The Democratic candidates have been divided up into 2 groups, for debates on successive nights.
NBC has announced.
... Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), former Rep. Beto O'Rourke (D-TX), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), former Rep. John Delaney (D-MD), Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), former HUD Sec. Julian Castro, Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH), New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, and Gov. Jay Inslee (D-WA).
... former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO), author Marianne Williamson, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), entrepreneur Andrew Yang, and former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper...
The second debate seems to have the stronger set of candidates, but that might not hurt the candidates in the first debate. People will be excited about the first debate, just because it's first, and without Biden and Sanders to draw attention, they have a chance to shine. I expect Elizabeth Warren to dominate, but everyone has a chance to stick out. On day 2, I expect Gillibrand and Harris to suffer in contrast to Sanders, Biden, and Buttigieg. I think those 2 women are bland.
That's just my guess.
Tags: 2020 campaign, debates
I think that first group is a big opportunity for Booker especially. His campaign has been going nowhere, but he both looks good and performs well in this type of setting.
He may not have a real chance at the nomination, but he could position himself as the likely VP pick.
Fen said...
Does anyone here believe the candidates were arranged randomly?
Let's take a closer look at...
Klobuchar will have an early opportunity to take down Warren. Will she?
The second debate seems to have the stronger set of candidates,
Seems right.
but that might not hurt the candidates in the first debate.
"Might not," but almost certainly does. Warren certainly thinks so and my own take is that she's right.
I just wonder if that first night will end up being a race to see who is the most extreme leftist? Will someone advocate for unadulterated Communism? Will the issue of impeachment be risen? Or will they try to not mention the bad orange man and talk about "policy".
Warren has a chance to shine that first night as a least slightly to the right of Mao Zedong. If she can't stick out amongst that goofy pack of nitwits, dullards, moonbats I guess she's toast.
Bilwick said...
They should divide them into two groups: (1) State-f*ckers and Tax lice; and (2) Even BIGGER State-f*ckers and Tax lice.
(A tip of the hat to P. J. O'Rourke for coming up with the expression "tax lice," which he used to describe the Clintonistas.)
Beasts of England said...
'I'd like you to meet Mohammed, Jugdish, Sidney and Clayton...'
Ann,
What would you think a debate in which there were no moderators? Once it gets down to about 5 top candidates, I'd like to see them put in a room with just a list of topics to discuss. I think it'd be fascinating to see how each person behaves in an unstructured conversation. Do they lead or follow? Are they able to listen and engage? What things do they choose to emphasize when they aren't being prompted?
I am curious to see how Tulsi Gabbard comes across. Forget about the rest of the clowns.
I am also curious to see what questions Rachel Maddow asks.
stevew said...
Bland. I would say they are not risk takers. The question is whether that is consistent with their thinking and leadership style or are they behaving as they think they need to to advance? If the latter then I doubt their instincts and ability to assess the situation.
Not worthy of your vote, no matter which is correct.
Ficta said...
I'm semi serious about this question: what on Earth are they going to debate? Is there anything they disagree on that they would admit to in this forum? The Dem base requires complete orthodoxy on absolutely every proposition in their Summa Theologica; to not affirm each self evident truth is fascist. Look at how they signed up for the ludicrous Green New Deal. So what are the candidates going to do; just all stand there and say "Yup Yup Yup" as the moderator reads every stray whim that's floated through Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's feeble mind over the last few months?
Corollary: I hate to get my hopes up so early, but are we really cruising to a replay of Nixon vs McGovern?
I think it'd be fascinating to see how each person behaves in an unstructured conversation. Do they lead or follow? Are they able to listen and engage? What things do they choose to emphasize when they aren't being prompted?
I doubt that such an arrangement would end civily. My guess is that it be an unlistenable jumble of cross talk as each one tried to talk over the rest. Anyone who was too polite would be steam rolled, they wouldn't get an word in edge wise. Most likely in the end you'd end up with a couple jackasses trying filibustering over one another and a the rest trying to interject unsuccessfully.
I think we should go all in with the media age and make the debates all like American Idol. People can call in for their favorites and each week the top 1/2 of candidates move to the next round.
An hour long show that features a foreign policy round, a domestic policy round, a historic issue round (how would you have responded to a key presidential crisis that isn't named until the show), and "candidate's choice"
Without looking I can tell you they've equally disbursed the women and minorities.
Anything less would be too obvious to the base who care, um, deeply about these things.
I second Francisco, however this is perhaps Tulsi Gabbard's only time to shine. Hoping she does.
I think he democrats will want to winnow the field fast to avoid more comparisons with the 2016 republican presidential races. Look for lots of pressure on all the second teir and vanity candidates to drop out after this first round.
Beto reminds me of John Edwards.
and "candidate's choice"
I think this should be replaced with a pandering round.
Two oppressed people are put in jeopardy, but only one can be saved!
anti-de Sitter space said...
Is it just me or is this a lame way to use 'just'?
Or maybe Althouse is being young and hip. Like, if she went even further young and hip she would write: "That's just the BRAIN's guess."
I dunno.
RMc said...
So...Bullock, Gravel, Messam and Moulton fail to make the cut. (Maybe put them in a "third tier" debate on Twitter, with folks like Ben Gleib and Robby Wells?)
I gather it's about getting the women's vote. No guy would watch it.
Who seems nicest and seems to mean well.
Is there anything they disagree on that they would admit to in this forum?
There are only two things that are being debated.
A. Who is the most Progressive candidate?
B. Who is the most electable?
Everything revolves around those items.
Sandra Bullock was running? She could handle Merkel. She speaks fluent German.
Questions faced by the first group: Do we gain or lose points if we roll our eyes when Beto speaks?
Questions only faced by Beto: Do I gain or lose points if I roll my own eyes while speaking?
I expect Elizabeth Warren to dominate, but everyone has a chance to stick out.
That sounds wrong. I don't think you want to stick out like some sort of missed nail, I think you want to stand out like a tree on the prairie.
For a guy that just joined the race, Bill de Blasio raked in the money and donors really fast.
And he's good at talking over people.
Ficta: "Corollary: I hate to get my hopes up so early, but are we really cruising to a replay of Nixon vs McGovern?"
No, as the dems/left/LLR-left have successfully replaced a significant portion of the American electorate with 3rd world socialists as well as trained another 3 generations to be more leftist in thought.
Tommy Duncan said...
I want to know if Liz Warren will have a beer stein on her podium and chug a brewski during her first question.
JRoberts said...
"I doubt that such an arrangement would end civilly. My guess is that it be an unlistenable jumble of cross talk as each one tried to talk over the rest. Anyone who was too polite would be steam rolled, they wouldn't get an word in edge wise. Most likely in the end you'd end up with a couple jackasses trying filibustering over one another and a the rest trying to interject unsuccessfully."
What if each candidate was required to wear an electric dog collar with a timer?
Lucid-Ideas said...
At this point it's easier to simply start a bracket:
The 26th League vs. the 27th Caucus. In a series of successive nights we whittle it down - upsets not withstanding - from Sweet 16, to Elite 8, to Final 4, to the championship.
Can Buttigieg be the George Mason of Dem candidates and pull an upset out of his hat? Or will Biden buck the smart money and flub on night 1? Who knows...
Tune in this Thursday, Thursday, Thursday...
I just want to state for the record that Tulsi Gabbard Got It Goin' On.
BJK said...
The Democrat candidates have been divided up into 2 groups: the also rans, and the also-also rans.
Lincolntf said...
I respectfully disagree with Ann's prediction that Warren will dominate. She only "works" in sound bites, any long exposure to questions or challenges and she reverts to her natural state of being, which is that of a narrow-minded crone,.She can't help herself. Format and time allotted/allowed will be the definitive factor. Warren is definitely a "Less is More" kind of speaker.
EP, being PC, appreciates a nice lei.
bleh said...
I'm #TeamTulsi and #YangGang. Neither is going to be the nominee but I hope both can get a word in edgewise at their respective debates. Especially Yang. I disagree with many of his ideas, particularly his signature UBI policy, but he's a very compelling thinker and he argues based on figures and logic as opposed to identity politics or partisan tribalism.
I like Tulsi because she challenges the Party's orthodoxy especially on foreign policy and trade -- and she opposes the hysteria about Russia. She will be an interesting candidate to have on stage. Her opponents will accuse her of being pro-Assad or pro-Putin.
T. Gabbard is by far the best looking and probably the most physically fit.
These are very important qualities that too many pundits overlook.
BTW, are there pics of Tulsi w/ a shirt that says she's busted but not flat broke? Maybe I mixed that up.
If they really really wanted to blow the roof off the ratings they could do the Village People:
Indian - Warren
Cowboy - Hickenlooper
Cop - Kamala
Biker - Rebellious Beto (Buttigieg or Booker for runner-up)
Sailor - Buttigieg (Naval reserve...and well duh)
Contractor - Biden (always under construction)
I'd watch.
There should probably be contests of fitness and strength in these things. They would add interest and eliminate the weaklings faster.
If these were replaced with a closed-door free for all with knives and clubs it would filter very well for the greatest will to power.
And save a lot of time.
Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...
I'm semi serious about this question: what on Earth are they going to debate? Is there anything they disagree on that they would admit to in this forum?
Hydra-heads "debating"
...and, to save the planet, they should not take 2 clown-cars
I'd rather watch a third night's debate between James Holzhauer, Ken Jennings, Megan Kelly and Alex Trebek.
Elizabeth Warren's main chance is to wear warpaint.
D 2 said...
"Bland" is Goldilocks strategy. In a crowded field, Be not too hot, not too cold. Wishful thinking that the ends of the parabola fall out first, and you wait to strike when it is down to 6/7 people. Maybe that worked in a different era.
No way it was random. It would be interested in hearing the different versions of how and why these arrays. Then it would be really interesting to hear the truth.
I think the first night crowd will have less in fighting. I may even presume side arrangements being contemplated. Let's take X out via coordination. Survive in threes by shooting at Y.
Whichever woman "wins" the first night becomes the foil against Biden. We were informed yesterday on this very site of media stories saying Sanders is not a serious candidate. He's done already, it's been decided he's NOT it.
So I assume the media story after 2nd debate night will put more distance between Biden & Sanders. Leaving the field to decide who wants to be in the finals.
PM said...
Maddow: "There's only one question. You'll each have ten minutes to respond. If you are chosen to be the Democrat cadidate, how will your campaign be different than Hillary Clinton's?"
Ten people enter the Thunderdome. One person leaves alive.
Do it twice.
Problems solved all the way around.
"...how will your campaign be different than Hillary Clinton's?"
Except for Biden and Bern, the rest can promise that they won't be shoved into a van like a half cow slab because they're an unconscious, brain damaged geezer.
Just like going second, night 2 is a hard act to follow. But Harris will steal the show on the 27th in her technicolor dreamcoat-a-la-rubic's-cube. Booker will beat himself up that night saying that was my idea although not having the guts to pull it off, while Buttigieg starts making plans to one up Harris with an Elton inspired Cockatiel outfit for future debates. Biden will look bewildered, but in the end will resort to finger-pointing as his lead evaporates. As the world turns...
Humperdink said...
With ten people it's not a debate but an exposition. The people standing beside Beto needs to careful of his wildly swinging arms. An inadvertent right cross could be fatal.
Physical fitness is an overlooked factor.
The main event will be against the Trump, an entity of superhuman energy.
Since Mrs Prole has already assumed the role of mother of my children, Tulsi Gabbard will have to settle for being my Democratic nominee for President.
gilbar said...
It's looking to me, like the powers that be have already decided that Jo Biden is the one to run against Trump; and they're stacking the deck to make that happen.
You'd Think that they'd remember the last time that they stacked the deck, at what happened then?
etbass said...
Don't think they seeded it like the NCAA.
Biden's performance should be interesting. I suspect he'll appear as though he's in fog.
"The main event will be against the Trump, an entity of superhuman energy."
You (and Dan) say 'potatoe' I say 'adderall/speed.'
> I'm #TeamTulsi and #YangGang.
They are the only interesting candidates in the bunch.
You get the warm up act on the first night, and then the main act is the second night.
"They are the only interesting candidates in the bunch."
The Joe Rogan guests.
Each day has 7 men, 3 women and 3 minorities (if you count a gay man as a minority).
What an amazing coincidence.
In a run-up to Biden's appearance on the 27th his spokesperson indicated that he could beat the entire Dem 2020 field with 'both hands tied behind his back'.
When asked if this was because of his considerable lead in the polls, the spokesperson said it was but also 'to keep him from touching anyone on stage'.
If you cons were to further follow the JRE thingy re libs:
https://www.reddit.com/r/JoeRogan/comments/bxaghd/joe_rogan_experience_1311_david_pakman/
Everybody drinks every time Inslee mentions "climate change".
The debates were set up randomly, alphabetical by height and skin color.
Jim at said...
Snort. Jay Inslee.
Wait until America gets a full load of that moron.
Arashi said...
So which candidates will get the questions before the "debates"? Or will all of them get them so they can "properly prepare" their woke answers to the hard questions?
1. Briefs or boxers?
2. What kind of tree?
3. Will you personally throw the switch to execute DJT and his entire family, or will you use surrogates?
4. Will your firt action be to elemninate whiteness or give all 7+ billion people on the planet US citizenship?
5. What kind of electric ar are you?
The DNC selected the candidates for each night and coordinated with NBC. Interestingly, Elizabeth Warren is the biggest winner and Bernie Sanders is the biggest loser. That's a *tell*. The DNC is shaping the perspectives of the college crowd. By positioning Elizabeth Warren on the first night (highest rating night); and positioning her with little intellectual or policy challenge; it appears the Perez DNC activist wing wants Warren over Sanders. It's also obvious Warren can critique Sanders without an rebuttal (smart move). Additionally Beto will look like the goofball he is. This helps assemble the college crowd to Warren (again, subtle but smart move). Conversely, the DNC put Sanders against Biden, Buttigieg, Harris and Bennet. Sanders has no-one to debate his communist bona-fides with. Night two will be a swarm of social justice and me-too-isms…. and of course, high dose Orange-Man-Bad.
Perfect. Well-played.
Dori Monson had good advice for Jay. To help him get above zero percent support. Help him get a PR spike.
He should stop flying around for his campaign. Instead he'll remote to events. To save the environment. For the children.
And, he'd save WA tax payers the massive expensive of having his security detail go all over the place for his vanity.
Rather than this car crash of a beauty contest, just require all candidates to spend two hours on Joe Rogan.
Inga...Allie Oop said...
It's astounding that you idiots voted for Trump, considering the high standards of debate and understanding of the the issues you expect from the Democratic candidates. But when one considers that Trump sycophants don't live in reality, maybe it's not so astounding after all.
I see Inga appeared from her hidey hole.
No, I don't expect anything from the clown show.
Clyde said...
I'm so glad that the debates are on at 9 p.m., since that's an hour after my bedtime (I get up at 3 a.m. to get ready for work). Regrettably, I won't be able to see either of them. Sad!
Speaking of not living in reality, what color is the sky on your planet, Inga?
The Jill Stein voter chimes in to call other people idiots.
Does Spock have a beard on your world?
Which candidate will pound his/her shoe or moccasin on his/her/it's podium? Need a reprise of old Nikita.
So does Inga support the communist, the pedophile, the one who got ahead by putting out, the one who isn't really a Native American, the 'Climate Change' candidate, or one of the other luminaries?
In my world it's good for the Russians to break our laws re theft, and then to use the stolen stuff to manipulate our elections.
How 'bout you Clyde?
"I think those 2 women are bland."
Which, coming from someone who wants politics to be boring, is a compliment, right? Or should candidates also be exciting?
Anyway, Althouse obviously hasn't closed the door on voting prog--what's a mere coup?--and looks for the "best person"--who cares about the direction of actual policy?--so I expect more pageant-style commentary here.
Ar,
Maybe she's for the liar, cheater, swindler who's had all the views over the years.
She makes Hillary Clinton look like a side of beef.
That said, don't be fooled by a pretty face. She's as much a progressive as any of them.
Dude, in your world, it's okay for Hillary's campaign to fund a bullshit dossier from a foreign spy with info sourced by THE RUSSIANS! and then use said bullshit dossier as a justification for the FBI to spy on the other party's campaign. Yeah, you people really have the fucking moral high ground.
"She makes Hillary Clinton look like a side of beef."
I KNEW we were missing somebody in that crowd.
BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
Inga likes her big nanny-state big centrally planned government. You idiots don't understand.
Clyde,
The dif is that what I typed is true. You typed falsehood.
You claim that the surveillance required the dossier, that is not true. Not to mention that you are not even trying to claim that Russia (or anyone) broke our laws so that they could manipulate our election. Breaking laws is illegal. Not breaking laws is not illegal. Ask a lawprof if yur confused re this.
spitter said: "Maybe she's for the liar, cheater, swindler who's had all the views over the years."
Hillary?
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/dossier-not-what-started-all-of-this/
You just know Bill Clinton would volunteer to be on the Tulsi Gabbard campaign. Liz Warren? Not so much.
In such a format, it will be question of who is willing to take the most risks and oppose the rest of the field. You have stand out from the crowd- this is especially true of the 2nd tier candidates, but will also be true of the 2nd night where I think it is do or die for Harris.
considering the high standards of debate and understanding of the the issues you expect from the Democratic candidates.
LOL. We don't expect any cogent thought to come from those candidates.
We'll wait and see what Barr thinks.
Roy Jacobsen said...
"Must-Miss TV."
I actually think they did Warren no favors by putting her at the kiddie table- she runs the real risk of getting dominated by the B-team.
anti-de Sitter space: "In my world it's good for the Russians to break our laws re theft, and then to use the stolen stuff to manipulate our elections."
Thats why Hillary and obama and Mueller all coordinated the hiding of criminal investigations and convictions of agents of Russian energy interests in order to deliver 20% of US Uranium reserves into tje hands of Putin-oligarch pals....just before the Russkis dropped $500,000 into Bill and Hils hands directly and another $146 MILLION into the Clinton Foundation slush fund.
# of dem/left/LLR-left complaints about this remains at ZERO.
I think there are two women candidates that could win the nomination- Warren and Harris. I think you can tell who the DNC wants- they want Harris, so they matched her up with the 3 leading male candidates hoping she can stand out. Let's see if she is up to the challenge.
Browndog said...
I'm not so interested in what is said at the debates, but the Olympic competition of who will win the Gold Medal in gaslighting in the media afterwards.
Nobody said...
it was information about a Trump campaign foreign policy adviser that sparked the FBI's counterintelligence investigation into Russian interference in the election.
Oh yeah,, Popadopolis, who, as the Mueller report said "had reason to believe" that the guy sent to entrap him was a Russian agent.
The Mueller report did NOT say that he was a Russian agent on account of he was not one.
They actually should pair off each of the candidates into separate rooms to solve puzzles. You would probably learn far more about all of them that way. You could put Biden in a paper bag and see if he could fight his way out of it.
Barr is not going to reverse time. The FBI was onto the DJT staff stink before they knew about the dossier.
Not to mention, just cause the pee pee tape didn't work out, plenty did.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/09/a-lot-of-the-steele-dossier-has-since-been-corroborated.html
This is the same Mueller report that called out Huckabee Sanders as a "liar" because she said "countless" instead of "many."
JaimeRoberto said...
There should probably be contests of fitness and strength in these things.
It would be like a political Festivus. We know they'll all be airing their grievances about Donnie and the Deplorables.
And, not to mention:
Do ya know the name of the POTUS candidate that the FBI was much more hardcore investigating? Where nobody went to jail or was convicted. But the deep state still went public to try and take her down days before the election (such that this led to a deep state leader being fired for his attempted take-down.) Hint: not DJT's campaign.
Logic is tricky.
That link by peanut butters is ridiculous, after droning on and on for pages saying nothing but that Steele is a great guy, we get to the "proof"
The most obvious occurrence that could not have been known to Orbis in June 2016, but shines bright in retrospect is the fact that Russia undertook a coordinated and massive effort to disrupt the 2016 election to help Donald Trump, as the U.S. intelligence community itself later concluded.
That's it. It's true because reasons. I think that this is called assuming what you are trying to prove. 50k in Facebook ads showing Hillary wrestling with Jesus, or whatever and the conclusion that the Russians hacked a server that no law enforcement agency was ever allowed to examine and that Wikileaks claims didn't come from the Russians.
Clapper has shown himself to be a partisan, along with Brennen in their many TV appearances on behalf of the Democrats.
No, a poorly reasoned article in Slate that looks like it came from an underground zine published by mimeograph does not overturn the conclusions of the Mueller Report.
this is the same due diligence, the Minneapolis tribune showed miss omar,
see if Saturday night live were still selfaware, they could do a sketch like with all the dems who were refusing to get into the race, like Mario Cuomo, who was admitting he had mob ties, the fake indian, the commie dinosaur, the gay mayor of dodge city, then it gets even sillier, with the woman who slept her way to the top of state house, I mean even marmalard (swallwell) and mayor bane (diblasio) qualified, that's what the quarter quell is for,
The audience is the wild card. Will they boo, cheer, chant a tomahawk chop?
But we can be sure there will be no attack questions from the friendly panel like Trump encountered from Megyn Kelly with blood coming out. These are all Team Stars of the Globalist Enviro-Marxist party.
it's like they shuffled the cards, into two decks irrespective of popularity,
Will Hillary!! watch both debates?
This oughtta be good.
I haven't read an essay of that quality in years, not since the troofers roamed the earth. And to think that it was published by Slate.
Temujin said...
There isn't even a slight chance that I'll be able to make it through either of those. I can't see me making it 10 minutes. I'll leave it to you to do the watching and deciding which Dem is best suited to stop the climate from changing, reduce income inequality, get Harriett Tubman on the $20 dollar bill already dammit, and make sure that bakers bake cakes for everybody, not just who they want to bake for.
Gk1 said...
Wouldn't it be a hoot if this crowd on stage got the CNBC treatment the republican got with such insightful questions like "Are there more than 2 sexes?" "Why do you support the elimination of ICE and all immigration enforcement?" "Was Title IX created to allow biological males to dominate women's sports?" "You seem to be criminalizing political differences by pledging to put Trump in jail after his presidential term. Don't you think this is unamerican?" I'd tune in to watch that show!
Activists have delivered a petition with 200,000 signatures to Democratic National Committee Headquarters, demanding they allow Democrat presidential candidates to hold a climate debate. https://wattsupwiththat.com
That would be great. Please please please please please....!
bagoh20 said...
These debates will show Trump as the only stable genius, and the only stable candidate running.
Smells like a parody account.
No one could be that noseblind while complaining of stench? Right? Heh.
Next, she'll be sliming us as racist sexist nazis for being uncivil.
Wouldn't it be a hoot if this crowd on stage got the CNBC treatment the republican got with such insightful questions like -
"Is Orange Man REALLY bad? Or is Orange Man REALLY REALLY bad?"
so they matched her up with the 3 leading male candidates hoping she can stand out.
It will be hard. When the men around her are firm, Harris has been conditioned to go to her knees to get what she wants.
"...demanding they allow Democrat presidential candidates to hold a climate debate. "
That's funny. What would they debate? They all agree. Then someone could ask for a show of hands: "Who flies on private jets?" Beto probably gets around on a skateboard.
climate debate... Please please please please please....!
I second the motion. The anthropogenic forcing of the political climate is in progress and has been catastrophic for more than 10 trimesters. Deplorable, really. Oh, and the prophecy of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming threatens a liberal election of human, fetus, flora, and fauna's future.
Harris has been conditioned to go to her knees to get what she wants
#MeToo #HerToo #SheKnew #SheProgressed. That said, #NoJudgment #NoLabels. #HateLovesAbortion
John Edwards Lite
As they attempt to outdo each other, by the end of it, they will be arguing over the best method of Presidential assassination, infanticide, border hopping, and the quickest way to return to the stone age.
It seems like it every time now, but has there ever been a clearer choice than 2020 will be? Unprecedented economic success and foreign affairs strength versus a party that hates America, depends on lying to its citizens, and is obsessed with overthrowing a duly elected President that is doing better than just about any in history. They advocate for protecting everyone but Americans, and American interests. Trump could still lose, becuase we are a nation with far too many maleducated, emotion driven people of poor character, but the choice offered is an easy one for those with three digit IQs and a grip on reality.
it's like the entire star wars cantina, or the version from the force awakens, ironically tulsi cant stand out in this crew, at least as of yet,
Skippy (because he looks like someone a kennedy adopted) yes he's going nowhere,
Will Beto bring his wife on-stage to hold his hands down?.....or will he just fly away?
Althouse wrote: I think those 2 women are bland.
So just how did they assume their positions? Bland ambition?
Tom Ault said...
Based on current polling and fundraising, the Democratic candidates break into three tiers:
* Biden
* Buttigieg, Sanders and Warren
* Everyone else
Warren is the only tier two candidate on the first debate night. All the others and Biden are crammed together on the second. To even things out without disturbing the distribution of not-white-men, the Democrats could have moved Sanders or Biden to the first night and moved one of the third tiers to the first night.
Is there anyway to structure are elections that could force them into a 4 month time frame. What could be done statutorily so money raising and spending could not happen until July 5th?
This election of 2020 and 2016 did not serve the citizens of the Nation.
The problem I keep hitting against is free speech. We know spending money is protected as speech. What about money raising?
@Arashi, I supposed you'd modify the question to granny panties or thongs for the women? Just thought I'd ask.
'...demanding they allow Democrat presidential candidates to hold a climate debate.'
Snorfle.
Note that candidates going on the second night are positioned to take pot-shots against the candidates on the first night, esp. Warren.
I am 100% confident that procedures were completely random and without any kind of outside interference, as pure as coin tosses for delegates in Iowa.
What divides these candidates? All we know is who unites them. This is political suicide.
Will be interesting to see how many viewers these debates attract. The Left has no issues other than Orange Man Bad, so why bother tuning in? The nomiee will be whoever appears to be the biggest threat to Trump.
For the Left, this election is about returning to power and fundamentally transforming America into a Socialist State. Nothing else.
Automatic_Wing said...
I think we know how Harris assumed her position.
In her honor, you must drink whenever Warren promises something free.
She looks like she is preparing for competition in the top right photo.
I am surprised they let her on the stage. She will definitely gain support from the average voter.
I wonder how tractable Gabbard is. Warren is the only other candidate that appears to think for herself. Everyone else in the democrat primary is an obvious tool of the wealthy.
Obviously not.
Male/Female ratios and white/not white ratios are too even.
I find it interesting they put the guy who gropes subordinate women on the same stage as the woman who sucked dick for her job.
I think they want both of them to go down.
I also think they have a definite idea of who they want to come out of each group, but they wont get their wish.
Nichevo said...
Why are you attacking the prole? He's one of you.
And very hard for some. You and Inga, for example.
top left photo.
long day.
Narr said...
Wait, who's going down?
Gabbard?
She's from Kamanawanalaiya, I think
Fen @ 2:00: Perfect.
Mayor Buttixyz, top or bottom?
20 democrats.
2 nights.
LLR Chuck HEAVEN!!
Whereas for normal folks, that's the agonizer in the mirror universe.
Looks like two kids tables.
But we can be sure there will be no attack questions from the friendly panel like Trump encountered from Megyn Kelly
Ha. I remember her. She says she's 'very happy' not being on TV. We should help a few others find that happiness.
"Do ya know the name of the POTUS candidate that the FBI was much more hardcore investigating? "
Gee ya think her first name might be Crooked?
Well they ejected her from the today show with great force,
Inga is back in da house!
Well, briefly to do her 7th grade mean girl thing. Yawn!
I am more interested in Tulsi Gabbard. This woman is bright, independent and rocks a bikini!
Uf Da!
Yes if I'm going to anyone of them for five minutes at a time, natch shes fairly down thr line lefty but still.
stephen cooper said...
Every single one of them (the Democratic candidates, that is, even poor Tulsi Gabbard (who could almost have been someone people respected)) is a hard-line eugenecist abortion supporter.
Even the African-American candidates are afraid to speak out against an abortion regime that culls African-American babies at 3 times the ration of white babies, even the African-American candidates, who have to know that even Martin Luther King would be ashamed of them. (African-American babies run three times the risk of being aborted while simply hanging out in the womb than white babies. THAT IS A FACT, that is the racist fact that people a hundred years from now will remember. Look it up, you won't hear it from the losers who are at the center of our information society).
Not a single Democratic candidate has ever said once in their public life a single empathetic word against those horrible legislative decisions celebrating the doctors who let aborted children who survive the first stage of abortion to just die from neglect after the botched abortion.
Not one single Democratic politician will be remembered fondly a hundred years from now, they will be in just as bad a shape a few decades from now as rich slave-owners from 150 years ago now are.
Will they the history is written now
https://mobile.twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status/765923144775458816
narciso ....
I like to smoke cigars I know how to enjoy for 10 minutes an inexpensive cigar , and I know how to enjoy for half an hour a cigar that costs money - money that most of us do not have ---- I know that .... I appreciate the fact that I have access to some of the good things in life
but that being said
I am so so tired after writing a MILLION WORDS on the internet, mostly with the intention of telling people who "never though about it that way" that God loves them ....
I am so tired about telling people God loves them when almost nobody listens....
and here is the saddest thing I will ever say ....
I look at people who know they have not been kind, who know they have not been good, I look at the wives who fell out of love with their husbands a couple days after the marriage, I look at the husbands who do not really love their wives but who know that they cannot admit that to themselves ....
and I want them all to be happy.
I have seen God, who is always gentle and kind, I have seen God in those moments where he tells people who have done something selfish and wrong:
don't ever do that again.
And I have seen some of the evildoers say, thank you for the good advice, and I have seen others say, get back to me later, I am too busy even for YOU ....
God loves us all the way we are but loves us too much to let us stay that way.
Let me say this as kindly as I can ....
Not one single Democratic politician will be remembered fondly a hundred years from now, they will all be, even poor Tulsi Gabbard who almost gets it, in just as bad a shape a few decades from now as rich slave owner politicians from 150 years ago now are.
You simply cannot support abortion on demand that disproportionately decimates African-American babies and at the same time claim to be a decent human being, who deserves praise and votes.
That is why Trump will win by a landslide in 2020, because everybody understands that every single Democratic pretender lacks concern for the unborn, lacks concern for a decent kind future.
Hate on me all you want but you know I describe the world the way it is
Kotex or Tampax is the serious question. After while they need more absorbency,.
And 150 years is an awfully long time, only if something is digital that they consider it real and pinterest reclassified prolife as pornograohy I guess the reverse is true
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Absent unique events, only Gabbard has a chance among the servile modern pro-abortion Democrats.
She can win, maybe, if she praises Alito or Clarence Thomas just enough to win the votes in their home states and the neighboring states.
She won't of course she is a mediocrity with a few good ideas, but whose heart really isn't in it to win, we all know that she has less to say, because she just doesn't care, than most people who e-mail follow up comments here.
"The Democratic candidates have been divided up into 2 groups....."
Lemme guess:
1. The Economically Illiterate and 2. The Emotionally Degenerate?
Narayanan said...
Mike asks the professora ...
Once it gets down to about 5 top candidates, I'd like to see them put in a room with just a list of topics to discuss.
I would also put an arsenal of weapons in the room.
Gladiator protocol and courtesy.
My two favs remain Hickenlooper and Tulsi
Gabbard. Not that I would vote for them, but at least the world wound't end if they would win.
The rest are all frauds, governments whores, and far too hard core radical left/socialist/communist/big government.
Time magazine is blue-sky pimping Bernie.
Forensic: etymology from forum!?
I'm cross reading AA and CTH for a meta forum on this topic to see what is not being shown or talked about.
My take :
First day is undercard.
Then the Main Event.
Will Trump tweet to set up the memes for this?
Showman gotta Show
If Tulsi and her squeeze do Bollywood song dance that is billion vote from call center.
Blogger buwaya said...
Men's sana in corpore bonissima or something like that.
Did what I said come over as :
Sane men go for hot bods!?
"In her honor, you must drink whenever Warren promises something free."
Good way to die of alcohol poisoning within 20 minutes.
I guess "bland" = "the boring I am not for"
So far the only ones I have seen a smidgeon of moral courage from are Gabbard and Hickenlooper. They both seem marginal otherwise but might stand out. None of them will call Warren for her lies about being a Cherokee, or her rare case of *actual* cultural appropriation — she actually took benefits intended for real native Americans.
Lizzie Warren Helps Chinese Hearing Aid Makers
Lizzie Warren looked at a hearing aid
And was amazed how tiny it was made
So she asked, "How much does it cost?"
And the quoted price made her frost
Then she asked how many were bought
And found that poor people get naught
So she asked the Senate to fix the deal
And internet sales would seem to be ideal!
Provided that the hearing doc disappears
When the fixes are made to to fit your ears
But Lizzie's imagined ingenuity will soon fall flat
Enterprising sellers have Been There, Done That
So far the only ones I have seen a smidgeon of moral courage from are Gabbard and Hickenlooper.
Tulsi Gabbard:
"I don't think that we should defeat Donald Trump through impeachment."
"What I am worried about is the continued divisiveness and putting partisan political interests ahead of the interest of the people."
"Our country is being torn apart and by pursuing [impeachment] it could lead us down a very dangerous path."
Hopefully, our gal Althouse will live blog this Leftwing love fest, so we don't have to watch these morons.
Danno said...
Blogger Bay Area Guy said...Hopefully, our gal Althouse will live blog this Leftwing love fest, so we don't have to watch these morons.
That would be way too much work with this many candidates over two nights.
You already know that most of them will try to outdo the others on such things as Medicare for All, Green Raw Deal, Trump impeachment, etc., but it will really just amount to 'Kumbaya with Nuance'. That's pretty much all you need to know.
Do ya know the name of the POTUS candidate that the FBI was much more hardcore investigating?
Actual criminal acts under investigation, if you would like, I would be happy to list a few for you to tell me why each is bullshit.
stlcdr said...
Who gets voted off the island?
I don't believe there will be anything said that hasn't been said already. As someone noted above: don't be too bland, but don't stand out too much (Goldilocks strategy).
It's apparently Comey's fault that Hillary emails from her time as SoS ended up on the laptop of a convicted sex offender. Something that never would have happened had she not kept a home grown server in her bathroom.
Democrat Debate issues:
1. Taxation: should we have 80% tax rates or only 75%?
2. Abortion: Does the Constitution really prevent compulsory abortions?
3. Green New Deal: Everyone a golf cart by 2050!
4. Affirmative Action: All white males should or should not wear the Star of White crimes in public?
5. Hate Crimes: Should we or should we not create a Federal Department of Hate Crimes? Should the duly appointed Secretary have administrative authority to ban jokes in poor taste, with or without a due process hearing?
6. Immigration: Should we tear down all walls like Reagan demanded of Gorbachev?
7. Immigration Part 2: why can't we just abort and/or deport Christians and import more low-skilled Muslims?
There isn't any Dem candidate who will even come close to matching all of the free stuff that Fake Indian Warren will be promising the voters.
Matt Sablan said...
It's time to gird our loins or whatever, election season is upon us.
"'Logic is tricky.
"'And very hard for some. You and Inga, for example."
Don't you reactionaries understand? Logic is a tool of white males to stop us from going full-blown socialist? Get with the program.