The Moderates Strike Back: The 4th Democratic Debate

my rankings after the debate: Making the Cut 1 Klobuchar 2 Harris 3 Steyer 4 Yang 5 Sanders 6 Castro Not Making the Cut 7 Biden 8 Gabbard 9 Booker (wants to play teacher too much, "class, behave") 10 O'Rourke 11 Warren 12 Buttigieg (he did not handle his attacks on Beto and Tulsi well)

I don't know where the claim that no one disagreed with Warren's wealth tax because of the substance of the policy is coming from. Yang literally gave a list of countries that have tried that policy and removed it because while it sounds nice on paper asking tax authorities to measure everyone's wealth doesn't work in practice.

I am a huge fan of the Daily however I was incredibly disappointed that today when you were talking about Elizabeth Warrens wealth tax you said that no one criticised the substance of her policy when that was completely untrue. Andrew Yang questioned the policy referring to numerous countries in Europe who had tried the policy and repealed it due to problems in implementation and the fact that it didn’t generate the revenue they expected. He then referred to the value added tax which still exists in many european countries and is largely successful. His point may be disputed but it most definitely challenges the substance of her policy. This exchange was deeply frustrating and made me question the integrity of the podcast.

I listened to this report for a third time. Biden's response to how he would handle a foreign policy crisis that will define how the world judges the US as an ally for years to come was totally incoherent, bordering the nonsensical. Democrats may expect that kind of answer from the current office holder, not from the candidate they wish to replace him with.

The artistic side of the podcast is now overshadowing the news. I skipped 3 minutes in and there was still "hot mic" chatter. I appreciate this summary of the debate. I'm worried for the Biden family, because it doesn't make sense for any country to pay $50,000 each month for an under-qualified employee. I want that gig.

I’m a huge fan of The Daily and Michael Barbaro, thank you for this podcast. That said, I was really disappointed that this episode focused so heavily on conflict around Warren and failed to mention many significant moments in the debate. In particular, when Harris and Booker called for a conversation about women’s reproductive rights and twice the moderator cut them off and said they’d come back to the topic, which never happened. There are many more important issues than instigating fights between candidates and I urge the Daily to explore them.

After listening to this episode on the Democratic debate, I wonder if The Daily could discuss what really is the role of the president in a future episode. I am unsure if the main job responsibility of the president is to be a visionary leader or a policy maker. Is it really the job of the president to figure out how to make policy work or is to set an agenda that guides Congress on creating policy? This seems to be central to the debate against Elizabeth Warren, but I’m unsure how to weigh that debate against actual expectations. I remember hearing Van Jones once say that Obama couldn’t both be president and Martin Luther King Jr, because the role of the president is to listen and respond, while the people need to challenge him. This helped me check my expectations for Obama and see that everyone has a different role in a democracy, but I am still confused on the actual role of the president. I’d love to hear a discussion on the expectations for the presidency and history on how those expectations have changed.

It is difficult to believe that helping your son with no qualifications other than the family name to a highly-paid job with a company in a country dependent on US aid should be considered "the policy of the US government". Beware of politicians who insist they have done nothing wrong. The best candidate to beat Trump is the one who represents most what Trump is not. PS: It's "Erdogan", Mr. Vice-President.

Can the Times report why Marc Lacey seemed to feed into Republican misinformation campaigns regarding Medicare for All? The choice is between sending $20K to an insurance company, like we do now, or sending $10K to the government, while putting $10K in the bank. Calling that a tax increase fundamentally misrepresents the question, and Marc Lacey knows this and the Times knows this.

Thanks for the great podcast as usual! Listening to The Daily first thing has become a regular part of my routine, and I know I am a more informed person because of it. Now, as to this morning's podcast, I have to say that I had a different reaction to the cringe-worthy exchange between Biden and Warren over the CFPB, Warren's signature political achievement. While I agree that there was definitely a hint of "Don't you understand that it's my turn?" in Biden's comments, there was something else, too. As a woman, I heard Joe trying to take credit for Warren's work. "You did well in your job," came across as an admonishment for Warren to know her place. I was deeply offended and lost what remaining admiration I had for Joe Biden in that moment. I bet I wasn't the only woman who felt like she'd been dropped into an episode of Mad Men. I truly thought we'd progressed beyond the time when men routinely presented a female coworker's exceptionally good work as his own in order to climb the ladder, but apparently not. Biden's words were grossly misogynistic.

I understand the trend to include background reporting details...for entertainment and often to help tell the story, but please don't add to much fluff. It was 3:40 mins into today's podcast before you actually discussed content. I'm here for the news.