Second Round of Democratic Debates

This should be the last debate with 20 candidates.  It is an unwieldy way to run an election and it is wasteful of air time.

It's hard to grade performances across two nights, especially when half of the candidates are not serious. So I'm going to rank the 20 candidates from most to least likely to be elected president next year.  I will give each of them two grades-one for how they performed tactically-that is whether or not they advanced their cause in the short term.  And then a separate grade for how they performed strategically-that is did they enhance their actual chances of becoming president (or enhancing their long term political prospects.) At some point, I will stop giving strategic great because half of these people are running to boost their speaker fees and maybe land a TV gig.

1.  Biden Tactical A-, Strategic, B+

Biden drew a lot of heat, just as he did last time. But this time he was prepared. He wasn't in full command of the facts, but he withstood a lot of heat. He is past his prime. But he's probably got enough left in the tank to win this race.

2.  Harris  Tactical: B-, Strategic: B.

Harris obviously listened to all the good press she got after attacking Biden in the first debate. Tonight she seemed unprepared to receive the same kind of fire from everyone else on the stage. She was the star of the fist debate, she was middling tonight.

That said, I'm bullish on her candidacy. I think she made a big mistake by committing to a huge tax cut as the centerpiece of her campaign, but her health plan is pretty solid and she doesn't alienate independents with her talking points.

3. Warren  Tactical B+, Strategic: C.

She landed a lot of good blows on Delaney and some other irrelevancies.  That won her the night, but she also expressed some really dumb ideas. That will catch up to her if she's the nominee.

4. Sanders  Tactical: B, Strategic: C
His talking points are so vapid that I can't believe people still want him to be president. That's my analysis.

5. Buttigieg  Tactical: A, Strategic: A-.
He is good in this format. He's calm and clever and very reassuring.  I still think he's a long shot but I think he has elevated his long term prospects more than anyone in the field.  If a Democrat wins, he will get an important job.

6. Inselee  Tactical: A-, Strategic: A.
He's got an issue that resonates with the base and a demeanor that scores well with moderates. He's a long shot, I won't count him out now.

7. Klobuchar  Tactical: B, Strategic: B+
She remains my preferred candidate but there is no getting around the fact that she is boring in this format.  Her message should be resonating more-she really is the strongest candidate to beat Trump but it seems unlikely that she will get that chance.  I really hope she gets the remaining donors needed to participate in the 3rd debates in Houston, because I think she might do better on a smaller stage.

8. Booker  Tactical B+, Strategic: B+
He had a few good moments.  He has a lane, but he's not doing much to seize it.

9. Castro  Tactical; A-, Strategic: B
He is a good debater and would make a good President some day. But it's hard to think of what demographic he connected with tonight.

10. Bullock Tactical: A-, Strategic: B+
He was good on substance but middling on style.  He probably won't make the next debate stage, but if he does, I hope he rehearses getting his talking points out.

11. Beto O'Rourke: Tactical: C+, Strategic: B.
It's easy to forget that he's running in this race.  But he made some good points about why he would be a good general election candidate. He already qualified for the next debate, which will be in Texas.

12. John Delaney:  Tactical: A

Delaney was annoying and, at times, petulant.  But he had one job-to get camera time and to beat the drum for centrism.  He gamed the system well-the rules reward making attacks against specific candidates, which invites cross fire.  He looked dumb in one or two moments and he's probably doomed to be a punchline down the line.  But last night everyone on social media was amazed at how much face time he got.  It seemed odd, but it was deliberate.

That said, he's never going to be president. And he doesn't have a long term future in politics. This is an ego campaign by a very rich man. That ego got stroked last night, and he might have made some points that get picked up by Biden or even Harris down the line.

13. Michael Bennett: Tactical: B+
He did fine. And nobody cares. He's not going to become president and he is probably hurting his long term national prospects.

14. Tim Ryan:  Tactical: C.
He's a meat head. That's my analysis.

15. Andrew Yang Tactical: B.
He was terrible in the first debate, merely unremarkable this time. He's probably going to wind up with a niche platform going forward. If he's serious about his ideas, he will run for a house seat sometime. But I think he's better suited to being an Internet intellectual.

16. John Hickenlooper. Tactical: C
I think his name is John. Maybe it's Jon. Please don't tell me. It's better not to know.


17. Kristen Gillibrand: Tactical: C.
She is a scrapper. She just sucks at it. Before tonight I thought for sure she would be dropping out soon, but he came loaded for bear tonight and unloaded some heavy smack on Biden. I do not think she has accepted that this race is futile yet.  Hopefully not making the cut for debate #3 will provide her that clarity.

18. Bill de Blasio Tactical: D
It's amazing for a politician to be this unlikeable and transparently phony. But we must remember that he's only in Gracie Mansion and on this stage because of Anthony Weiner's dick pics.  Fuck him.

19. Gabbard: Tactical: B
She's hard to grade, because I don't know what her agenda is. If she's trying to promote the cause of peace, well then I guess she said some of the right things. But it seems that her real agenda, for reasons known only to her, was to take out Kamala Harris. She unloaded the oppo research on her but to what effect?

You're going to hear more and more speculation about her real motivations as time goes by. I'm reserving judgment for now. But I sleep well knowing that's not going to be the nominee and that she apparently doesn't intend to run for another term in the House.

20.  Marianne Williamson Tactical: A-.
She got a few good lines in. The audience applauded her, especially her answer on reparations. She is going to have a very soft landing out of this-she'll grow her base of fans and she'll write more books and what-not in the future. Maybe she will get a talk show or some other platform that no one with her dangerous vies on vaccines and mental health should ever have.

She got some good buzz last night but she will never get above 2 percent in any national poll.  And that is the difference between the political parties-Democrats like and admire their hippy aunts, but Republicans vote for their racist uncles.

Quick Thoughts on the Democratic Debate Lottery

Tomorrow night CNN will hold a live draw for the next Democratic debate. The first debate draw was done privately and was completely random. That resulted in an imbalanced division of the major candidates, with Warren hogging the first night and the other four debating each other on the second night.  For this second set of debates, the candidates will be divided into three tiers.  Each debate will get:

1. Two each among Biden, Harris, Sanders and Warren.

2. Three each among Buttigieg, Booker, Castro, Kloubuchar, O'Rourke and Yang.  

3. Five each among: Bennet, Bullock, de Blasio, Delaney, Gabbard, Gillibrand, Hickenloper, Inslee, Ryan and Williamson.

Let's ignore the middling candidates and the kiddy table folks. One or two of them will have a good night, but very few people will be tuning in to see them.  The main question is how will the top four candidtes be divide?  There are only three possible permutations of leading candidates.  Here are my thoughts on each, with a brief word about which order would be more ineresting.:

1. Biden and Harris  // Sanders and Warren.

Biden versus Harris would be built up as a rematch of the most memorable exhange from the first debate. Hopefully this time Biden will come prepared. Harris might prefer to be matched with one of the other choices, since she already got her licks in on Biden. Or she might look at it as her chance to  firm up her sanding among the moderate wing, while Elizaberth Warren and Bernie get framed as the left-wing prospects on the other night.

Both of these pairings will bring in a good audience. If I'm Warren, I want to go on the second night because last time Harris carried the news cycle for several days after Warren's strong performance against the tomato cans she drew on opening night. 

2. Biden and Sanders // Harris and Warren. 

A good old-fashioned guys versus dolls scenario.  Bernie probably wants to pummel Biden using his 2016 Hillary playbook. But that will feel very tired and I think Harris and Warren would wind up collectively elevating the discourse in their debate. If this is the draw, then Harris and Warren will want to be second. Let the old white guys get the stage warm for them, and then try to bring the discussion into the 21st century.

If this is the draw, I really hope it's Biden/Sanders on the first night, followed by Warren and Harris on the second. I think Biden and Sanders will make each other look old, especially if Buttigieg and or Beto are on the stage with them. 

3. Biden and Warren // Harris and Sanders.

This is probably the comination that CNN would most want to avoid.  But this is the one I am rootinng for. Biden and Warren have some very substantive beef that goes back to when Biden was reffered to as the senator from MBNA and Warren was a bankruptcy scholar at Harvard Law. Biden was a driving force behind the 2005 amendments to the Bankruptcy Code and Warren made her reputation as a public academic by decrying that very law.  I doubt the CNN panelists know much about this so it might be a wasted story line, but I'm pretty sure Senator Warren will force some part of the conversation on to this terrain. She is chomping at the bit to tell the world that Joe Biden was on the side of credit card companies. She knows better than anyone the high human cost of those "reforms." 

Warren will clean Biden's clock with facts and figures. He might come prepared for Harris this time, but he cannot match Warren's economic sophistication. Biden will probably be hoping that foreign affairs are a prominent part of the debate in this permutation. But my money would be on Warren forching him to talk about middle class economics. And that is her strength.

If Biden draws Warren, he will want it to be on the first night. He can't take another extended news cycle about him getting his ass kicked by a woman. CNN would rather have this on the second night, because the substance of their exchanges will be a lot more compelling than Bernie vs. Kamala.