Apprentice, with the twitterati, punditocracy, and commentariat getting to feel good saying, "You're fired!" and "You're hired!" I seriously doubt that people with genuinely open minds are even watching, as there is no relationship between how a person comes off on TV to how that person would actually function as President. Look what happened in 2016 when people went for the histrionic TV performer.
1
I don't care who does what in this debate. I know who I'll vote for in the primary, so this debate means nothing. Do you really think that debates are going to change people's minds?
4
I stopped watching “debates” long ago.
One, I haven’t had a TV for a long time.
Two, these Q&As are not debates. A real debate would be like Lincoln-Douglas. Person one has so much time to speak. Person two has the same amount of time to speak. Person one has about half-that time to speak.
A debate is not one candidate stalking the other on the stage.
Although any government official may have to make quick decisions, he or she rarely if ever has to make those decisions with millions of people watching. They do it behind closed doors with trusted advisors.
9
I won’t watch the debates. Here’s the deal. Even if the eventual Democratic presidential nominee is a potato, that potato has my vote. I’m just waiting for the ballot so I can do my thing.
854
@Tom Kochheiser Thanks for the laugh. I usually go with a sponge, but I like the potato reference, as well.
105
@Tom Kochheiser I get your point, but that attitude is precisely how Donald Trump became president. Enough people would have voted for a potato instead of Hillary, which tipped the election to Trump. If we don't elect an extremely competent Democratic president, not just any ol' Democratic person, that president will completely fail and in 2024 we'll get something as bad as Donald Trump (like, for example, Donald Trump, who would be eligible to run again) or worse. Imagine the goosebumps Trump would get by being the star of that comeback drama. Imagine the tyranny he would unleash if he felt vindicated after a 2020 loss. We need someone who can both manage the government and simultaneously undo the damage Trump has done unilaterally without inflicting more damage. Not sure that all 19 Democrats can just fall out of bed and do that. In any case, if they can, the voters should verify that they all can by evaluating each candidate, even if their eventual choice in the general election is foreordained. Register as a Democrat and participate in the primary/caucus in your state, so that the party finds the most electable AND most competent nominee. No one has to watch the debate live. We can watch it later on line, even in hour-long chunks instead of as a telethon. Consider that option.
67
@Tom Kochheiser
Right there with you! I don't care for the way they run the debates; I want the candidates to have the time to give well thought out answers; not a 1 minute elevator speech. I prefer watching the candidates in the televised town halls which I feel is the better format for me to decide who I want to support.
39
Unfortunately Andrew Yang was not mentioned in this article, but it doesn't matter! I am really excited to see him broaden his message on such a large stage, tell people about all his well reasoned policies on democracy reform, medicare for all, human centered capitalism, etc. to all the people that still have not heard of him. His bipartisan support continues to grow as others fade, as people realize he is focused solving the real issues in America without focusing on antagonizing supporters of trump and all of those theatrics.
3
@Will
As a Yang supporter, I'm happy to see him rising in the polls. More and more people of all backgrounds and political leanings are liking the Freedom Dividend and his other policies.
1
@Will. Bipartisan support?
Could we please stop treating political contests as if they were sporting events, made for TV?
Substantive questions and more than a minute to answer.
Trying to be all things to all people is wasting valuable time. The DNC is doing a terrible job, fighting progress and holding the line for the trivial and the "popular".
I don't want popularity, I want skill, intelligence, compassion and expertise.
Warren for me, but I'd take any Democrat a long way ahead of the looters and exploiters promoting toxic waste of every kind, and using hate and victim blaming to stay in office.
It's not a sport. Killing the other guy rather than bringing people together is just plain wrong.
9
Is anyone willing to say this is a stoopid way to choose a president? Dumb, too.
This is really, beyond any doubt, a war of attrition, what they once incorrectly called the war in Vietnam a long time ago. The game is to be noticed, get campaign donations and survive long enough that the other pretenders fall by the wayside. For those who don't have much of a chance, running for president is a way to raise one's national profile without doing some stupid television show for 14 years.
Think, yes, about age. Pete Buttigieg would be the same age as Biden FORTY YEARS FROM NOW. So, he wins by not winning this season and getting himself teed up for future leadership, maybe. In 20 years, past mid-century, he'll still be a young man compared to Biden is now.
There should be an upper age limit just as there is a minimum age (35) to run for president. This is getting nuts. Yes, we all live longer now than our grandparents and good health and vigor can be seen, but, come on, the presidency is always about the future: what kind of future we want and how we place our hopes about that future into someone who will, likely, live to see it, or some of it, realized.
No matter how one can perform publicly, there is the issue of fatigue and mental decline brought on by aging. We don't have this quantified or fully measured but we know it happens. We really don't want the impulsiveness of youth NOR the lassitude/forgetfulness of the aged. Experience without having been run over by father time
6
The big thing for the world is that Trump be replaced. He's a one-man wrecking ball. He delights in slashing environmental protection of all sorts because he's happy to spend his life either in air conditioned buildings or on golf courses. He doesn't look like he cares for US taxpayers since he wastes so much money on flying hither and thither accompanied by an army of secret service members. Because of the ubiquity of his tweets and the media's incessant need to cover them, your President affects pretty well every country in the world. We want him gone.
7
The conservative and racist fervor that had gripped this country will not be quelled by Democratic nice guy tactics. Democrats don’t have the courage or the charisma to call him out and impeach him which shows their cowardice. Liberals fail to grasp the conservative , racist wrath that have been unleashed which will, like a hurricane , overwhelm everything in its path.
1
None of the candidates on stage tonight can actually shift the culture of this country, and that is what we so desperately need.
Trump is a symptom of what ails us, not the cause. We need a leader who will address the big picture. Policies are secondary.
We don’t need business as usual. That’s what got us here.
We need an uprising of decency, a rejection of the thrall of malignancy.
I will vote for whoever they put up, but it’s seems to me that Williamson is the best qualified to bring about a culture shift. She’s done it her whole working life, one on one.
We may as well give love a chance. We’ve tried everything else, and we are well and truly lost as a result.
14
@D. Wagner
Policy = the big picture.
6
@D. Wagner
I'd like to hear her voice more. I'm not a fan of hers, but I'm angry that the NYT and the media in general have not taken her seriously. She's the only person who's truly progressive in her thinking.
NYT and others write endlessly about the frontrunners and rarely tell us much at all about the 1%ers. Maybe that's why their poll numbers stay low - no name recognition. A vicious loop that doesn't serve the voters.
I hope Williamson will end up with a cabinet post. We could use someone like her in health or education.
11
@D. Wagner Andrew Yang is the only candidate that is really focusing on the issues that got Trump elected: the hollowing of the middle class and the slow death of the American dream. This is caused by automation and companies focusing on shareholders, not stakeholders. His slogans are "Not Left. Not Right. Forward." and "Humanity First." I really encourage you to look at some of his interviews, especially long form ones, where he clearly understands the issues facing America and has thought deeply to find real solutions.
9
Bernie is too angry, Warren wants to put my banker husband out of a job, Beto is a potty mouth, Mayor Pete is too young, and for some reason I find Castro, Yang and Booker sort of interchangeable. I have no opinion at all about Klobuchar, same with Harris. Maybe someone will break away from the pack tonight. There’s no telling. At least nobody made their dog ride on the roof of a car! For now, my money’s on Biden.
33
@Jennifer L.
Do we really think any of the Dem candidates would be so manically draconian as Trump? Putting people out of jobs? Think about that absurdity. I don't find that is her stance ...
She has the ability to motivate, lead, and she is very sane, unlike the current president. She would be someone who would be willing to negotiate with Congress since there is a small percentage that Congress will be all Dems.
20
@Jennifer L.
I forgot to mention the primary point, which is that Republicans cut taxes, spend the savings of Democratic administrations, and crash the economy. Democrats will need to be smarter than ever to save us from the big crash that this overheated economy and billionaire welfare is making for us all. But their record of rescuing the economy is stellar. However, Biden is just not smart enough for the coming troubles ... too much business as usual, which won't hold.
16
@Jennifer L.
Your banker husband is going to be in trouble if Dems don't take a hand. Remember the Bush financial crash? Trump's will dwarf it. Warren is the only candidate with the experience and compassion to make everyone participate in the economy's upside, not just the "too big to fail" bankers.
And if your husband is helping billionaires take pennies from the less fortunate, Warren would be right.
Meanwhile, you need to get wise to climate change. Otherwise, we won't all be here all too soon.
25
Every time I hear the phrase "existential threat," I envision Albert Camus in a boxing ring.
In this corner, the . . .
5
Absolutely no one looks good to me. Truly. I cannot bring myself to listen to all the "I will do______fill in the blank"; anymore. Everyone, and truly mean all of the Democratic candidates is missing an incrediblky important thing: Authentisicism. No one puts this across to me. Obama did. Robert Kennedy and JFK surely did. Noit now; no way. I don't see anyone even close. Michelle Obama, who is not running (for now) is someone I believe and trust. Oporah Winfrey? Are you kidding me? If she ran and won, "Dr. Phil" would be the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Oh, just thanks a whole lot!
Your's is the only column I can read at any time!
1
Any of the candidates would be better than Don the Traitor, who appears to be taking orders on how to destroy the country from Vladimir Putin.
2
As Trump has unfortunately taught us all, to our despair, a not insignificant part of who we choose for the next President is the kind of people, and administration, they will surround themselves with.
This is what worries me most about Biden: he will bring back the old network of “moderate democrats,” in other words, DINOs (apt), who are really just Republican Lite.
And the government will continue to enslave the rest of us, and serve only the super-rich.
Our world really is moving rapidly towards slavery, feudalism, the resurrection of dismal autocracies backed by advanced surveillance and policing technologies, the likes of which Hitler and Stalin would approve. And we comply with it cheerfully, every day.
This has got to stop, and very soon.
Time is running out for life on Planet Earth. And freedom is being destroyed almost completely.
4
I am not a Democrat, so my voice will have no bearing on who the eventually choose to run against Mr. Trump. Once they have chosen someone, I will take the time to listen to that person's views and policies, and make an informed choice who to vote against. Until a candidate is chosen, however, the incessant blathering of the flock is of no interest to me.
1
I hope that the candidates will spend less time on Trump and more time on why Democrats, Liberals, and Progressives have been the key factors in keeping the United States strong and healthy. It seems that people have forgotten that it was the Democrats who made the “Safety Net” of Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare, which kept the middle class alive. In fact, I would call the “safety net” of Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare: GOOD AMERICAN SOCIALISM. On the other hand, I would call paying for stadiums like Giants Stadium in New Jersey and New York and some of Donald Trump‘s golf courses, such as in the Bronx: BAD AMERICAN SOCIALISM, where the taxpayer foots the bill for a very small percentage of rich Americans. So when Donald Trump and Republicans scream that Democrats are bringing in socialism; I say: that’s GOOD AMERICAN SOCIALISM and what we’ve had in this country since the 1930s when the Democrats under Franklin Delano Roosevelt started social security. So in conclusion, Democrats should remind all Americans that it was liberals and progressives who had their back since the 1930s, have their back today, and will have their back into the future.
7
I am appalled by the many who say that they plan to vote for Warren who is so anti business that no moderate Republicans, even those who hate Trump, will vote for her. Biden is not perfect but he is an honest man who knows how to compromise when necessary. He is the only candidate who can beat Trump, the worst President in the history of America.
44
@JCTBI
Warren isn't anti-business. She started totally pro business, then moved left as she gradually grew up and looked around her--a bright adult learning and evolving. She's anti-rapacious capitalism, as so we all should be. Northern Europe is one of the healthiest, happiest regions in the world, and they've mixed enterprise and compassion nicely. We can do the same.
19
@JCTBI Republicans don't vote for Democrats. They may just stay home and not vote for Trump, but they are very tribal and no Dem will get their vote. I don't think that being pro worker is being "anti business". Business has the lobbyists and all the money, they don't need the president in their pocket.
7
I appreciate your thoughts, but there are no moderate Republicans any more.
4
I was going to watch the debate but tonight is the only chance I'll have to clean the bathtub this month. Maybe I'll record it and watch it tomorrow. No, can't do that. Tomorrow is sort out the sock drawer.
I promise I'll vote for anyone running against Trump.
235
@Enough . Don't drop away, please. This is a major election and right, there is no immediate outstanding candidate emerging for everybody but still there is much ahead in the election process; be informed about who's who in it.
9
I'm currently in Canada, where they've just announced the formal beginning of the campaign for federal elections.
40 days until election day.
This seems like a much better approach than our system to me!
764
@Lisa
Yes, but it's not as lucrative for the media, and advertising firms as the US's model - which must generate hundreds of millions of dollars every 2 years. It's all about making money, isn't it?
125
@Lisa
One of the arguments justifying the interminable run-ups to our elections is that the winnowing process results in better elected officials. Well - as Shakespeare memorably phrased it - so much for that.
54
@Lisa many things about the Canadian way are better than our way. Like healthcare for all and a bunch of doctors saying they are overpaid! Like no electoral college, a left over of slavery. Oh, and like abolishing slavery in 1833.
40
I won’t watch, it’s all too scripted with zingers. It would be nice if the news reports would include the less well-known candidates. Maybe that’s why they are less well known!
2
Okay, cute column, but despite all appearances this is not a comedy revue nor, as a regrettable print headline screamed over another article, a boxing match. This is the future of our democracy at stake, something everyone - the press, the officials and the American people - must take very, very seriously. There is a madman on the loose in the White House who must be extricated and, hopefully, called to account for his transgressions and those committed in his name. Job 1 is how we best do that. Job 1a is who we elect to do that. Job 1b is providing them a House and Senate with which to do that. Everything else becomes possible only after those jobs are done.
3
This discussion is like debating who among FDR, Joan of Arc, Jefferson, Washington, Toussaint Louverture, Golda Meir, Teddy Roosevelt, Lincoln, Frederick Douglass and Benito Juarez could beat Caligula.
O tempora o mores.
7
I could only name nine. For the life of me I could not remember Julian Castro. I am getting a bit old so no fault of Mr. Castro.
I expect that Beto will look as vapid and foolish as he is. Biden will likely either try to hug Kamala or call her Kruella. Kamala is going to be walking a fine line between demonstrating how she is a minority candidate and how she treated minorities in California as Prosecutor and AG. I hope Bernie doesn't spray spittle during his usual diatribe against whatever. Klobachur actually makes a lot of sense compared to some of the others. She could be a good VP for Elizabeth Warren. Corey Booker with all his earnest love for everyone will try to find a way to skewer Joe Biden and then feel bad about it later. Mayor Pete is fading, troubles back home, not good. Andrew Yang is interesting but though I did remember him it was with a great deal of effort, like Julian Castro, no fault of Mr. Yang.
I expect Elizabeth Warren will look very good compared to the rest of them. I would put a fiver on her to win the nomination.
9
How about one of your good pieces aboutregime change wars that have undermined our social/health care/environmental conditions. No Democrat will touch that except for Gabbard, who the NYT and their various rich forms of supporters have blackballed.
2
Pray that none of them starts yapping about decriminalization of illegal border crossings.
That will DOOM us in 2020.
DOOM. DOOM. DOOM. DOOM.
5
I confess. I Have become increasingly cynical about the debates, the elections, and the American public. The debates are nothing much more than beauty pageants. They are appeals to people's emotions, not intelligence, because people do not vote intelligently. In reality, facts don't matter, and reasonable policy is subordinated to our emotional knee-jerk reactions. I hate the Republican policies and their cynicism. Democrats are slightly better, but not always. It feels pretty gloomy right now. The fact that Donald Trump has a very strong chance of being re-elected makes me realize that human beings will always be tribal above all else.
1
Yes a big waste of time. This whole electioneering is out of control. I am a liberal Dem who will work to get rid of Trump but am totally uninterested in these so called "debates" and money attempts. The Dems will continue to damage themselves trying to one up each other and will dilute the money for the big show in November 2020.
Like it or not, Biden has the best chance, Bernie and Elizabeth the best ideas and knowledge and the mayor the most intelligent. The rest need to stay in the senate where they can do the most good. Be quiet except for policy and let Trump be Trump. No need to get into a food fight with him. Try and show some democratic results in the congress rather then be a punching bag for repubs. Save the $$ for the real battle.
1
I've heard it said that these "debates" are dog and pony shows. That, I believe, is a shameful insult to dogs and ponies.
What we have here are quasi-entertainment televised fund raisers, wherein the candidate who "creates excitement" or who has the best put-down of another obtains sufficient donations to keep going. This should be beneath the dignity of the American citizenry. It also shows the sad state of the DNC (not to mention Republican pathologies) and the pathetic cravenness of commercial television.
How about a series of real discussions covering a two or three major issues named in advance, each featuring at most three or four candidates, each having significant experience at least one of the matters at hand? A format like that would truly help voters know the minds and qualifications of the candidates and would help educate Americans about important topics and differing approaches to them.
Though I've studied government and politics for decades and have a greater concern about the future of our nation than at any time since 1968, I doubt I'll be able to watch three hours of the current silliness without becoming ill. Instead I'll play with my dogs and maybe go visit a pony.
2
Excellent!! Just what the doctor ordered - a little tongue-in-cheek humor. I the stakes weren’t so depressingly high tonight’s debate will reach few, if any, new viewers (what channel is it on again?). Those that will be watching will do so because; 1) They want to see their ‘horse’ get some zingers in, 2) Witness a gaffe by either a near octogenarians or kid, or 3) Because they don’t have a life or are on the rebound from a bad relationship.
The chances of any minds being changed is small. What is guaranteed to happen is our Tweeter-in-Chief will make some (more) nasty comments to incite his base. Polls, money, and Super Delegates will determine who runs against The Donald. Let’s knock off this nonsense and get down to just a couple of candidates that actually have a chance of beating the buffoon in office. If anything, they should all unite in supporting the couple of brave souls that have chosen to run against the incumbent. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Just sayin’....
2
Gail, dear, Isn't Elizabeth three years younger than you? So why the ineluctable references to age?
Besides, if people have the energy to campaign, they have the energy to watch TV fourteen hours a day. I mean, to be president.
5
That you Gail for reminding some of us to take an evening off to catch up on our reading. It is not that we are disinterested in knowing who the Democrats select to oppose “that man in the White House” it is just that the political season in the United States has become a 24/7; 12 months affair. The agony and ecstasy of it is simply too much for those of us not seeking to be become a newly discovered presidential aide working at Mc Donald’s. No, it is simply that we have weathered the “stormy” blast of “that man in the White House” far too long and we will gladly accept anyone who is a Democrat to be the next President. We know that she or he will have their own personality disorders (just like us) but we are betting that our champion will be a better person. so, get on with your TV viewing, and I shall return to my reading of the best of Charles Dickinson.
I'm guessing that Gail is still funny and normally I would be laughing but nowadays all the humor has left me. The present state of politics has reduced me to a worried, grouchy, humorless voter, that sees a bleak future.
2
The Times says that " comments are moderated for civility."
We really need to do that for President Trump--maybe make it a rule for our presidents in the future. And presidents cannot intentionally lie to he public either, or doctor public documents with a Sharpie pen.
1
With one exception I think that debate organizers have done very well on very difficult job. The exception is the placement of front-runners in the middle of the stage. Placement should be randomized, or at least made to be a non-issue by using some other format. At this point the playing field should be as level as possible. Here is an idea--put those polling the lowest in the middle! I remember agonizing though the 2016 republican debates where trump enjoyed tremendous exposure thanks to his placement. We all know how that turned out!
One of the best candidates, Steve Bullock, will not be on the stage tonight. Look to Steve Bullock either as VP or President once he gains traction.
I wish I could tell you that I will watch all three hours of the debate plus commercial breaks but I can't. I wish the debates would lose the network format where the network controls the panel of questioners and the flow of the discourse. Dump the commercials, the color commentary and let the viewers listen to the candidates responses unvarnished.
2
I understand why the candidates attack each other's ideas in the debates. But I am much more interested in hearing what each one plans to do about the many problems facing the country. To me, the food fight aspects of the earlier debates were not helpful in understanding the candidates.
3
As an Independent voter, I don't see these "debates" as being very inspiring. With too many candidates vying for attention, and a format that encourages a border line Jerry Springer show atmosphere, its just not worth the time. Let the Dems pick their nominee, then lets hear a sober, calm, detailed statement of policies from that person.
7
The trouble with this debate is that the most interesting candidate the Democrats have in not included. Tulsi Gabbard is talking about issues the other don't want to face. She also is out polling many of the people who are included. I'm sure these 10 people are glad she is not there but the public is being disserved.
4
@dennis
Ms. Gabbard was serving in Indonesia with the Hawaiian National Guard. You couldn't ask for a person to show more service to their country.
She should have been at the debates.
1
I've already seen them. No need to watch this time.
1
I have been of voting age since the 1964 election. I have voted for a Presidential candidate only six times. I have voted in all fourteen elections, which means I cast my vote against a candidate in eight of those elections. This means, in those eight elections, I held my nose and voted for the person I disliked the least. I voted against Nixon twice; against Bush in 2004, (but for him in 2000); against McCain because of Palin. Goldwater, Clinton (1992), Dole, and Trump are the other four I voted against. If any of the 30 or 40 Democratic hopefuls I have seen in the past year and Trump are the choices, I will vote against Trump. However, if someone like John Kasich or Ben Sasse were on either ticket, I would have someone to vote for!
I'll wait to read about the debate(s) in the newspapers. I've seen enough of these folks in one way or another to get a sense of where they stand.
At this point it is anyone but trump, but I have to admit that I will not vote for any one who has not been a long-time member of the Democratic Party.
2
Don't know much about Tom Steyer but I am absolutely certain that it takes a different set of credentials to run a democratic government than it does to run any business which are certainly not, democracies.
4
You know the old saying "there's many a slip, twixt the cup and the lip" seems to apply right now, so it is difficult to get excited about a debate with the election so far away. Looking at the polls if the election were tomorrow Biden would win in a landslide, but the election isn't tomorrow. I am so afraid if Biden is the nominee that Trump will eat his lunch, breakfast, and dinner in a debate.
I must admit I am afraid of the upcoming election. Most of us had confidence that surely Hillary Clinton would win against such an odious, unworthy opponent. We were wrong. I went to bed election night in 2016 depressed and in tears as a black cloud settled over our country. Now we are in a fight for this country's soul. I see Elizabeth Warren as the person who can step up to the plate, take on that fight, and best challenge Trump at this point.
She is the optimal person to take Trump on in a debate and put him firmly in his place. He is afraid of powerful intelligent women, and she has the vigor and fire in the belly and experience to take him on and beat him at his own game. She also has a campaign platform that is appealing and for the most part workable, albeit some of her ideas such as Medicare for all need to be tempered.
Let's just hope the moderators tonight don't replace hand raising with "mother may I". That would indeed require taking a shot every time.
4
@Diana
Please remember that Congress will have to debate and change any "Medicare for All" or any other issue that some feel need "tempered." Consider any policy espoused by these candidates as aspirational, then put the policies through a House of Rep and Senate with some (hopefully a minority) Republicans and some moderate Democrats, changed and moderated. This is also when you, as a constituent, can influence the legislator.
Remember when we didn't have government by tweet and a Senate that doesn't vote on good bills passed by the House? Remember the way government is supposed to work? Well, we can have it again.
3
Meanwhile...
Up in Canada yesterday, the Governor General was asked by Prime Minister Trudeau to dissolve Parliament, thus launching the country into its 43rd federal election to determine the next ruling party and, therefore, who will be our next prime minister.
The vote is to be held on October 21. This year.
A 40 day election writ.
Don't you folks find your American election industry to be a tad exhausting?
12
Instead of applying broad generalizations about septuagenarians to individual candidates (the very definition of ageism), Gail Collins and others should look at the individual candidate to determine whether s/he has cognitively declined or not. Does the candidate act appropriately in different social situations? Can the candidate adjust to changing conditions and changing societal norms?
Biden would appear to have a lot of trouble in these areas, while Bernie does not. Age is not just a number; it is also an attitude. Biden's world view seems to be stuck in the 1980's, whereas Bernie's fresh approach to today's very different problems has millennials and progressives flocking to him. What policy ferment there has been within the Democratic Party over the past four years has been both initiated and nurtured by Bernie. Biden is a poor candidate because of his inability to adjust to change and because he represents a status quo that the majority of voters both on the left and the right have rejected, not because of his chronological age. Bernie has shown he can respond to criticism, change course where appropriate and approach issues from where we are today, nothwithstanding his chronological age. Don't make generalizations.
3
“I should like to see one of these Democratic candidates, perhaps one of the more obscure among them, announce: “I have no big idea. If elected president, I should do my best to keep the ship of state steadily afloat, attempt to ameliorate painful inequities, reduce violent crime, avoid unnecessary wars, help tone down ugly disputatiousness, and, if you will allow a mixed metaphor, keep the hive humming. I would without hesitation give that candidate, man or woman, my vote.”
--- Joseph Epstein, writing in the National Review Magazine, 7/29/19
My thoughts exactly.
8
@A. Stanton
It figures this quote would come from the National Review. Not just this country but the West in general are facing existential crises that require far more than "toning down ugly disputatiousness" and "keeping the hive humming." We have less than 12 years to turn around climate change before permanent, civilization-altering changes set in. We have an historic and crippling wealth gap that is destroying our democracy and right to self-rule and leaving the middle class in the dust. We have crumbling infrastructure that we don't seem to have the will to repair -- we are supposedly the mightiest nation on earth, yet we have yet to build a single mile of high speed rail. The status quo is not holding and we are on the cusp of revolutionary change that will reorder our entire society -- not by the end of the century or in a generation but right now. The process is in fact already well under way. The only question is whether that revolution is coming from the authoritarian right or from the populist left. It certainly isn't coming from the center -- it is the center that is in the process of collapsing all around us and it is long, long past saving.
5
@Boris Jones The items on your list are doable within the state, where all politics begin. If voters see their local and state taxes improving their lives, they are more prone to vote for the governing party that made it possible.
Trump makes up his own weather maps because he is a 'weather vain'
7
Biden bloops or Beto's bleeps.
I love you, Gail.
7
Will someone explain to Joe Biden what "literally" means?
What comes out of Joe's mouth first tonight? A. "Literally" . B. "Fundamentally" C. Snoring
He's become Abe Simpson.
3
The guy with the red and white socks is the winner in my book, but what's his name?
And, PS, this oldster is very taken with Buttigieg. I don't think he'll be the nominee this go-round, but I hope he will stick around and try again in about 10 years.
6
@Carol
I'm with you on Peter, Carol. He's always the smartest one in the room, he answers the questions asked, and he's calm. Chicken soup for my soul.
1
I think we're really lucky to have Bernie, Elizabeth, and Joe Biden. Any of them would be fine Presidents.
I have no enthusiasm for the rest - treats her employees like trash Klobuchar, threw women under the bus when she was prosecutor loves Israeli slow motion ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians Kamala Harris, laughably little experience Pete Buttigieg, scandal-ridden Cory Booker, trying to buy the election Steyer and Yang, and whatsname Castro weren't in the running.
Harris and Steyer are so distasteful they are the only ones I can see not voting for against Trump, however.
1
Tulsi won't be there so why bother watching?
I think I'll watch another MidSomer Murder on Acorn instead.
1
"So, we’ll be watching to see if Biden bloops or Beto bleeps."
And that's what the so-called debates are about; whose going to screw up.
Racers say, "You can't win the race on the first lap, but you can lose it."
Our political system reduced to two elements; the candidate that collects the most money and the fewest screw-ups wins.
I'm not watching any debate, or sending any money, until 2020, and the field winnows down to four.
3
@Ralph Averill
The old status quo that centrist Democrats dream of bringing back is permanently gone because it was unsustainable. A democracy simply cannot exist with this level of wealth inequality. In Europe, where the gap isn't even as big as here, people are turning to authoritarianism and xenophobia: witness the Brexit mess and the rise of nationalist governments in Italy, Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic. Democrats here are too busy preaching "bipartisanship," warning against "circular firing squads" and insisting that "the perfect is the enemy of the good" to notice that the Republicans are waging full throttle class warfare, hell-bent on rolling back the New Deal and civil rights while sneering at the very notion of "reaching across the aisle."
We need to wake up and realize that, as utterly odious as he is, Trump is NOT our main problem, or even the cause of what ails us. He is only a by-product of the larger fact that a small elite of Wall Street and the 1% have taken over both parties and our government, leaving us with only the forms of a democracy rather than the substance. Our elections have become circuses of manufactured feuds, faux debates and dog whistling to distract us from the fact that the needs and wants of the 99% increasingly just don't matter. And the "centrist" establishment Democrats are every bit as much responsible for that as the far right Republicans; indeed, they enable them. We need fundamental change, not just a change of "teams."
2
@Boris Jones — define “fundamental change”, and then drop a hint or two about how to achieve it.
"And what about Joe Biden? Everybody’s waiting to see if Biden will do something … strange. Maybe refer to one of the questioners as “Mom.” Or start telling stories about his adventures in a M*A*S*H unit in the Korean War, forgetting that was a TV series."
These hypotheticals seem like pretty tame stuff next to the nonstop lunacy issuing from the White House. Reagan used to confuse reality and movies all the time, and the media thought it was adorable. Why is the bar always set so much higher for Democrats? It makes no sense to carp about every tiny, insignificant error that Biden might make, when the actual President is making actual policy on the basis of lies and delusions. Perspective, please.
7
@lydgate Indeed, perspective please. Do you think replacing a lying, delusional President with an addled one who may be unable to distinguish reality from a T.V. show is progress? What Biden is doing are not "insignficant errors" and pointing them out is not "carping." The bar that a candidate must clear for the nomination had better be miles higher than merely "better than Trump," or the Democrats will almost certainly lose this electionand I frankly don't think we can survive another four years of this.
2
Probably shouldn't say this -- but I'll vote for any candidate who isn't Trump. And three hours for a debate isn't a debate. It's a marathon to see whether any candidate can stand and not do something stupid for that long.
8
I am not a Liberal, or even a Democrat, and I find I'm reading the Times less and less. But Gail Collins' articles are always entertaining and worth coming back to the Times site to check out. Keep 'em coming Gail.
5
Your dismissive cuteness is an effort to put you and your know it all friends above the fight. You make not caring the reasonable choice. Disengagement only serves Trump. The Times is out of step with these times if they can't spur you to SAY SOMETHING.
1
@dan chumley Lighen up! This is an opinion column by Gail Collins and is meant to be tongue-in-cheek.
If we can't laugh at least once a day, we are going to explode before we clean up the repubican/trump mess.
1
Humour helps.
She's not a show-horse, she's a work-horse
She's not an ideologist, she's a problem solver
She's not tribal, she's tough love motherly
She's not intellectual, she is wise
She's not funny, she is caring
She's not in your face, she's in your mind
She's not an icon, she's a leader
She can't entertain, but I believe she can govern
In short, she is Amy Klobuchar, the candidate for adults
5
Ten candidates talking at once - sound and fury signifying nothing. None of them stand a chance because none of them have racism or bigotry in their DNA. Donald Trump is not concerned with the Democrats; he knows he does not have to be. While praising the intelligence of the American electorate, he secretly knows that they can be led around like bulls with nose rings - only instead of bull rings, he uses their beliefs and prejudices to lead them wherever he wants.
If DJT doesn't destroy our fragile democracy, he has published the blueprint and playbook for some other demagogue to do it later. If a democracy like America's is going to exist, there will have to be a paradigm shift in human thought throughout the world.
In the near future, we will program the human mind in the computer based on a "survival" algorithm, which will provide irrefutable proof as to how we trick the mind with our ridiculous beliefs about what is important and what is supposed to survive - producing minds programmed de facto for dirty tricks and destruction. These minds see the survival of a particular belief as more important than the survival of us all. When we understand this, we will begin the long trek back to reason and sanity.
See RevolutionOfReason.com
1
Trump is the man that Americans elected to draw their weather maps and negotiate with the Taliban.
The only thing our country is missing now is his updated Montreal Cognitive Assessment.
4
Spare us all "gotcha" moments. Employ some degree of humor. Reach deep down and find your inner Bobby Kennedy. Act like you will steamroll Trump.
2
I rarely dream, but I had one last night that stayed with me loud and clear.
I am in a department store trying on an expensive brown tweed overcoat cut in a European style.
It looks good on me. I like it.
I get home and discover that I am still wearing it, without ever having paid for it.
Joe Biden, Marianne Williamson, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Mayor Pete Buttgieg,
Beto O’Rourke and Donald Trump arrive at my front door.
Joe Biden says, “I sometimes forget things too.”
Marianne tells me, “It’s probably due to a spiritual void in our society.”
Elizabeth says “You deserve it. Keep it.”
Bernie says, “All the billionaires have nice warm overcoats.
You could donate this one to the poor.”
Kamala and Cory say, “Now you know how the rest of us feel.”
Mayor Pete says, “ We need to study this hard and take strong action against it.”
Beto says, “I’m tall and I’m thin, and I remind you of Robert Kennedy.”
Donald says, “Go back to the store and grab two or three more.”
8
@A. Stanton
And Amy Klobuchar says, "Go back to the store and pay for it, you'll need it this winter. And the next winter, and the next . . . Good job finding a well made coat that will last !"
3
Appreciate the satire. Where can I get the “It’s Cool To Be In The Middle” tee shirt?
1
Just think, Gail. Trump used to vent his anger and frustration by doodling on newspaper columns and sending nasty messages to anyone prominent who dared call him out on his lies and nonsense. Like you. Now he's president and has graduated to doodling on official documents, contrary to the rule of law.
Do you feel abandoned?
5
Time to go buy some booze and shot glasses!
4
Elizabeth Warren, Elizabeth Warren, Elizabeth Warren!!!
6
Donald Hump doesn't sound like a "bloop" by Biden. It is an accurate description of Donald's behavior with women.
5
I’m going with “A”
Ha!
Thanks
They call this collection of those who would try to run the country a debate. They do not debate, they simply try to tell us why we should vote for one of them them. At least one will try to tell us the other are too old, remember don't trust anyone over thirty? That was in 1964 at UCB. They did bring about some change, but not many of you remember what it was.
Today it will not matter who gets the nomination, even Daffy Duck would do a better job than the human imposter in charge is doing. Biden is younger than me, he stumbles a bit, but is a known quantity. I would like to see a junkyard dog in charge, one that would chase all the present GOP appointees over the White House fence.
We now know a sharpie pen can restructure the government, so the next glorious leader can just draw the country to be as he would like it. Warren has some plans, but as we know the most radical ones will just be relegated to the kill file, just like many of my comments to these pages have been treated by the Times robo editor. It is an AI programmed computer and seems to have taken a personal dislike to me.
2
Just a doggone minute here: Can Ms. Collins offer evidence that she has a "cousin Fred who runs a pickle stand"? What's a "pickle stand"?
Sorry, but I'm skeptical............
2
I challenge anybody of any age to do what these septuagenarians do every day of every week for months on end on the "campaign trail". It is beyond exhausting. The mental and physical stamina required of all the candidates way surpasses what is necessary after they are elected. Not all 70+ year olds would be able to do this, but these 3 have proven many times over that they can. Age in this case should be no more of a consideration than race or sex.
103
@lrb945
There's physical strength and then there's mental acuity. And I'm 71, so I know whereof I speak. Besides, the man in the White House is a cautionary tale---although there's a lot more going on there.
14
@lrb945
I have been hoping that Cory Booker would announce that he would consider being Elizabeth Warren’s VP because it would benefit the party to settle on a candidate. I have also dreamed that Jill would convince Joe that, as Philip Roth’s main character in Everyman said, “...that the missing component will not return to make him inviolable once again and reaffirm his mastery, that the entitlement mistakenly severed would be restored and he could resume where he left off only a few years before.” And then there’s Bernie, who, again by Roth’s description “…like any number of the elderly, he was in the process of becoming less and less and would have to see his aimless days through to the end as no more than what he was… waiting and waiting for nothing.”
9
@lrb945
Physical stamina hardly makes a great president.
My concern with the septuagenarians (I'm 65 btw so hardly ageist) is their mental acuity. I don't want to have to hope Biden and Sander are mentally sharp and up to the task 4 years from now.
Sorry, but age is absolutely more of a consideration than race or sex.
13
I've never seen Ronald McDonald in a business suit before.
But if he ends up running against Trump, I'll vote for him.
396
@KJ
Even the Hamburglar would be a better ethical choice.
(Why do I even know these characters— the only time I visit those establishments are out of desperation for something to eat, hoping I find some real food later on.)
13
@KJ - I'd vote for him even if he wore his clown suit. Trump needs some serious competition.
7
@KJ
I'd vote for Ron McD in a bright yellow jumpsuit, or no suit at all!
8
I’m a great believer in caring for our fellow man.
I’m also a realist. The candidates all raised their hands saying that college tuition should be free for all Americans (with some believing that this also includes asylum seekers.)
I thought: Are all these wealthy people (candidates) even aware that it’s the LIVING expenses that keeps most kids from completing or even starting college?
Those students carrying large debts are those who got their post grad or professional degree...which means that debt isn’t the biggest problem in their lives.
No we need to look at the impoverished students who don’t own a car or live in an area that has no public transportation. It doesn’t matter if community college is free if the kids can’t get/live there.
It’s the same problem I see when comments here can’t POSSIBLY understand why everyone doesn’t have a government issued ID to vote.
That people can never get a job that pays more than a temp minimum wage job as THEY CAN’T GET THERE!
I want to hear that infrastructure is a priority with these candidates.(Yes we can work on Climate Change at the same time). None of them understand that our country has horrible or no public transportation. Hey who cares? 84% of Americans drive a private car to work. We’re the only country IN LOVE with our cars.
That needs to change...especially as we Boomers are barely making it on this lousy Soc Security. Then we can’t see well enough to drive anyway even if we could afford a car.
Dems don’t care.
1
Speaking from personal experience in Beto's defense (and in no way is this an endorsement of his candidacy), it's pretty impossible to limit expletives in this era of Trump. One runs out of adjectives quickly.
3
Gail, love your columns. Your humor is great! Keep it up! Nice to smile while I read the paper these days.
12
I want a debate between the two leading whip smart policy wonks: Warren and Klobuchar, both of whom have the policy and legislative experience qualifications to be prez, while most of the other Dem candidates do not and are not.
8
The almost monthly herding of candidates so they are standing in their pens for these awful marathons should be reported to the ASPCA.
They are designed to prevent any exchange of substance and create an illusion of democracy, which is ironic because they have nominally been convened to determine who can best purge exactly those traits from the White House.
3
RAYS/Rangers in an important game in a wild card race or junior high school dance where everyone is trying to stand out as the coolest, any of whom I’d pick over the current title holder........
Thank God for baseball.
2
I got 8. I forgot Beto and Klobuchar. To be fair, Beto is pretty forgettable. How is he still around? Gail, how worried are you about me?
I'm not sure if I will watch the debate. Not live, I don't want to give the networks the satisfaction. Or more importantly, my eyeballs. 10 people on a stage is way too many. They should have had two nights, 5 people each night. The debates are a reality TV show anyways. The moderators don't ask questions to better understand the candidates positions and inform the public. The moderators just want a fight and a sensational story. The networks just want ratings. The moderators are incompetent weirdos with fake tans, dad jokes, and expensive hairdos. They follow the horse race too much and are out of touch with the people. Why couldn't we have gotten actual journalists to moderate? Joe Rogan is more informative than these ridiculous debates. It would be much better to have a few candidates simply discuss a few topics and really take the time to explain their position.
I'm a supporter of Bernie, Warren, Yang, and Gabbard. Haven't settled on who I will vote for yet. I don't want Trump as president, I am sick of the daily updates from the right-side of my computer screen of what Orangeface said this time. And to be brutally honest, I want to see the DNC and media implode. I hate them and Hillary even more than Trump.
It's sad that you linked to the Rolling Stone piece, and that I followed the link, and that the Rolling Stone piece even exists. What a shame.
I got eight and a half. I wasn't sure about Klobuchar and I totally missed Julián Castro. That's probably because his most memorable contribution to the primary is dragging everyone into the decriminalized border debate. Thanks Castro [slow clap].
I think I'm still going to skip this debate though. I tried the 10 candidate thing once before. It just doesn't work very well. I have better things to do with three hours anyway. The highlights will obviously hit front page center on Friday morning anyway.
Why subject yourself to a "Lord of the Rings" length event featuring old people talking over each other? That's what the media is paid to do. Their report is where your subscription money is going.
The Steyer thing is interesting though. Among other things, Steyer is proving money can buy your way into the political conversation. That alone is reason enough to drink. But not in a happy way. I'll save primary beer-bingo for Friday night.
2
I see a bounty in these 10 candidates. Every one of them is preferable to our current "leader". Each has their own strengths and weaknesses but none of them bragged about grabbing a woman by the, well, you know what he said. None of them is going to "roll back"-what?! laws that help keep the planet clean. Each of them is smarter, more educated, and more worthy of the oval office. This is simply the warm up for the existential battle which is going to ensue next year. And that is what it is going to be sadly, a struggle to define our nation, to ourselves and to the world. Are we a nation that cares for one another and our planet or are we a nation that wants to retain white privilege and trash the planet for immediate gain? More Americans want the former, we just need this angst to ensure they get up and cast a ballot!
4
While I favor Warren, I know that no matter what happens, no matter which of these people gets the nomination, they won't put children in cages, and they won't forge weather reports.
13
Would like to see a "real" debate during the selection process and especially during the final campaign. The observations of Gail are typical media fluff covering over real and very significant issues facing Americans
2
@WhiskeyJack Gail's long-time fans appreciate her tongue-in-cheek humor. If you mistake her columns for news or NYT editorials, you are in big trouble.
The election is well over a year away. Wake me up when September (2020) comes.
3
@LTony
May 2020, when some of the primaries have swept out to sea most of the malingerers and prior to the convention a couple of months to follow.
1
I am writing from the UK where we have our own ructions and even a Donald Trump imitation in B Johnson. You are so lucky - I miss being able to watch the debates live. But I noticed you mentioned Bill de Blasio - is he still in the race? Why?
3
Presently, 10 Democratic candidates fit for our presidency next year are running. Isn't it clear that 2 of these will be combined
to make the Pres. and V.P. ticket by next summer?
Will a charismatic comet candidate, a Barack Obama or JFK, rise from somewhere in the U.S. like a Deus ex Machina, to save America from Trump for 8 more years?
2
How much of the audience will be thinking about age?
Judging by the all the ads it runs for adult diapers and stair elevators even the oldest among the candidates will look like youngsters to a large part of the CNN audience.
3
"has been known to forget which country his father was born in"
And deliberately "forget" where prior Presidents were born.
"I don't talk about that anymore", the loser would say with a wink now.
2
No mention of Yang even though he's polling better than Beto?
3
@K. If they can mention Beto cursing, they can at least mention Yang crowd surfing.
1
I am looking for the candidate who will address the looming crisis of a twenty plus trillion dollar deficit and growing. Who supports abortion for rape and incest victims. Who would cut military spending by one third and would withdraw our troops from the 18 year old war in Afghanistan...who would talk with Iran without Netanyahu's influence...who will protect our borders without building a needless fence...who supports law and order and the death penalty for mass murderers...who protects our environment...who supports wind and solar over coal...and who would deal with trade imbalances intelligently. Steyer may be as close as I get to that candidate.
1
Gail, you are on my fantasy dinner party guest list. I'm skipping the drinking game just so I don't die of liver failure before that fantasy has a chance to come true.
3
She says:
“This dude’s gotta go.”
I say:
"Clean the swamp,
fire Trump"
Same thing.
3
As they go into the debate, they need to realize that the media is the enemy. Stupid questions with an absurdly clipped response time, designed to make the candidates and their positions all look foolish. A stage intended to make the process look like a cross between a pageant and a news flash. I just wish that the candidates would reject the idiotic questions and demand to make relevant remarks in more than 30 seconds. Under no circumstance should Rachel Maddow, Chuck Todd, anyone from CNN, be allowed to moderate. I'd rather see Megan Kelly asking questions.
2
I'd vote for a yellow dog as long as it was a democrat. At this point I think I'm not alone.
3
If only we were interested in the numbers, logic, and plain old truth. We the people need to take the government back. Circumvent our biased media friends if you have to.
Half these candidates appear disingenuous and self serving or have been around too long for me to not question whether they’re actually a part of the problem. #yang2020 #math #yanggang
1
A sure winner: A) My cousin Fred who runs a pickle stand is a better businessman than Donald Trump.
3
@Kingfish52 Maybe Bernie ought to try joinung the Democrat party then he will ' getting the memos'. perhaps you did not get the memo, Hillary won by 3 million votes Donnie cheated vis a vis Russian interference.
3
Gail. You are priceless!
3
I will not watch this circus! Trash this format! Get rid of live audiences. Get rid of commercials. The DNC should pay to put it on if no network is willing to do it as a public service. Let some smart high school students ask the questions. No more celebrity news people trying to boost their own ratings.
9
Gail: What useful info did this column add to what I need to know about the candidates? Nothing. Just snark and some attempts at cleverness. Please! We need better than this.
@larry bennett The only thing that is going to get me, at least, through this circus is a little snarky humor...what if we actually end up with a human being for a president, Saturday Night Live won't be funny anymore.
6
@larry bennett Gail's is an opinon column that has a reputation for humor and is enjoyed by many. Go to the editorials for the serious views.
2
Please don't use the word "maniac." Do you know anything about bipolar disorder? It is an incurable brain disease which causes its sufferers to go through phases of mania, suicidal depression and if they are lucky normalcy. The duration of the phases depends on the individual and his/her age. Sufferers of bipolar disorder commit suicide at a higher rate than those with any other psychiatric or psychological disease. Fortunately Senator Warren does not have bipolar disorder and your meaningless use of the word "maniac" to describe her contributes to the stigmatization of bipolar disorder and all other brain diseases.
@James Ricciardi
Maniac and manic are not the same word or intent.
Bipolar/schizophrenia are associated with manic behaviors, stemming from mental illness mania. That's clinical.
Maniac is associated with excessive energy and involvement with a goal. That's not clinical but colloquial.
2
@Maggie If everyone were as educated as you, there would not be a problem. There are a plethora of words which can be used in place of "maniac." There are two many people who confuse the words and too many people who stigmatize brain disorders. Obviously you do not understand that. If you have a member of your immediate family or a close friend with bipolar disorder, you would agree with my comment.
You write this??
"It’s sometimes a little hard to keep track of the actual issues when everybody’s vying to be youthful/likable/powerful/memorable/not-disaster-prone."
It's certainly hard to focus on the Big One, that we are destroying conditions for human life on Earth, leading to doom for our youngest and our species' extinction, when you lead the NYTimes in misusing your space to divert America's attention to featherweight trivia.
1
Can Sanders just go away already?
4
Another forum for discussions of environmental extremism, banning private insurance and having open borders. The Trump campaign says thank you.
2
Without cable or satellite TV unless CNN streams 3 hours over the Internet, I'll be snuggled down with a good book.
Ms Collins, I look forward to your analysis and synopsis. I trust you to keep it light but accurate.
3
Here's a thought, perhaps the candidates should attack trump's delusional behavior, attacks on workers, lack of a coherent policy or strategy on any subject, climate science denial, and the list goes on. Then contrast that with their policy proposals and positions. That would be far better than attacking each other, and certainly better than attacking former President Obama.
5
I used to look forward to columns by Gail Collins and enjoy her humor. Unfortunately, since the 2016 election, I have lost my ability to appreciate her writing. Reality is just too disturbing to laugh at it now.
I hope we get another Democrat back in the White House in the next election so that I can return to her work with pleasure. Right now I can only glance at these columns wistfully, with fond memories.... Those were the days, my friend....
1
I'm guessing the repubs are loving the spectacles of the Dems engaging in these faux debates. Nothing good can come from these events for any of the candidates; lots of bad can come from these events for any of the candidates. The Democratic Party leadership continues to be out of touch, starting with Perez. Let's hope the electorate knows what they're doing and pulls the country out of its nosedive. Lord knows the Dem leadership can't.
1
10 Democrat wannabe's. One fact is apparent -- the 2020 Presidential election will be a repeat of 2016 with a choice between two losers. My choice now as then will be "neither".
Why? Because the Democrats are leaving their Best and Brightest on the sidelines while the President has crushed all opposition in his party.
The only real job of President is to enforce laws Congress passes. We give him or her 3 million employees to do that and give tools to deal with Congress.
I will be writing in my Governor, Andrew Cuomo, because he is the most qualified to do the job. But he won't win because many in our country vote for a sleazy political party rather than a "representative" -- and his party is parading 10 lightweights on television to fool us the "debate winner" is qualified.
You simply cannot have a debate with 10 candidates, much less 20. There is insufficient time to grapple with issues, especially when the questioners are trying to play gottcha' to prove their Woodward & Bernstein journalistic bona fides. What these really are is an elaborate take down where candidates try to distinguish themselves, e.g., Kamala Harris, a talented pol with a severe likeability problem, tries to unhorse Biden and he lands on his feet little damaged because voters don't care about a pol's former positions, they care about whether s/he can defeat Trump. If you want to know where the candidates stand and how they would govern, rely on the print journalism of the Times and the Washington Post, watch Town Halls, and forget about the 'debates', or just watch them for what they are: political sport.
3
Brilliant! Gail’s wit and humor lights up my morning once again.
2
I understand, Gail, your job is to find and point out the potential humor in tonight's debate and you managed it pretty well. Unfortunately, removing Trump from our political world is far beyond humor.
The fact that his disagreement with NOAA went more than 15 minutes shows what a folly-ridden man we are up against.
Let us hope that only good comes of this debate. The Democrats need to settle down and get to work. There is no humor in that.
3
Best advice from NYT.- a drink each time I hear “existential threat.” Suddenly I find myself looking forward to the debate.
I will be watching at home ...
Seriously, I just want to hear them support one another and say, “With a Democratic victory, all of us here on stage will be a team working together for American people.”
3
This is a flippant article. Debates are important, particularly in a democracy that needs constant nourishment through good meaningful debates. But the mainstream media turns debates into theater for scandals, drama, gotcha moments, one liners and optics. Shame on American MSM for ruining good debates and democracy. Collins should have commented on her own MSM peers, and how they ruin, weaken and mediocritize debates.
1
Whoever wins the nomination looks great to me.
3
This is a flippant article. Debates are important, particularly in a democracy that needs constant nourishment through good meaningful debates. But the mainstream media turns debates into theater for scandals, drama, gotcha moments, one liners and optics. Shame on American MSM for ruining good debates and democracy. Collins should have commented on her own MSM peers, and how they weaken and mediocritize political and policy debates.
Watching paint dry would be quite a bit more interesting than listening to that cast of characters "debate" each other.
1
I just hope this time when the Democrats on stage in the debate attack the president they focus on Trump and not Obama.
1
This is a flippant article. Debates are important, particularly in a democracy that needs constant nourishment through good meaningful debates. But the mainstream media turns debates into theater for scandals, drama, gotcha moments, one liners and optics. Shame on American MSM for ruining good debates and democracy. Collins should have commented on her own MSM peers, and how they ruin, weaken and mediocritize debates.
First, Tom Steyer should scrap his presidential aspirations and spend $100,000,000 helping to enable disenfranchised citizens to register and vote in states with voter suppression laws.
Second, Beto should change his t-shirts to read, "Make America Great Again" on the front and "Lock Him Up" on the back with an image of the Mueller Report.
1
Gail. You made me laugh out loud. No small feat. I’m in your debt.
1
Sorry, Ms. Collins . I usually enjoy your columns and your humor, but this one reeked of cynicism and it literally made me sick to my stomach .
In the end, regardless of what one thinks of these "debates", countless Americans will take them seriously and use them to form an opinion on this or that candidate .
Your dismissive and elitist take on the forthcoming debate borders on contempt for the average voter .
Only one candidate talks about the root of America's problems of health care, gun control and such, Tulsi Gabbard.
But since Tom Perez and his handlers hate roots and love to just sniff the flowers, the media, including this one, went to the beautiful flower, the Venus Fly Trap. They will eat each other, but not Donald Trump who is inedible.
1
To the folks who incessantly (and ignorantly IMHO) describe some Dem candidates as "socialists":
Can you actually define "socialism" in any meaningful way? Libraries? Public roads? Police & fire services? Public parks?
4
@J Darby How about if a candidate describes himself as one, while dismissing the Democratic one?
@Norma
"while dismissing the Democratic one?"
Not sure what that even means.
On your first point, I'm not talking about the few that self identify as a "Democratic socialist" (very easily defined). I'm talking about the trumpettes (like Graham & McConnell) who use the term as a broad brush bumper sticker pejorative for all Democrats.
1
Nice going, Gail. You wrote all those words without mentioning Andrew Yang, who is set to take off once everyone (read: everyone) catches on to the brilliance of the Freedom Dividend and the applicability of his 100+ other policies, all based on the idea of Humanity First. Buttigieg, Harris, and Warren are the young, middle-aged, and elders of the corporate Dems, respectively. Sanders or Yang. That's it.
Some of us may choose to rent a good movie, as good as it gets, and tune in, before calling it curtains for the evening.
The candidates have to stand, for three hours during this debate, which sounds strenuous, and explains why Trump was semi-slouched on occasion and laid-back while Clinton stood tall. A round-table, where each and every candidate stands when it is their turn to speak, might be too civilized.
A hedge-fund manager in The White House is fine, with the added presence of a 'president'. One who is with it, and does not go off on a tear of profanities and abominations.
One 'shrill' note from a woman and it's duck soup. One big 'whine' from a man, and expect silent hisses.
Ms. Collins, you are more than entitled to feel on edge and keep in mind that you are not alone. If you told your readership that this was business as usual and mundane, the Country really would be in trouble.
Wear comfortable weathered shoes and have a glass of bubbly. Earlier was remembering 'Never let a dog get in life's way', which is still resonating with a former contender for The Presidency.
1
The "debaters" (really the tactic used is how to get to talking points without seeming like getting to talking points) should really take a new tack.
Ignore the questions - raise the issue of how the Republican Party is looking to anoint the King. How democracy is dying and the Republican Party is planning the funeral.
And of course the question of who is most qualified to comment on the track of the next hurricane.
1
I truly like Elizabeth Warren. If anyone reading this is in a position to influence her, please remind her there is some truth to the old adage “dress for the job you want ...". She seriously needs to present herself as someone other than the substitute high school homeroom teacher.
1
Instead of trying to outdo each other with debating skills and details of plans that'll really work, I'd rather see them show us who's the best at beating the guy on the other side that they're all running against... the one with nothing but insults, lies, and fake promises.
1
I'm going to be watching paint dry tonight. Much more exciting.
I don't care who wins or loses as long as Trump is out. So get out and VOTE.
3
Sorry Gail, just cannot laugh anymore, it’s all too depressing. The Dems won’t get their act together and fight hard. Why are there still 10 candidates? Beto refuses to drop out to run for Senate. Also, Stacey Abrams refuses to run for the Senate. Sorry, just cannot laugh.
2
We should finally change tune. Let's stop talking nonsense and go to real problems and real solutions.
Gee, who will win? The network sponsoring this thing and the republicans, that’s who!
Trump would make mincemeat of Biden, not because Trump is so smart, but because he's deranged and Biden is not mentally agile enough to confront such a chaotic id. He still thinks in terms of the slow, deliberative Senate where reason mattered, not this Twitterized universe. Warren has ideas that need to get out there but she's also nimble and will come up with a strategy to deal with Trump on stage. Rope-a-dope? I even think she would do a better job of thrashing Trump, out behind the gym, than could Joe at this point.
1
Tulsi Gabbord is the best candidate and the one who could best win.
I think the format should be changed. Put them in pairs and let each one interview the other for the job of Vice President. Then we will see what each thinks is important.
1
What does Booker add that you can't see in Harris?
What does O'Rourke add that you can't see in Castro?
What does Sanders add that you can't see in Warren?
What does Pete add that you can't see in Klobuchar?
39
@JoeG
What does Sanders add that you can't see in Warren?
A lifetime of being a dedicated public servant.
A history of always being on the correct side of politics and issues.
A politician that still gets out into the streets with his fellow working wo/men and fights for their rights.
A mensch that says what needs to be said out loud; whether the truth is uncomfortable, palatable or politically correct.
A person whose authenticity is obvious to friends and foes alike.
Said McCain: “I obviously am in strong disagreement with him on his basic philosophy of the role of government, but as far as an honest individual, to work with, to reach agreement, I respect Bernie Sanders.”
He added: “I will also say to anyone who will ask, Bernie Sanders is an honest man. He’s an honest man and his word is good. Once we reached an agreement, that agreement stuck. And now he’s brushing his hair, which is really a remarkable thing.”
9
@JoeG
"What does Booker add that you can't see in Harris?"
First Lady Rosario Dawson
Also, while Harris will take on a big fish like Biden and start selling t-shirts, Booker has that self-satisfied grin whenever he mentions himself as president. Otherwise, they are both self-serving opportunists. (I do not like them.) (Also, you did pair them together because the opportunist thing, right? Please tell me you didn't mean something, um, else.)
"What does O'Rourke add that you can't see in Castro?"
Castro actually speaks Spanish and has a backbone. O'Rourke only curses, Castro's brother will dox you.
"What does Sanders add that you can't see in Warren?"
Okay, those two are nearly the same. I'm worried they might split the vote and hand it to grandpa Biden.
"What does Pete add that you can't see in Klobuchar?"
First gay president. Also, he has never had any problems with race related issues as mayor. (rolls eyes) Who's Klobuchar again?
You forgot to mention Yang.
2
@Dobbys sock "I am not a Democrat! I am a socialist!" That's all I hear when I see bernie, who has been an Independent on congressional roles his whole political career, except for borrowing the Democrat label to run for president.
7
I listened to the climate forum on NPR..where all the questions came from the audience---these questions were so much more substantive and interesting then what our cable news people come up with. Wish, the democrats would adopt that format for these debates.
233
@Amanda Jones
Best to hand back the debates to the League of Women Voters. Agreed, the debates are too important to be in the hands of corp. media and the DNC.
31
@Amanda Jones
Why bother with any audience members/gas bag journalists/citizens? Just put them around a table and let them talk, but with a automatic timer that cuts off their microphone.
11
Better that we all take a drink every time someone says "existential threat" than every time the president of the United States lies. We have enough of an addiction problem already.
On a more personal level, I started a betting pool with friends regarding which candidate will offer more free money for this or that before the debate ends (rule: no fair adding those post-debate free-money ideas from candidates who realized they were out-freed).
19
@Larry
Great! You are concerned with the free money we give to the fossil fuel industry and big agra! I am with you. Let's include the free money we lavish on the military, too. They get so much they can't keep track of it - literally - haven't ever passed an audit and thought they were really great guys because they tried to do it recently. Got nowhere, but they thought about it!
Oh, did you mean college and health care? Those are not "free" because they are paid for with our taxes - just like the trillions we spend making the world safe for corporations. We all contribute because we all benefit. That is what good governments do.
If you think they are "free" because there is no immediate out-of-pocket expense, you are listening to ads from the groups that stand to lose when profiting from those services is no longer possible. If you aren't one of them, you have nothing to fear.
71
@Larry By "free money" I'm guessing you mean public services funded by the taxes we pay. I'm also guessing it's only objectionable when someone else gets it.
36
@Larry
Does the $700 Billion we spend on defense count? How about all the tax breaks for billionaires and corporations?
Ethanol in gasoline for the folks in Iowa? Bailouts for the farmers to pay for Trump’s tariffs wrecking their businesses?
Gee, so much free money. Where is mine?
11
From the comments, I would say that the networks are doing a terrible job. They treat the debates like infotainment, which they should not.
Bring back candidate debates moderated by the League of Women Voters and have all the networks air them as a public service. They get to use our national airwaves, and we deserve some real public service in return. The League never asked "raise your hand" questions or double-barreled ones. They did not encourage in-fighting on the stage. The debates were serious and informative.
To those who won't watch because they are so-o-o boring, democracy is not a sport. It is the business of how we live safely together and how we apportion our resources. It is your business to be involved. It is not only your right, it is your obligation to be fully informed. Mute the ads, but listen to the candidates.
We have a deadly serious choice to make this time. Voting for the cutest is not an option, nor is voting for those with no experience in government. The learning curve is just too difficult - as Trump demonstrates daily.
Take it as seriously as you do your diet. We must elect a president who puts the climate at the forefront or in a decade we will have no food to eat. Arable soil will be gone and the pollinators who make our crops possible will be gone with it. We cannot eat stones.
Be a grown-up and pay attention. It is the least you can do.
398
@nora m, excellent. This comment should have been Gail's column today. (Sorry, Gail, I remain a fan, but it is time to get serious.)
19
@nora m
Your scolding inner Parent wrote this comment for you.
We can't help what we do or say: Something just takes us over, despite our best intentions. Some people claim that they tough it out and always do the mature, responsible thing, and maybe they do, but they don't control that either. Our DNA and environment, past and present, are invisibly and soundlessly calling the shots that we mistakenly label "free will."
It's unsettling to realize this, but neuroscientist Sam Harris, philosophy Professor Derk Pereboom, and writer James B. Miles explain it so persuasively that it seems, to me, impossible to deny.
1
@nora m
Brava, Nora.
11
Debate watch party at our house. We will watch for Senator Warren. She is amazing on and off the stage. She is smart, sharp and is in this race for middle class Americans like us. Her records show how much she cares about the consumers and not the bankers. Go Warren !! I love Bernie and Biden and will cast my vote to whoever the nominee is but I can't wait to see Warren debate DJT , if he dares to debate that is.
1
Once again Korean War Veterans are forced to remind even the notable Gail Collins of a simple but vital fact of our existence. MASH units were not a TV fictional series. Mobile Army Surgical Hospitals were a vital important reality in the treatment and survival of wounded during the Korean War. Attempted ridicule of Biden by ignorance of an historical fact would backfire among those of us still alive who vote and remember the value of the MASH units. They were not fiction.
3
So how are we going to convince Tom Steyer to put his campaign money to really good use and donate to the Democratic Party and support our nominee? We all know he will not be president. He must know it too. So the question then becomes why not help Democrats win in 2020? He would be known as the ultimate benefactor responsible for saving our country.
12
I wish I could enjoy your humor about this topic as much as I often do on other occasions.
However, this is quite serious.
The thing I most fervently hope is that the candidates use this time to speak on how they see and would handle all of the critical issues we face.
If they beat up each other, it will be a horrible scene.
They should be speaking about all of the backsliding and erasures of the safety and dignity of the US which have been terribly compromised by this presidency.
They should comport themselves in an adult and professional way which they are all capable of and provide clear paths they will follow to repair the devastating damage that Trump has wrought.
10
Same old conventional rhetoric is not going to cut it anymore. Aren't people tired of hearing "Here is what I will do" from potential candidates? At least I am. Instead of listening to another debate,I would rather turn on my hairdryer and save the aggravation. At least, the dryer would also dry my hair at the same time. An additional benefit.
What I would rather from a potential candidate is pretty simple : " If you want another 4 more years of what you have just seen, go right ahead. Be my guest".
2
Anybody who chooses not to invest 3 hours of watching the debate also chooses to be unaware and uninformed of what's really going on and howanother four years of that will definitely destroy what's left of our democracy. While that's not funny, Gail has once again done her best to candy coat a video root canal by making it feel better for the patient to endure. Let's just hope this isn't gallows humor.
Watch. Choose. Vote.
It's the least you can do for your country.
26
Can your readers name the eight WNBA teams that qualified for the playoffs beginning tonight, in the single-elimination round?
A: Mercury, Sky, Lynx, Storm, Sparks, Aces, Sun, Mystics. (Phoenix, Chicago, Minnesota, Seattle, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Connecticut, Washington (DC).)
I'd like to encourage more women, and men and youth, to follow women's professional sports. More competitive than you think, and so much to learn from team sport and strong women. What we put into building women's careers now will only pay off in the future...
5
@Midway I would prefer to look at their college courses and grades.
Here's my 2 cents worth on these candidate circuses or "debates."
Let's have real debates between the top 10.
1. By drawing, 2 of the candidates square off against one another for 1 hour or more.
So 5 debates amongst the 10.
2. Only 3 subjects are chosen to debate by the moderator.
3. Each debater presents his/her position on subject #1 and has an opportunity for rebuttal.
No interruptions allowed or stalking as in trump stalking Clinton last time.
4. Then move on to subject #2.
At least this way we could see a candidate's positions and see how they defend them.
As the field narrows we would see the top 4-6 candidates defend themselves against one another..
Most anything would be better than what we have now.
4
We should probably make them do some jumping through hoops.....physically. If we have to listen to multiple people droning on and saying similar things differently about the same subject, they should be forced to attempt a pull up or do the shuttle run....for our inspection.
2
@M How about having them recite the pledge of alligence and sing the national anthem? Bet trump can't do either.
@Entera TV moderators frame the questions, but the candidates answer them. The candidates do not need to go for the bait. They should start any answer with how they would differ from Trump. Town Halls are good, too, but I like to hear both formats.
1
My fear is that the only thing that will result from this "debate" will be more fodder for the Trump campaign. Do we really have to go through this? We already know which of the ten will be the finalists. We're not talking about high school president here, all popularity and fun. We're talking about finding someone who can save this country.
24
@Michael, isn't debate a good forum to do that? Why do we have to be scared about what trump uses for fodder? We already know he'll use anything; his silly nicknames don't come from actual policy discussions. You shouldn't put scare quotes around the word debate. Yes, we go thru this because TV debates reach a lot of Americans. I DO want to hear how each candidate reacts to unexpected questions or accusations. It's not just popularity, it's actual information. Seeing Joe Biden actually talking is useful, instead of just reading what he says. Same for every person who wants to 'save this country'.
2
The national sport of this country would appear to be presidential campaigns. This thing has been going on for quite some time now and the election is still some 15 months away. All that effort and expense and we wind up with a dud like Donald Trump as president. We need a better system or at least a briefer one.
46
@Clark Landrum
We could limit the length of time campaigns run. Europeans do. We could make the networks/cable run debates as a public service without advertising. That would shorten the campaign schedule very quickly.
10
No one mentions that these are not really debates. In debating societies you have the chance to make your case, your opponent does the same, you rebut their argument and then they have their turn. Neither is allowed to interrupt the other. Televised political debates are all about television, barely about issues. Show business all the way. Clinton ‘won’ after he left the podium to wander with his mic through the crowd, stealing the show. Because it was a show, not a debate. Debates are about points of view, classically defined as being able to see you opponents’s pov as well as your own; current televised political events that else are calling ‘debates’ are show biz all the way.
24
Yeah, I didn't make it to seven. Of course, I never can name all seven dwarfs, and it is never the same one I forget (although I never forget Grumpy.)
But bring it on, and get a few more to drop out.
I favor Buttigieg myself, because he is just so calm and sensible anytime he is called upon to speak. For that alone, I'd give thanks.
46
@Cathy
Yes.... Buttigieg. Calmness, intelligence, rational goals, moderation, youthful energy, hope.
1
@Cathy
I always forget Bashful
Every time!
1
The debates are just another circus act. Once the field narrows to the real contenders then I’ll tune in. Until then, it’s a let’s see who can out liberal their opponent hug fest.
12
I will watch the debates. I always do but they will likely have almost nothing to do with how I cast my vote. The candidates use them to generate soundbites for the next day when they resume campaigning. The word debate, sadly, is a misnomer when it comes to these things. Debate implies some sort of back and forth, some sort of honest grappling with real issues, some sort of follow up, some sort of moderation that insists on getting an answer to something that the candidate just side stepped two or three times. Unfortunately, that doesn't even happen in the presidential debates that typically involve only 2 candidates.
22
@Susan
When candidates are given 1 minute and 15 seconds to answer a question and 45 seconds for a rebuttal, all they can do is a soundbite. That is not the candidates' fault.
Talk to the DNC and the companies running the debates. They are in charge of the format, one which doesn't serve us well.
7
Some Americans haven't been paying attention over the past three years (likely, not their entire lives). They should tune into some old TV reruns tonight.
Many of us, however, have been paying attention and we've endured. Endurance is often an overlooked attribute. We have endured Donald Trump...so far (even if it takes drugs and/or heavy drinking), thus we can endure tonight's three-hour debate and the long campaign ahead. That's little to ask of us, for the good of our country which cannot endure a second term of Trump.
What those of us who care about America and its future should keep in mind as the campaign proceeds is cheer for whichever Democrat you like, but vote for whichever Democrat gets the nomination.
61
I dread these TV extravaganzas which mask as debates.They are not classic debates and are more damaging than they are instructive.Who cares how well a candidate answers a carefully crafted question posed by a TV personality?It is disheartening to witness Democratic candidates trying to demean each other.The Republicans love to see this happen and use the same tactics when they confront these same people.Candidates should be invited to televised town halls where the questioners are not pre-selected.A wide range of voters will be going to the polls-they should be the ones asking questions.Most of us do not live in Iowa,New Hampshire, or South Carolina.We need to see the candidates interact with voters-not TV anchors.
83
Kamala Harris has lately sunk low in this voter’s poll of one. She has now had two revealing moments, both of which revealed something critically disappointing.
The first was that breakout moment in the first debate, when she berated Biden. Many people seem to have taken it as an outpouring of righteous indignation from the heart, but to me it was a prosecutor’s calculated lunge for the jugular. You could just picture a pre-debate strategy session with someone stubbing out a cigarette and saying, “Look, you have a chance to set yourself apart here.”
Then came her mirthfully approving reaction to the use of certain heartless words and her disingenuous apology for it. Along with remorse came utterly implausible denial: “I didn’t hear the words the man used in that moment, but if I had I would’ve stopped and corrected him.”
Of course that’s nothing compared with Donald Trump’s lying, but what is? It’s still the common politician’s slip-sliding away from moral responsibility. Harris couldn’t bring herself to own that she was guilty of insensitivity. Her thoughts turned at once from the people she had hurt to Number One, whose ambition demanded damage control. With so little strength of character, she’s merely preferable to Trump.
If, as you expect, Harris vies with Pete Buttigieg for the youth vote tonight, she’ll be trying to impress people who know her type: an overachiever who feels entitled to come through everything smelling substantially like a rose.
23
Andrew Yang omitted in this piece has the most forward looking vision and an ever growing following that is breaking with expectations. I look forward to his debate performance and see more of his meteoric rise. No crazy socialist postures just down to earth thoughtful policy that can take this country into the future. And the freedom dividend will probably die in congress if he ever gets elected but in the end it won't matter, his vision for America is the real prize.
14
@James
Yang is a one trick pony whose 'freedom dividend' seems to be the answer to everything.
Refugees of global warming in the US? give them the dividend and let them figure it out.
His extended sci-fi solutions for global warming are even more concerning, and in the environmental town hall it became evident that he couldn't back up their proposed effectiveness with any kind of figures.
trump was a 'refreshing alternative' for some too.
15
@James
We truly cannot afford the luxury of electing someone who has no experience in governing. The learning curve is too steep and the world too unstable to take that chance. That goes for Buttegieg as well. He is too young and inexperienced. He should run for Congress or governor first.
6
@Doug Keller
Give me one candidate who backs their proposals using more figures than Yang. Next, give me one proposal to deal with global warming that is decidedly, irrefutably, the answer. It's just a humongous issue, which hundreds of governments worldwide have been unable to solve. Why do you expect any team of 30+ election campaign staffs to conclusively solve it over a few months?
The dividend indeed is not the answer to everything. And I'm sure Yang has never promised something like this. He's so focused on the proposal because 1) it helps him stand out 2) it ties well with his principal concern regarding automation 3) it's a legitimate idea.
Money does not solve everything. But to millions of those who are, and who will be, in dire need of some financial help, money sure solves a lot of issues, be it disaster relief or mass structural unemployment.
What makes Yang a SOLID alternative is most importantly his approach to problems. Facts, math, objectivity, respect. Meanwhile, I find many of the current candidates oftentimes engage in pageantry. More pandering and virtue signaling than delivering original, well-grounded thoughts. Funny thing is, Biden and Buttigieg have "borrowed" some of Yang's platform, and of course, without due credit.
It's admittedly difficult to have Yang elected, considering the media's constant refusal to give him just the standard amount of attention. I don't expect them to give the nerd the tiara, but please, at least, give him the attention.
The whole concept of debate as a qualification for president is wrong. We complain that we have a TV personality as president, yet we require Dem hopefuls to be TV personalities. When presidents are at there best they are reading prepared and vetted speeches on teleprompters, but they don't do that at debates. Debates are essentially ways to sabotage otherwise good candidates. Kill the debates and let the candidates write their thoughts and do individual interviews.
40
How one does on TV is now the standard for presidents. Guess that was one reason for Trump. Or maybe TV matters little as minds are already made up, and voters are emotional about their choices not strictly rational.
8
These TV "debates" are a joke. It's entertainment fare served up by the networks, who control the action like a game show. Moderators frame up their questions in ways that encourage spats BETWEEN the candidates, and the fleeting snatches of time allowed for responses guarantees that they end up being three hours of sound bites.
Schedule more actual town hall meetings in actual town halls instead.
146
@Entera Thank you for your comment. It is spot on accurate and needed to be said. Town Hall meetings are the way to go - they allow people to hear what a candidate has to say, how they feel, what they believe. It is difficult to share such things on stage with 30 seconds of time before you're interrupted by a commentator or a fellow candidate. I'll watch the debates for 10-15 minutes and then change the channel.
16
First time around Biden was between African-Americans. They gave him what-for, Harris more cogently than Booker (flavored Kool-Aid?) Biden didn't take the bait, which disappointed politicos, but probably was the best strategy.
This time he'll be between the lefties. The audience will eat it up. They'll roar when Sanders and Warren tag team him. Great fun. Politicos will wonder what damage they did. Will there be a 2% drop in the polls?
Someone might surprise us. The moderators might ask realistic questions. Buttigieg might explain how the health system works in a way that will make people understand for the first time. O'Rourke might talk about curing opioid addiction. Harris might reflect on what it means to be Indian (as in the continent). Booker might talk about solar geoengineering.
Let's hope.
6
Enjoyed this. I could use more of this humor during these times.
22
@Tim
I hope you watch Stephen Cobert and Jimmy Fallon, plus Seth Meyers. Like Gail, they provide a relief valve for one's blood pressure.
4
Dancing with Starz or The Family Feud seem a more watchable venue. If Hannity hosts either you’re sure to pick up across the aisle viewers.
1
Very much enjoyed the vignette about the pickle stand.
Stop picking on maps. Politicians have been using them to lie for centuries. Disinformation is part of mapping history.
Not sure I am going to watch, but you have made it fun to think about.
12
I am not going to watch because I can name the three top names, and believe no one in their 70s (obviously including Trump as well as the three elderly Democrats) should be running for this office! Actually because I will be travelling, but I hope viewers will be thinking about what candidates say about issues, not whether someone uses a bad word or not or makes a blooper. Silly trivia may excite this columnist, who treats debates as spectator sport, but I hope viewers keep in mind that this is very serious business about who leads the most consequential nation on the earth. Whether Biden misspeaks, as we all do, or another candidate takes yet another selfie is NOT important. I am unhappy that the Democratic Party has prematurely excluded some of the younger, fresher, and more innovative voices from this forum.
10
@MEC
The younger, fresher faces have not caught on. People realize that we need more than that. We need someone with vision and experience.
"It takes an old cat to catch an old rat." Knowing what you are doing is vastly underrated.
@MEC Have you read Gail Collins before? She's a brilliant writer of droll political satire. "Silly trivia" is the last thing that she wants in our politics, but she can make us laugh at its absurdity.
2
@MEC Anyone who reads Gail's op-ed columns regularly knows that she writes tongue-in-cheek columns that help to lighten the impact of the news and gives us the opportunity to express our views as seriously, or as silly, as we want. I, for one, look forward to her wit.
1
Many of us loyal Democrats who spend a lot of time reading and keeping up with the issues will spend today muttering, “Aw, man, not another debate tonight!”
It feels like there is a Democratic presidential debate every week. Whoever came up with this system and claimed it was good for giving the candidates exposure? It must have been someone who makes his or her living from political campaigns.
I loathe Donald Trump as much as the next guy, and I promise that I will vote for and donate money to any woman or man the Democrats nominate.
But, right now, I’m wondering how guilty I will feel on Friday, if I just watch the debate highlight reel late tonight.
36
Dems need to ditch the "debate" format and go with a town hall approach. The CNN climate change town hall last week was terrific. CNN moderators did a fairly good job of staying out of the way and letting the public question and candidates respond.
118
@notrace
I agree. Except for one question from a Bernie supporter for Biden - it was a nasty set up. Asking him about a donor who was/wasn't an oil guy. That was uncalled for. That was a personal attack and not a question on climate change policy or practice.
4
@Mimi
In the issue of Climate Crisis, are there any uncalled for, out of bounds questions?!
Biden pledged that he wouldn't accept money from fossil fuel companies. Then attended the next night, a fund-raiser held by a former gas/oil executive that still serves on the advisory board for that company.
Rank hypocrisy by a candidate for The Leader of The Free World needs to be called out. ESPECIALLY when it comes to the Climate Crises. It does go directly to what Biden's policy and practice will be. He is another bought 'n paid pol. The whole reason he supposedly made that no gas/oil fund pledge in the first place.
He was/is caught in the lie.
2
@Mimi If that happens again, someone should ask bernie about his visit to Russia some years ago and how that influenced his being a socialist, which he has claimed he is.
3
The candidate will need to be able to charm the moderates without losing the progressives. A tall order, but energy and momentum are going to count.
If the Democratic Party leaders actually want to win, they will pay attention to the candidate who can inspire hope and optimism. These qualities will shine in the face of Trump’s grim, plodding hatred of others.
The other thing we need is focus. I think Americans are finally coming around to the fact that every other developed country has a better system for delivering healthcare than the U.S. Universal coverage is the cause to which everyone relates, this should be the centerpiece of the campaign. You aren’t going to win by just not being Trump.
Warren was not my first choice, but I’m beginning to think she can do this. If she can’t, that should be clear very soon, but my money, such as it is, is now on Warren.
28
@Chickpean - On the hope and optimism front, Beto O'Rourke and Cory Booker blow away the field. As for focus, Amy Klobuchar and Bernie Sanders lead the pack there.
6
@Chickpea. Sanders tends to be characterized as giving ideological rants as stump speeches, but when I saw him recently at an event in a small red town, he was very down to earth and spoke about the value of decency and fostering a society in which "I care about what happens to your family and you care what happens to mine."
1
In order to narrow down the field, I suggest the next debate be staged as a Survivor game. All the candidate-contestants will be given challenging tasks to perform involving mud, pythons and leeches. Unpopular players are voted out. Underhanded tactics and betrayals are encouraged Last one standing wins.
7
@GBM
I think that is how we got Trump. Not a good ploy.
2
@nora m
Okay, then - forget the leeches.
I will watch and hope the subject of health care comes up and how the GOP voted so many times to take it away.
Aim big, now is the time.
20
@Steve Kazan
Don't forget the GOP better replacement health care plan they will reveal at some time after we are all dead.
1
Gail,
Your never fail to entertain. But choosing the next President of the United States is extremely important. Probably the most important primary vote that anyone will ever cast. I thought I would have made up my mind by now but I am still casting about for the President who will have the most talent for being persuasive. I know what it is when I see it but so far I find it impossible to rank the 10 candidates who are running. I will be watching carefully for the verbal and non-verbal traits that cause me to feel that they will be persuasive. One of the factors which will weight my persuasiveness rank is how well the candidate can make me believe that they understand the American people and how well they can address the concerns of the American people.
I am hoping they have enough sense to avoid using Mr. Trump's name in their statements. Clearly, I want them to establish their priorities as President and how they intend to involve the American people in carrying out these priorities. I certainly would not advise the candidates to make a big deal about the Party, I think they need to demonstrate that their thinking is above the Party.
The toughest challenge I can think of is how to mobilize the World in an international effort to reduce the threat of global warming. The scale is huge. I think this will be a commitment for a whole generation, so we need a strategy for electing a string of Presidents and Congresses to carry out 20 or 30 years of intensive effort.
37
@james jordan
In addition to organizing an international effort to deal with global warming, in the U.S. we must begin to correct the poor job we have been doing in the distribution of income and work, the distribution of healthcare, this should be a non-worry, and the distribution of educational opportunity, to make myself clear, poor communities should not have poor schools.
28
@james jordan I'm actually starting to believe who we elect for Senate positions is much more important. They are the ones who can and should block a mad president; they are the ones who should be blocking bad choices for for-life court positions; they are the ones who can override a presidential veto. McConnell makes me wonder daily why Kentucky should be allowed to remain in the Union. Clearly its residents are deluded deplorables.
3
@james jordan
Bernie is your man on both of those fronts. He has the best, most comprehensive plan for climate action and articulates that the rest of the world needs to be engaged and at the table.
He also got an A+ for his educational plan. Read about it in the June 17 edition of The Nation. The NYT and WaPo failed to cover it. Gee, I wonder why? Could it be that it stops for-profit charters from sucking resources away from public schools? I, for one, do not want to pay for religious/private schools.
Most people aren't paying attention, don't know Buttegieg from Buddha, and only in October, 2020 will start watching the political ads. I've yet to meet anyone of any age who thinks Biden should be running, but he's a known entity, just as Trump was. I imagine Judge Judy would poll higher than any of the current candidates. Judy and Trump have been visiting people's homes for years. Most Americans' political awareness isn't concerned with policies, but with familiarity, comfort levels, and laziness. Don't make them work to learn anything about governance, candidates, or "existential threats.
25
@Cordelia28 Trump wasn't really a known entity--he was a known TV name. And like most TV personalities, he seemed familiar, so they thought they knew him. The main aggravation I have with the media is that most news sources seemed to assume he had no chance of winning, so they attacked the front runner and didn't bother to describe Trump's problematic background. Now most people know a lot more, and I just hope that means most will vote against him. But come to think of it, most people voted against him last time....
55
@Carol Robinson: I paid very close attention to the 2016 race and I must disagree with you about the press not delving into Trump's problematic background. They absolutely did. I knew very little about him before the famous ride down the golden escalator and I was shocked by what I learned from the press. I learned a lot. But the press also gave him, The Great Disruptor, all the attention, both negative and positive, that he craved. He's an attention junkie and he was rewarded. TV Execs/Print Editors saw that people tuned in more with their emphasis on Trump and so they made money. And Hillary? All emails, all the time.
But enough of the people disregarded or didn't pay attention to the press revelations about Trump. But those negative stories were there.
7
Policies will be irrelevant once the real election campaign begins. Trump will monopolize the media as he always does and they'll hardly get mentioned (except by Trump and the GOP, when they can be misrepresented to their advantage).
10
It really is not a debate at all but gives us a chance to hear for ourselves ideas, expressed in complete sentences, of those seeking the Democratic nomination. Plans, proposals, and visions of how these people would govern. The format may not be ideal but it does allow the audience to have some basis for judging such a crowded field. Like many other Democrats, I have my "favorite" but I am also aware that all 10 would be a much better occupant of the White House than what we currently have.
42
I have real problems with the debate structure as it is. None of the candidates gets a chance to fully develop their ideas, or to explain themselves, given the frantic pace of the show. I was much more impressed by the in-depth extended "town hall" event that CNN presented on Climate Change --certainly a serious issue --and yet because it was not sponsored by the DNC, the other media outlets gave it relatively short shrift. How about similar discussions on the other major issues facing the country, rather than shouting matches which are short on substance.
81
Everyone needs to remember just one thing. ABC will be hoping for high ratings. Therefore, if Bernie accidentally hits Elizabeth with one of his wild arm gestures, we will watch reruns until Christmas. If Amy Klobuchar proposes a strong bipartisan approach to curb global warming, watch the camera zoom back to Elizabeth applying an ice pack.
32
The DNC shoots itself in the foot again.
These events are not debates they are shouting matches.
They should have made the requirements for participating much more stringent so that candidates that have the most reasonable chance of being the nominee were on the stage with more than 60 seconds for an answer.
In addition choose 'debate' monitors who were not trying to make themselves the stars.
76
@Edward B. Blau
Bill Moyers, we need you.
4
I’ll be watching, and will happily vote for any of them, but this isn’t a debate in any meaningful sense of the term. It’s a sound bite contest in search of a gotcha moment, and it may have significant consequences in terms of subsequent media spin. But it ain’t no “ debate.”
195
We have a president, a wannabe dictator, who is giving away state and military secrets like they are gossip cotton candy. His political party enables him. Many countries are not trying to serve our best interests: Russia, China and North Korea come to mind. We need informed, competent and stable leadership in a dangerous world.
Democrats are busy outplaying each other to win the nomination. They need to exercise caution in promoting extreme positions to score points, because soundbites will come back to haunt them when the general election rolls around.
Border decriminalization? Taking away private health insurance? Structural change in government? I'm all for it, but it just seems like too much right now.
Trump has the advantages of incumbency, in particular not having to deal with the primaries (except as a spectator) and being able to stoke the economy at will.
Democrats lost the presidency in 2016. They should not be acting as though they won. They cannot alienate large swaths of voters.
I still like Biden. Sure, he's old. But he will surround himself with rational and intelligent people. And he is going moderate. I sincerely believe that is the path to victory next year. And Biden can handle Trump in a debate.
Any of the candidates would be better than Trump. But Democrats cannot enact their policies if they do not win. I still believe Biden offers us our best chance.
43
@Blue Moon
I agree with you totally. There is climate change denial going on with some Democrats, by which I mean Trump's toxic environment. Campaigning as though it's 2016 won't work. The polls consistently show Biden can win against Trump with the largest margin including in the Midwest and South. He will appoint top advisers and Cabinet members as well as a Vice President who is qualified and intelligent.
After Trump, trust is important and realizable ideas like improving the ACA, rejoining the Paris climate accord, and repairing the broken laws and strained alliances.
Debates are fine, but they're just talk and jostling for the cameras. We've had enough reality TV and tweets and T-shirts. Trump wins that arena.
This is reconstruction time not revolution where you break everything again without being able to put it together unilaterally as though Republicans don't exist.
There is a large silent majority in the middle of America consistently telling pollsters that they support Biden and what their priorities and lines are. Ignoring them is as foolish as marooning yourself on an island within shouting distance of Trump. Or tweeting or profanities even when we share the sentiments.
9
@Blue Moon Sorry, I have a clear memory of Biden's treatment of Anita Hill, and that we have had Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court for decades as a result of Biden's lack of respect for a woman's testimony. Anita Hill paid a steep price, and I won't overlook it. If Biden is the candidate, I will not vote for him.
5
@SMB
Polls show the following all can beat Trump: Biden, Sanders, Warren and sometimes Harris.
On some days, Daffy Duck could beat him.
We do not want for candidates to beat Trump, so that is not a reason to support Biden who I seriously doubt could best Trump in a debate. He can't hold his own with the other Democrats as it is.
2
Funny that Andrew Yang doesn't figure into Collins's satire (if that's what it is). Don't discount him. He embodies the best of all the candidates' qualities. Energy, empathy, vision. And I wish Steve Bullock and Tulsi Gabbard had made the cut. In 3 hours of debate time there would have been room for two more candidates.
44
@jerseyjazz --- It's a HUGE mistake for the DNC to have rules that cut out Steve Bullock. I wish they'd gone to 2 nights and that Bullock, Gabbard, and Bennet could have been included. They have voices worth hearing ...
7
@jerseyjazz Absolutely right. Yang is now polling higher than Pete, and Beto has zero change (and is showing himself to be a buffoon), but the candidate whose poll numbers continue to climb gets no thought at all.
5
The DNC still doesn't understand what it is the country wants.
They tried 'anointing' Hilary, apparently going on the theory that Americans were thirsting for another "first" - First Woman President. They were so certain of this that they effectively tried to close off all challengers to her. The only problem was that Bernie, not being an actual Democrat, never got the memo. Still, despite all the obstacles they erected, he almost got the nomination, and based upon the outcome, should have.
So since 'anointing' didn't work, the DNC opted for "Let anyone who can fog a mirror run" on the theory that if they placed enough challengers in his way, Sanders would be too exhausted to prevail. Again, Bernie apparently didn't get the memo because he's still running strong. And unfortunately for the DNC, their 'unspoken favorite', Biden is barely capable of fogging a mirror these days.
Maybe those in charge of the DNC ought to stop trying to tell Americans who they should follow because clearly they don't have a clue. Americans are fed up with all the "System" choices. They want someone who has THEIR interests, not the oligarchy's interests, at heart. Of course that would risk angering their wealthy donors and they can't have that! But if they don't listen to the people, all the money in the world won't matter. Did it make a difference for Hilary?
It's clear who the people want: Sanders, Warren, or Biden. The rest can vie for VP and the Cabinet or Senate.
91
@Kingfish52
Warren for Supreme Court or Treasury.
3
@Kingfish52 My friends and I are not wealthy donors. We support the Democratic Party by donating monthly and volunteering to get out the vote for Democrats.
bernie is not a Democrat except when it suits him. Having heard him loudly yell that he was not a Democrat, but a socialist, at the 2014 Move On conference in D.C., and seeing him listed as an Independent on congressional records convinced me to take him at his word. He is as much an opportunist as trump.
10
@nora m
I'd prefer she stayed in the Senate, 'cause we need her D. vote; which Mass. would likely replace with a Repub.
Lets Ditch Moscow Mitch and replace him with Sen. Warren. (If we win the senate of course.)
She would be a great assist and whip for a Pres. Sanders.
2
Funny column, Ms. Collins. Enjoy yourself.
But this is deadly serious for the nation. We should listen to policy proposals and to diagnoses of what needs to be preserved and what needs to be changed, and make up our minds who's the best choice to do this. The future of our republic depends on how this comes out.
38
@Howard
In case you haven't noticed, all of Collins's columns actually have a serious underpinning. They're just couched in a style that it's a pleasure to read.
4
Yes. Very snide and I wonder if Ms. Collins is above it all? Such an intellectual article.
1
@Howard I look forward to Gail's column and is the first item I read in order to bear the news of what else trump and his minions are doing to destroy our government.
2
I imagine the first hour will be taken up by arguing Medicare for All versus expanding Obamacare. Biden who is for the latter will have Medicare for All proponents on each side slamming health care insurance companies. Two against one, no fair, but it should test Biden's stamina and ability to debate. He also will have to put up with Bernie Sanders shouting next to him about taking on the big corporations which should make for a very unpleasant evening for Biden. I don't know why Sanders has to shout with a microphone in front of him but but it does make him stand out.
13
@Bob Oh dear. Some candidates are derided for being "shrill". Others for shouting. I remember one that end up losing a squeaker of an election because he "sighed".
When will the voting public evaluate the ideas, values and policies of the candidates, rather than their tonal qualities?
110
@David A. - Maybe when someone (anyone?) has more than sixty seconds to elucidate a complex policy position. There aren't many issues of import that can be addressed in a one minute sound bite.
17
@David True. The sound bites of broadcast media are almost pointless. But all that is required is a visit to the campaign's web site and using the nearly lost art of READING (surely not lost to the commenters on a Gail column) to get the details of the candidate's positions.
5
Remember when the debate moderators' main thrust was putting candidates on the spot for not wearing a flag pin? Those were the good old days. Political debate was easier when we weren't worried that our next candidate would have to pull our Democracy out of a death spiral.
129
I am sure every democratic candidate can tell you where Alabama is on a map. This in its self would make them more qualified for the presidency than the present occupant of the White House. Thank you Gail for making this process bareable which should be at least four months shorter than it is. The end result is all that matters right now, getting a sane democrat into the presidency where he o she can do what is good for the country.
87
@syfredrick
Maybe there will be a bit of that - but it would be more relevant in the general election.
This is, after all, the political equivalent of "Beat Bobby Flay" ... before they can take on Bobby, the contestants have to go through each other.
These candidate aren't yet running against Trump, they are running against each other. They need to contrast their policies against the others on stage.
Biden attempted to stay above the fray (as front runners always do) and contrast himself only with Trump. It did not (predictably) turn out well. Others came after him. He wound up on the defensive, and not even a very good defensive - he came off weak. He could have cemented his position in the first couple of debates. Instead, he opened the door - precisely because he tried to run against Trump instead of the other Democratic candidates.
No ... they are all going to be coming prepared to battle each other. As, BTW, they should. The 20 have become 10. Two nights have become one. For the first time, everyone with a realistic chance of actually winning (maybe four, or five at most) will be on the same stage.
Wasting precious minutes bashing Trump won't win the nomination - it is already a given that everyone on stage hates Trump. They need to differentiate themselves from the others.
They have to go up against each other before they can try to beat Bobby Flay.
9
During the years of my professional life, I’ve sat on 22 hiring search committees. Some were for senior technical professionals and some were for executives.
When I vote for President, I’m hiring a person who has experience as a manager, and has effective communication and leadership skills. Also high on my list, (and the list of most my colleagues), is someone who has enough enthusiasm that they’ve studied our industry, and problems, and based on organized, focused, valid research and solid practical and personal experience, has a track record of implementing solutions.
I have no patience with bumper-sticker sloganeering or pie-in-the-sky cheering leading.
A search committee can easily go through a couple hundred applications and be lucky to find one who checks all those boxes.
We’ll be lucky Thursday night. One of those will be among the ten. Two others will be worth our time.
That’s good. It’s about time for the Democrats to home in on some focused messages.
171
@Liam Jumper
You keep track of search committees?
1
@Liam Jumper,
You know, of course, that the only one who fits that description is Elizabeth Warren.
5
@beaujames
You are not serious, are you?
1) experience as a manager - what has Warren managed?
2) effective leadership skills - what has she lead?
3) studied our industry, and problems, and based on organized, focused, valid research and solid practical and personal experience, has a track record of implementing solutions - what industry has she had any practical and personal experience in? or a track record of implementing solutions?
Her experience has come from academia and writing papers and books. Her expertise is bankruptcy law. Her research has resulted in papers, books, and now as a politician "plans." She has not implemented any solutions to problems in any industry, not practically, not personally.
That is essentially my reason for not supporting her as the Dem candidate. She is as inexperienced in governing as Trump and that freaks me out.
At least Bernie has been in government all his career. So have all the other candidates, except Steyer, of course, but I'd never support him either.
1
As shown by some recent elections, there is no shortage of 'deplorables' out there. Twittie attracts mobs of those who believe that they are underappreciated. Large segments of the country have gone temporarily nuts. The main object is to unite behind whoever gets the nomination. Four more years of chaos could end that the 'framers' began.
32
@David
If only the insanity of the electorate were temporary.
1
@DavidI presume you mean the large segments of the population that have Trump derangement syndrome.
2
@David
The main object is to unite behind whoever gets the nomination.
--------
You learned nada from 2016, David.
If you namecall the "deplorables" and tell them their segment of the country has "gone temporarily nuts", then you really aren't persuading anyone to vote Dem.
Maybe you should focus on the issues, and craft your message not to offend others, but to bring them into your camp. There are no artificial winners to be chosen by the elites. If you want to win, convince the voters.
Your comment shows why a repeat of 2016 is likely. Learn, David, learn! Yes you can.
Warren: smart, serious, policy ideas, cares for the little guy, a Harvard intellectual living most recently in liberal Massachusetts. Likewise smart, liberal voters got behind Dukakis many years ago. He put on a helmet and sat on a tank. That is what people saw, and that was his end. As much as adoring Warren fans think that her intelligence will help her win a general election. It will not. She’s not charismatic, she doesn’t come off as “authentic” and those qualities have been time proven as more important than being a policy wonk when it comes to winning the vast majority of middle America. Any adult has my vote in a race against the so called President but I worry about members of the bi-coastal left echo chamber ignoring the vast middle.
39
@Eric Blair on the whole, Warren comes off much better than Hillary Clinton, who had zero charisma and less than zero authenticity, yet nearly won, and would have, if she had taken advice and campaigned in the states where she lost by a small margin.
35
@The Poet McTeagle
HRC authentically went to Wellesley and Yale Law, organized voters in the south, worked on the Nixon impeachment, worked for a major law firm, ran for and was elected to the US Senate, and was US SecState. By all accounts, she is a good mother and grandmother, and an authentic church-going Methodist. The latter may also explain why she’s put up with her husband for all those years. This isn’t student body president we were and are voting for.
189
@The Poet McTeagle -
Ummm, is Biden charismatic? Hardly. He is performing like the almost 80-year-old he is. And wait until his son’s Ukrainian money becomes a GOP issue...
Is nearly 80 Bernie electable? He isn’t even a Democrat.
No one else has 5%.
A view from London shouldn’t be considered very authoritative.
Warren insights the passion needed for turnout.
She is the obvious choice.
36
I am so impressed by Senator Warren - not only her intellectual chops - but also by her ENERGY.
I don't care how old she is - she doesn't act of and she doesn't look it.
I'm sure she doesn't live on a junk fast food diet - and I'm also sure she won't spend her time - or the taxpayer's dime - on the golf course.
450
@Andy,
While your enthusiasm sounds genuine and uplifting, and Senator Warren is on the right track, let us not forget 'The Other Side of America', where some of us are living behind the times and may not be prepared for a female president.
There are also chauvinists for all times, and earlier received an earful about Warren's personal wealth, causing a working-class man to seethe not only because of economic inequity but social as well.
As for the age factor, most of my women friends are coming into their own at 70, and 'energy' is key word. With a tendency towards caution, a Biden-Warren presidential ticket sounds better to ensure much needed smooth sailing.
18
@Miss Ley
I'm not exactly sure why the answer to "a working-class man seething" about Warren's personal wealth is Joe Biden and his nearly as large personal wealth. And I'm not exactly sure why that would be an issue in a general election against someone with a couple hundred times more wealth than either of them.
'The Other Side of America' certainly seems ok with women of both parties as Senators, in Alaska, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Tennessee, West Virginia and Mississippi, for example. Chauvinism seems to be a minor factor compared to the strength of the candidate and their stands on issues.
12
Very confusing comment, Miss Ley!
If you are aware that you are "living behind the times", then why not catch up? You wouldn't vote for a qualified person because she was a woman?!
And your comment about the 'working-class man' [sic] seething over economic inequality because of Warren's 'personal wealth'? [between $4 and $11 million according to Wikipedia] is especially perplexing. Your implication is that this guy is a Trump voter. And he's upset about Warren's 'economic inequity'?
Maybe I'm missing something here, but again, if you are know you are 'behind the times', I suggest that you do something about that. Just sayin'.....
7
It is unclear that this administration has (m)any policies, if one means by that proposals that come with plans to implement them (and get passed by Congress), plans moreover that are grounded in facts. Where are the plans for jobs to emerge from reducing immigration? Plans for simplifying tax system to benefit all tax payers? Plans for healthcare insurance that is better than ACA? Plans for overcoming ISIS influence?... Indeed, other than McConnell's Senate stacking the courts, are there ANY promises the Trump administration has put into plans?
22
This shouldn’t be about which Democrat best speaks to young adults, or what end of one’s seventies is most ideal for a president.
The fact is that any of the candidates debating on Thursday would be far superior to the sitting president, who has the maturity and intellectual depths of a toddler.
330
Most toddlers are actually much better behaved than he is.
10
@NM
Well, yes. But could you pick a different comparison? Say maybe the sitting president who has the maturity and intellectual depths of a small, mean-spirited, senile, hateful, unintelligent carney con? Toddlers everywhere are protesting this odious comparison.
10
@NM
Please, lets be fair to toddlers here.
6
Every Democrat in the debate should make a joint pledge to begin every question by explaining how catastrophically awful Donald Trump is on that issue, and then explain how he/she would be better than Trump. Use these hours of air time to remind voters how dangerous Trump is to America and our future. Reinforce this important narrative, so it is deeply established by 2020. Don't take this for granted, and don't waste these opportunities. Don't criticize other Democrats, even if goaded by the moderators. Trust voters to pick the Democrat they like best. Don't create a circular firing squad. Aim at Trump. The fate of the country is at stake.
569
@Mke0007 Agreed. The way democrats are going they will lose this election.
8
@Mke0007
That's brilliant. Totally brilliant.
10
@MKE007 Yes, every answer should start with how the candidate will differ from Trump!
9
Warren is 70? Then her age shouldn't even be a topic of conversation. Assuming she has reasonable genes, exercises and eats as right as she can on the trail, she's more than capable, age-wise, of being a fantastic president in terms of age. 77...could be another story. Spent some time with my aged parents the other day. It's no joke, what happens.
Elizabeth Warren, Elizabeth Warren, Elizabeth Warren.
332
@James
The USC, written in 1789, has a minimum age for POTUS of 35. Life expectancy info for that time and place is sparse. As best I can figure, if you lived to 15, you'd live to an average of 52. (Educated white males who ate well, lived well, and were not struggling to subsist daily, skewed older; e.g., Franklin was 70 when he signed.)
To extrapolate, 35 in 1789 would be 54 today. (This is based on an average life expectancy of 80 for ALL Americans.)
But what does that mean for a Chief Executive?
They have to pick the right staff.
Age is not as critical as surrounding yourself with the right people.
45, sadly, is struggling here. He should take a page from RBG. At 86, she has hired her for law clerks not just for 2019, but for 2020-2021 as well, when she will be 88.
21
@James
Warren, the evil twin of Bernie, the proud Socialist ( hey, I spent my honeymoon in Moscow. How about you?), is 70 and spry.
No doubt about her ability to do selfies and drown us all in her leftie plans ( Read my lips: No more private healthcare insurance or else!!) but if she is the nominee then we are definitely looking at four more years of Trump.
At least we will know whom to blame.
If Warren and Bernie want to campaign as Socialists then let them run as such.
We Democrats need to appeal to the center in order to win against Trump and his loones.
An extreme swing to the left just won't hack it in 2020.
2
@James Pretty sad that you would use ageism in trying to advance your candidate. My grandmother lived to 94, sharp as a tack. I'm 75 with my brain cells all accounted for. I'm pretty sure Elizabeth would diss you for trying to use that against Bernie and Joe Biden.
6
Just picked our niece up at the airport. We have not seen her in over 20 years. So lots to talk about. Subject of politics came up, we're all Democrats. Niece asks who we think we might vote for. Firm answer, Elizabeth Warren.
Her answer, me too. We don't really need to watch the debates, but will anyway. Many of us have already decided, it's Senator Warren in the primaries.
458
@cherrylog754 Cherrylog, this Californian is right there with you folks. Warren is my pick. I have so much confidence in her smarts, experience, and integrity. But of course, I must repeat my mantra: I will vote for ANY of the candidates in a nanosecond. I may or may not watch the debates; it depends on my mood which directly relates to my anxiety level. Mel Brooks coined it best when I think or watch or hear that Trump guy...High Anxiety seems to be the go-to emotion. At any rate, maybe David Axelrod is on to something. That is the Boomerang Effect as I like to call it. What comes out of Donald's mouth or Twitter account will bounce off its target and travel back to him on his journey to self-destruction.
64
@cherrylog754
Go ahead and vote for Warren.
And then the rest of us will pray that she is not our nominee. If she runs with her channeling of Bernie's wacko Socialist program for America then it is four more years of Trump.
Sure, run campaign on taking away my private health insurance. I sure want to give you my vote.
Not.
4
@cherrylog754
If only people sat back and actually thought about who they supported instead of treating it like an ice cream cone.
Elizabeth Warren is not very electable out in the swing states.
I hope everyone doesn't make their choices like you do.
And NO, I'm not a Biden supporter.
3
I hope that each of the candidates, while talking about any of their policy proposals, makes a point of comparing their policy to the corresponding policy of the current administration.
212
@Midway
Remind me, how much has the current administration added to our national debt? Where’s that much better health care plan? Did I miss infrastructure week?
20
@Midway
No more pandering please.
Right! At least not until the spend more time mastering GOP tactics.
2
@Midway,
Name one new war started on Obama's watch. Even if you include Syria, that's marginal. On the other hand, name dictators who Bush and Obama admired. That's foreign policy.
Economy. Tax cuts for the rich, penury for everybody else? Everybody on the stage does better than that.
Border security? Walls that don't work at the expense of our soldiers. Children in cages? Gimme a break.
Healthcare? The GOP wants to destroy anything that protects America's neediest. Were it not for John McCain, they would have done it. Which is only why Mr. Indecency couldn't have the McCain ship sailors wear their uniforms when he visited Japan.
Judiciary. We can stop at Kavanaugh.
I don't know what universe you live in, but it isn't the one that anybody other than your idol occupies.
12