The Field Begins To Whittle (The 2020 Democratic Field, Take Seven)

Labor Day is traditionally when voters supposedly start paying attention to a presidential election.  So we are only one year away from normal people starting to really thinkg about this process.  In the meantime, we political nerds soldier on.

I last updated the field four weeks ago. Since then we have had a few drop outs.  Three dropped out before officially missing the cut and Senator Gillibrand dropped out as soon as she officially missed the cut. (Good for her. Being a senator from New York is a pretty sweet gig. There's not need to waste the next 4 months in Iowa and New Hampshire.)

I. The Power Rankings, Take Seven.

These are just my preferences, without regard to the chances they will win the nomination.  There is not a lot of movement this time, except for the spaces created by former candidates, most notably Jay Inslee who had shot up from 13th to 4th in my last ranking. The removal of the three other former candidates, Hickenlooper (13), Gillibrand (14) and Moulton (16) caused less disruption. 

1. Amy Klobuchar  
2. Kamala Harris 
3. Elizabeth Warren    
4 Beto O'Rourke (Up from 6)  He seems more relevant after his response to the El Paso shooting and just yesterday there was another horrific shooting in West Texas.  I'm not counting him out yet.

5. Julian Castro (Down from 4)  He seems to be getting slithgly desperate. This week he put forth a proposal to make it illegal for animal shelters to euthanize unadopted pets. There may ben argument for tha ton the merits, but it is NOT an issue for the federal government to decide. It struck me as an attempt to hit a very specific fundraising niche.  (Cat ladys.)

6. Michael Bennett (Up from 7)
7. Steve Bullock (8)
8. Pete Buttigieg (9)
9. Joe Biden (10)
10. John Delaney (11)

11. Corey Booker  (12)
12. Tim Ryan
13. Joe Sestak (Up from 17)
14. Bernie Sanders (18)
15. Wayne Messam  (20)

16. Andrew Yang (19)  I have to explain something here. Yang moved "up" 3 spots because 4 candidates dropped out.  But I'm moving him behind Wayne Messam for a very specific reason. I know nothing about Wayne Messam. He is the mayor of a some mid-size Florida city that I can't even remember the name of. He's youngish and African-American. I don't know if he's a good mayor or a bad mayor. I don't know his religion or his priorities or his favorite band. I think it's slightly absurd that he's running for President of the United States but I also have to assume that he is more qualified and competent for the job than a name chosen at random from the phone book. 

To be ranked below Messam, I have to think you would be worse than a random name chosen from a phone book. Last month I gave Yang the benefit of the doubt that he was. I have now sseen enough of him to conclude that he is not. His ideas are stupid and I believe he is running to become a fringe public intellectual akin to Ron Paul. He is going to wind up building a small political movement that disrupts things for no substantive purpose. Just like Ron Paul.

17. Tom Steyer (Unranked)  I think I forgot about him last time. I'm glad he didn't qualify for the debate because he's a rich asshole who should have better ways to waste his money than to juice the ad revenues of Iowa TV chanels and radio stations. Build a hospital for Christ's sake.
18. Bill de Blasio (21)  

19. Tulsi Gabbard (22)
20. Marianne Williamson (23) 

II. The Horse Race, Take Seven.

A.  The Top Tier (Front Runners).
1. Joe Biden
2. Elizabeth Warren
3. Bernie Sanders (Up from 3)
4. Kamala Harris (Down from 3)

Harris' slip in the polls has been pretty consistent over the past month.  Her performance in the 2nd debate was poorly received and pretty much erased the bounce that she got from a strong performance in the first.  I still think Bernie is unlikely to be the nominee but he should do well in the first 2 states and I think it will be tough for Harris to withstand finishing out of the money in both Iowa and New Hampshire, especially if Buttigieg or O'Rourke finishes ahead of her in either place. She is still my preference among the top 4 candidates, but she can't be please with the trajectory of her candidacy.

B.  Tier Two (Those Guys).

5.  Pete Buttigieg
6.  Beto O'Rourke (Up from 6)
7. Cory Booker  (Down form 7)
8.  Julian Castro

I slid Mayor Pete down to the second tier because his support has been on a plateau for months. He is an appealing guy and has the right temperament to be President some day. But I don't think people are going to flock to his candidacy in a big way. He's kind of stuck in 5th place, unless Kamala or Bernie tank. 

He also fits a little better with the other three candidates in this tier. They are all moderate. They each have some strengths and some obvious weaknesses. Three of them have been mayors. If a Democrat wins, all of them will be considered for important jobs.  And there is a least a chance that any one of them might find a cause or have a moment that shoots them up into contention. It hasn't happened yet, but there is hope.

C. Tier Three (The Grown Ups).

9. Amy Klobuchar
10. Michael Bennet (12)
11. Steve Bullock (14)
12. John Delaney (13)

These candidates are more experienced than the "Those Guys" Bunch but a lot less charismatic and therefore less likely to be the nominee.  If God gave me a magic wand and said I could pick which tier the next president would come from, I would choose this bunch.  But I am more moderate than the typical primary voter and less interested in how dynamic someone seems on television. I wish this group well, and I think 2 or 3 of them might be able to 

D. Tier Four (Long Shots)

13. Andrew Yang (21)  He's had an undeniable bump in the polls-all the way to 2 or 3 percent.
14. Tulsi Gabbard (19)
15. Tim Ryan   I think he's running to raise his profile in order to one day run for Governor or maybe for speaker of the House.
16. Joe Sestak (18)
17. Tom Steyer
18. Bill de Blasio  (17)   The complete rejection of this guy by the national party has warmed my heart. 


E.  Fifth Tier (Trainwrecks)
19. Wayne Mesam (22)  I hope he sticks around if only because he now serves a specific purpose in my power rankings.   I wonder if his wife teases him by calling him "President-Elect" when he forgets to take out the trash.
20. Marianne Williamson (23)  Fuck her.

2020 Democratic Field, Take Six (Post 2nd Debate)

I.  Do You Ever Think About Death?

This weekend, the country experienced two horrific mass shootings. That's a lot, even for US.

It's early but the reaction this time feels different. Tonight the governor of Ohio was shouted down at a vigil with chants of "Do Something." Watch the video. Only about half the attendees are actively chanting but what's really interesting is the reaction of those who are not chanting. They are quiet. They are not telling anyone to stop chanting. They seem torn, between wanting to be respectful of the fact they are at a vigil and wanting to well, "Do Something."

The shooting in El Paso was inspired by the racist rhetoric of our President and his obedient bullhorn, the Fox News Channel.  The shooter wrote a manifesto that made two broad points-the United State is being invaded by non-white immigrants and that white Americans need to use their right to bear Arms to repel this invasion because the white people of Europe do not share those rights. 

This one is on the Republicans, full-square. It will fade as a news story, as all of these horrific episodes do.  But it has reinforced the narrative that Donald Trump is a white nationalist. And it has so far emboldened Democrats to connect those dots. 

We'll see if these facts affect poll data as the weeks go by. I suspect that it will. Americans are sick of living like this. And I think the silly idea that that this is about mental health or praryer in schools or motherfucking video games is finally being treated as the nonsense that it has always been. 

II.  The Field Takes Shape, (Sort of)

The past week gave us some slight clarity on the state of the race for the Democratic nomination. After two rounds of debates, the polls are about where they were two months ago-Biden leads, with Warren, Harris and Sanders also in double digits. Pete Buttigieg remains in fifth. Beto O'Rourke is a distant sixth, and everyone else is reguarly pollin between 1 and 2 points in both statewide and national polls.  

Only eight candidates have qualified for the third debate in Houston, with Klobuchar and Booker joining the above mentioned candidates.  Andrew Yang and Julian Castro each need one more poll at 2 perecnet or above to put them in the debate. I expect they will both get that.

That would bring the field up to ten candidates. That would mean one night of debates, with all the front runners on stage together. If an 11th candidate qualifies, then the field will be split in two again, so we might not get the top four on the same stage. But the smaller panels will give each candidate more time to speak.  I'm rooting for 11 to qualify because I think Klobuchar will benefit from being given more time on her night. 

Only three candidates have even a single qualifying poll at two percent-Gabbard, Hickenlooper and Steyer. Gabbard has met the donors threshold. None of the others are close. So we might need a Gabbard bounce to split the field in Houston.


III. The Spider Stumbled Power Rankings, Take Six.

These are my purely personal preferences.  Since the last rankings, Eric Swalwell and Mike Gravel have dropped out of the race. So we are down to 23 spots. 

Changes from the previous ranking are noted for each candidate. (Not a lot of change this time.)   



1. Amy Klobuchar  Unchanged
2. Kamala Harris (Up from 3)
3. Elizabeth Warren  (Down from 2).  
4. Julian Castro (5)  Unchanged

5. Jay Inslee (Up from 13)  He had a strong performance and let's face it-his priority is the right one. If we don' stop heating up the planet, we are all fucked. 
6. Beto O'Rourke (Down from 5)  He had another laclucster night in the debate, but he has a rare opportunity to speak about the shooting in his hometown. So far, he is speaking plainly and truthfully.

7. Michael Bennett (Unchanged)  
8. Steve Bullock (Unchanged)
9. Pete Buttigieg (Unchanged)
10. Joe Biden (Unchanged)
11. John Delaney (Unchanged)

12. Corey Booker  (Up from 14)
13. John Hickenlooper (9)
14. Kristin Gillibrand  (Down from 6)  Her attack on Joe Biden was very dishonest. I hope she starts looking for the exit once she officially fails to make the next debate stage..
15. Tim Ryan (Unchanged)

16. Seth Moulton (Up from 17)
17. Joe Sestak (Up from 18)
18. Bernie Sanders (Unchanged)

19. Andrew Yang (Up from 22)  

20. Wayne Messam  (Unchanged)
21. Bill de Blasio (Down from19)  He is a prick.

22. Tulsi Gabbard (Unchanged)
23. Marianne Williamson (Down from 20)  

IV..   The Horse Race, Take Six.

This is where I handicap the field and attempt to put it into an orderly system of tiers. 

The Top Tier Candidates 

There are no changes in this tier from last time.
1. Joe Biden 
2. Elizabeth Warren 
3. Kamala Harris
4. Bernie Sanders 
5. Pete Buttigieg 

The Pack 

Swapped the Texans.

6. Cory Booker (Unchanged)
7. Beto O'Rourke (8)

8. Julian Castro (7)
9. Amy Klobuchar (8)

Flawed and/or Floundering 

Only 4 candidates left here, down from six last time. I think Gillibrand and Ryan have been exposed as candidates with no particular rational or political base to draw from. They are long shots.

10. Jay Inslee (Up from 13)

11. John Hickenloper (Up from 12)

12. Michael Bennett (Down from 10)
13. John Delaney (Up from 14)

Long Shots

14. Steve Bullock (Up from 19)

15. Tim Ryan (Unchanged at 15, but down a tier to long shot, because he is meathead.)

16. Kristen Gillibrand (Down from 10)

17. Bill de Blasio (Unchanged)
18. Joe Sestak (Unchanged)

19. Tulsi Gabbbard Unchanged)

20. Seth Moulton (17)

Train Wrecks
21. Andrew Yang (Up from 22)
22. Wayne Messam (Up from 23, by attrition) 
23. Marrianne Williamson (Up from 24, also by attrition)

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.

After the First Debate: 2020 Democratic Field, Take 5

The first Democratic debates were held this week and the field has officially been shaken up.  Kamala Harris laid a big heavy glove on the front-runner and now the betting markets have the race as essentially even between three candidates-Biden, Harris and Warren.  I will discuss how each candidate did and then list my new power rankings.

I. Five Candidates Who Helped Themselves, At Least a Little.

1. Kamala Harris. She came hunting for Joe Biden and stalked him at the perfect moment. Joe should have been prepared for this, but he wasn't.  You do not want to run the Democratic primary for president on a position of "Civil Rights is a state and local issue."  But that's where Kamala put him. She had been pretty stagnant in the polls. It will be interesting to see if that changes now, because she will have a bullseye on her back at the next debate. I expect she will come prepared to defend the inevitible attack on her record as Attorney General of California.  The one good thing about our absurdly long primary process is that everyone gets a turn in the barrell.

2. Elizabeth Warren.  She caught a bit of a break in the candidate lottery and was the only top tier candidate on the stage Wednesday. She did not squander the spotlight, although her glowing reviews only lasted for 24 hours.

3. Pete Buttigieg.  I have been dismissive of his candidacy. I still do not think that being mayor of South Bend makes you qualified to be President of the Untied States.  But he was prepared for this glaring weakness-the state of South Bend's police department. He took the questions seriously and owned up to his failures. He also resisted the temptation to tell Swalwell to STFU when he started spouting off at him from the cheap seats.  He may not be ready for the Oval Office yet, but I would like to see him in one of those jobs that will prepare him for it one day-maybe ambassador to the UN.

4. Julian Castro.  Castro knew he had to move up the pile, at least by one rung and he decided that Beto O'Rourke would be that run to climb over. He did well and I think he might get a modest boost in the polls. But he remains a long shot.

5. Amy Klobuchar.  She has been my preferred candidate from the start, so maybe she bleongs in the tier below this one. But she was serious and thoughtful and might benefit some from Biden's glass jaw being tagged.  She's going to need to stand out in the second debate to not fall off the list of serious candidates.

II.  Six Candidates Who Helped Themselves But It Does Not Matter.

On the first night, John Delaney an Bill de Blasio both did a reasonable job of getting their points across. They needed to be heard and they were. But they will not be president of the United States anytime soon. Eric Swalwell took a similar tack on the second debate to a similar result.

Michael Bennet did well on the second night but it's really hard to imagine how he gets any traction in this crowded field.  He probably would have been a solid VP choice if he didn't run and maybe he's hoping the solid debate perofrmances will elevate his profile as a senator down the road.

The Two Governors in the field-Jay Inslee and John Hickenlooper also had competent but uninspiring nights. They deserve to remain in their current jobs, which is a sort of compliment, I guess.

III.  Three Candidates Who Hurt Their Chances of Being President.

1. Joe Biden.  Mike Tyson once said of a vanguished opponent "Everybody's got a plan until the get hit."  Biden's plan was to ride the popularity of his former boss to the nomination and the unpopularity of his opponent to the Oval Office. Things will not be that simple.  He now has to come up with a narrtive that explains why he was opposed to busing for some reason other than being a bigot.  There are many thoughtful critques of busing, and he might be able to cobble together an explanation. The problem is that he talked about this issue a lot over the years and it will not be hard for his opponents to make him look bad.  That goes for the general election too. Donald Trump is so stupid he seemed to think the question of busing related to what type of transportation kids take to and from school. But his noise machine will not be afraid to run Facebook ads claiming that Biden is a bigot, just as they did against Hillary Clinton.  This is a real problem.

I also think that his age showed poorly that night.  Is this someone you want to be President nine and a half years from now?  It's a fair question.

2. Bernie Sanders.  Allowing 20 candidates to debate is a joke. The Democrats have committed to do so at least twice.  That struck me as crazy but I think there may be some method to the madness-Bernie got a lot of mileage from being the only opponent on the stage against Hillary Clinton. But in a crowded stage, Bernie repeating his simplisitc solution to everything-"Stand up to Wall Street!" sounded really fucking stupid.  He didn't direct that attack at any candidate, probably because he's not sure who is rivals are yet. (He mighat have tried to go after Warren if they were on the same night.) The result was that his words just felt like a vaccuous drone.

The Democrats do have a Bernie problem, though. He is not running to win. He is running to continue the process of shifting the paty leftward and creating a genuinely Leftist lane in American presidential politics. That means he will not drop out, even if the nomination has been sewn up by a more serious person.  One year from now, he might just be a huge pain in everyone's ass.

3. Beto O'Rourke.  Biden was unprepared for one specific thing. Beto was both unprepared and underwhelming. He does not seem to have figured out how to ramp-up his senate campaign into a national one.

4. Corey Booker.  I mean, he wasn't terrible. People inclined to like him, thought he did fine. But it's hard to see his support growing off of that performance. He has a better chance than Klobuchar or O'Rourke of surviving past the early states but I think he is also a long shot.

IV. Six Candidates Who Performed Poorly But It Doesn't Really Matter.

Tulsi Gabbard did a decent job of sounding like the candidate of peace but she never seems fully engaged with her surrounding and frankly gives off the vague vibe of someone who was raised in a cult and/or is overly sympathetic to Russia and the Taliban. Tim Ryan managed to get the worst of an exchange with her whee he was taking the anti-Taliban position. That does not auger well for his chances in this race but he also seemed to be running for some nebulous "voice of the Rust Belt" job that doesn't actually exist.

Eric Swalwell was smarmy and gruff. I don't expect anyone to rally around that cause now.  Andrew Yang straight-up choked. He didn't bother to wear a tie and he had nothing interesting to say. He did not belong on that stage.

Kirsten Gillibrand gets points for making an effort to be involved but all of her interjections fell flat because everyone knows that she is a dead-flat scratch in almost every single poll-national or statewide. She recently got zero percent in a poll of Democratic primary voters in Florida. That is impposisble for a senator from New York. (Consider that Hillary won the Florida primary by 17 points in 2008 and by 12 in 2016.)  Equally baffling for a New Yorker, she is having trouble raising funds. It seems very possible that she will not qualify to be on the stage at the end of July.  She is probably only doing permanent damage to her political prospects.

Marriane Willamson taught us all how to love and birthed 1,000 SNL audition tapes.

V. The Spider Stumbled Power Rankings, Take Five:  

These are the candidates ranked purely by my personal preferences. The number in Parenthesis indicates their rank in the Previous Rankings. The field has grown by three candidates since the last time I did these rankings. Not much movement at the top, but Buttigiege moved up by 4 spots and dear old Marrianne Williamson dropped by five.

1. Amy Klobuchar
2. Elizabeth Warren
3. Kamala Harris
4. Julian Castro (5)
5. Beto O'Rourke (4)
6. Kristin Gillibrand
7. Michael Bennett (Unranked)
8. Steve Bullock (Obviously he needs to make the next debate if he wants to stick around, but I hope he does.)
9. Pete Buttigieg (13)
10. Joe Biden (8)
11. John Delaney (13)
12. John Hickenlooper (9)
13. Jay Inslee (10)
14. Corey Booker
15. Tim Ryan (11)
16. Eric Swalwell (15)
17. Seth Moulton (16)
18. Joe Sestak (Unranked)
19. Bernie Sanders (18)
20. Bill de Blasio (Unranked)
21. Wayne Messam
22. Andrew Yang (17)
23. Tulsi Gabbard (22)
24. Mike Gravel (21)
25. Marianne Williamson (20)

                                           VI. The Horse Race, Take Five.

This is where I handicap the field and attempt to put it into an orderly system of tiers. There is a lot more movement here than in my personal preferences.

The Top Tier Candidates (Five, Up From Three Last Time)
1. Joe Biden (2)
2. Elizabeth Warren (6)
3. Kamala Harris (4)
4. Bernie Sanders (1)
5. Pete Buttigieg (3)

The Pack (Four Candidates, Down From Six Last Time)
6. Cory Booker (5)
7. Julian Castro (9)
8. Beto O'Rourke (7)
9. Amy Klobuchar (8)

Flawed and/or Floundering (Six Candidates, Down From Eight Last Time)
10. Michael Bennett (Unranked)
11. Kristen Gillibrand (10)
12. Jay Inslee (13)
13. John Hickenlooper (12)
14. John Delaney
15. Tim Ryan (11)

Long Shots
16. Steve Bullock (19)
17. Bill de Blasio (Unranked)
18. Joe Sestak (Unranked)
19. Tulsi Gabbbard (16)
20. Seth Moulton (17)
21. Eric Swalwell (15)

Train Wrecks
22. Andrew Yang (18)
23. Wayne Messam (20)  I misspelled his name last time, which I'm sure you all noticed and were very upset about.
24. Marrianne Williamson (21)
25. Mike Gravel (22)

October: The Story of the Russian Revolution by China Miéville
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

The events of Saint Petersburg, 1917 are among the most fascinating in history. The largest and most oppressive monarchical empire in the world was over thrown by something that proved to be much, much worse. What makes this book interesting is that it was written by someone who can't quite bring himself to conced that last point.

I never heard of China Mieville before finding the handsome cover of this book. He is a gifted and confident writer who strikes the right balance between procedural detail and human drama. I have read many books on this subject, but Mievell made the material seem fresh.

Mievell concedses off the bat that he is not a neutral observer of these events. A quick Google search confirmed tha the is, even in the year of our Lord 2019, a committed Marxist. His affection for Lenin is not subtle. And it takes a little mental energy to periodically remember that the author believes in the economic equivalent of Scientology. But the story drives forward and builds to the glorious moment when a ramshackle band of second rate political theorists take over land spanning 11 time zones.

At times I was deeply annoyed by his ability to bend facts away from Lenin's faults. He seems to genuinely believe that Lenin was a pure soul with only the best intentions. It borders on the embarassing at times, but I may have read to many right-wing accounts of these same events.

In the epilogue, Mievelle does acknowledge the profound problems that revealed themselves in the decade after the October Revolution. But his thesis seems to be that those events were not an inevitible consequnce of Bolshevism. On that, I must strongly disagree. But this book is a quick read and the style is entertaining.

I will mention one annoying style clithc-Mievell is fond of using obscure words for commonly used concepts. Several times he uses a word that I've never head and then immediately saves the reader a Google by defining it. When a writer feels that is necessary, he's just showing off his Scrabble abilities. Here's a related example. In the epiloque he describes the display of Lenin's corpse as "A gnarled and ghastly relic, recieving obeisance from its catafalque.

And here, let me Google that for you. Catafalque: A decorated wooden framework supporting the coffin of a distinguished person during a funeral or while lying in state. Obeisance: deferential respect.







View all my reviews

Thoughts on the Game of Thrones Finale

Note: this is published about 90 minutes before the Game of Thrones Series Finale. It is full of spoliers throug the first 5 episodes of season 8. I've also read the firs two books, which might inform my commentary. 


Reaction to the final season of Game of Thrones has been very negative. As I write this, there is just one episode left and no one seems to think the show can stick the landing. There are just too many loose threads to tie up and we already know that certain key characters will have unsatisfying story endings.

When this truncated seasson began, I started watching the old episodes. It's been a bittersweet process. The writing and promise of the first two seasons really make season eight look worse.

There are at least three levels on which to appreciate GOT.  Ian McShane famously called GOT "A show about tits and dragons."  Surely the tits and the dragons brough in a lot of casual viewers. Re-watching the first two season reminded me of how shameless the "sexpostion" was in the early goings. As the show progressed, the show (and most of its audience) matured and there was less need for exploitive titalation. A slightly deeper reading of the story is that it's a story about a war. The plot is set in motion by a disput over who the rightful monarch is. And the second season starts with the War of 5 Kings. But another glaring thing about the rewatch of those episodes is how little combat is shown. When Tyrion heads off to battle for the first time, he is knocked out by accident and we learn the result, with him, after he comes to, hours after the battle. We are told that Rob Stark wins several battles against the Lannisters, but we only see glimpses of it. The show's budget and popularity eventually demanded more warfare, and we got that in a stone classic of an episode two years ago-The Battle of the Bastards. The show has twice tried to match the quality and drama of that hour this season and it failed both times.

For me, the show has always been about politics. George R.R. Martin created something truly ambititous-an entire mythology and history that reminds us of midieval Europe but inhabited by characters that are three dimensional, complicated and most of all, smart. Consider how the Starks and Lannisters can each give credulous narratives of how the war started. The Starks accused Tyrion of trying to kill Bran, but he didn't. Ned Stark assumed that Cersei killed John Arryn, whose death put in motion the action of the very first episode. But he was actually killed by his wife, Lysa, the sister of Katlyn Stark.  The Starks of course would point out that Joffrey was a bastard and that their lord was killed for doing nothing more than speaking the truth. As with any great war, both sides have a narative that can become the officially history, if only they win.

Ah yes, winning. The show's title tells us this a game. From the jump, we have been rooting for team Stark and hoping that one of them winds up on the Iron Throne. I think we'll probably get that much closure tonight, although I'm not sure how the lesser story lines will end up.

Part of me wants the finale to just be a total fuck it episode. Instead of resolving the question of who gets the Iron Throne and what is to be done with Daeny now that she is crazy, we could open with a title card that says "Ten Years Later....In High Garden." Then Bronn can walk out, talking directly to the camera, "Oh hi there! I'm so glad you stopped by. Tonight we are celebrating my first decade as lord of High Garden with some old friends. You never know who might stop by."  [Off camera, a large dog barks.Cut to Tormund and Wolf walking toward the castle entrance.]

But I doubt that will happen. We will probably get a conventional resolution of the big issues. I tend to think that Danerys will die, but I'm not sure how. The genius of this show was how it emphasized the importance of alliances and family. Daeny has no relatives and almost no friends. Her nephew/ lover is not goin to be able to forgive what she did last week. So she's got to go. And her dragon too. I think the best resolution might be to have her commit suicide, but I don't think they have set that up at all.

So I will watch and learn.  I feel now that the show was about three sets of siblings and how each of those eleven characters have made their way through the world. I tend to do a lot of ranking on this website, so I'll close by ranking these 11 characters and give some thoughts on the ending they either got, or the ending I think they deserve to get tonight.

1. Tyrion Lannister. No one played the game better than him, rising from family outcast all the way to The Acting Hand of the King, and later the Hand of a Queen. Along the way he killed his father, had his heart broken and became cellibate for reasons that don't really make sense. Last week he betrayed Cersei in order to hopefully avert a bloodbath and hopefully spare the life of his unborn niece or nephew. Danerys will not let that stand. But dying for that sin is as fitting an ending as any I can think of.

2. Cersei Lannister. Her evolution from drunken cuckold (and cuckolder) to reigning monarch of the seven kingdoms was believable every step of the way.  And then last week she watched her capital burn, helplessly, only to die in the basement of her palace. I read a lot of negative comments about how she deserved a more dramatic death than to be killed by falling debris, but it was believable to me. She put this war in motion with her ambition and the whole thing collapsed on her head.

3. Sansa Stark.  It is painfully obvious that she is the most qualified monarch left on the board.The saddest thing on this show is that Sansa is going to go through eight seasons without being loved by a man. She was brutalized by Joffrey's henchman and raped by Ramsey Bolton (nee Snow). If anyone has earned a happy ending, it is Sansa Stark. She should either take the Iron Throne, serve as Jon's hand or declare the North Independent and let Brienne to commander her forces against any southern opposition.

4. Arya Stark.  My favorite part of last week's episode was when Arya left the Red Keep. The Hound was right-she deserves a live that is about something other than revenge.  Rewatching season two really made me appreciate how good Maisie Williams was even as a girl. Her scenes as Tywin Lannister's cup bearer are among the best of the whole series. I know some people will cringe if she rides off to Storm's End and marries Gendry, but she deserves a life like that. Gendry is a good guy and they have been through some shit together. Gendry also has no clue how to run an estate. Arya can make the Baratheons the new Tyrells-a secret matriarchy of enormous wealth.

5. Jaime Lannister.  Like the above mentioned characters, Jaime goes through an exraordinary evolution in eight seasons.The Kingslayer delayed the destruction of King's Landing by about 20 years but history will just remember him as the guy who impregnated his sister four times. I think he deserved a better death than the one he got, but it's also true that his love of Cersei was the one thing he couldn't ever overcome.

6. Jon Snow.  I didn't start watching this show until after the Red Wedding. But the scene in the second episode where Ned and Jon part ways hooked me for good.  "You are a Stark. You don't have my name but you do have my blood."  Something about that line reminded me of Obi Won telling Luke that Darth Vader killed his father. He was telling the truth, but not the whole truth.  The discovery of that truth will always be one of the great story lines in television history. BUT.....as a character? He's not very complicated. I know we're supposed to get one heroe to root for even if he's dull, but I wish the show runners had allowed Jon to be something other than a do-gooder once in awhile.

7. Rob Stark.  Dave and Dan are getting a lot of shit for this season, but let's not forget that they did a great job with the first three seasons of the show. Their best trick was making viewers believe that The Young Wolf was goin to win the day. In the books Rob Stark doesn't even get a single chapter from his perspective. But Dave and Dan imbued him with some humanity and Richard Madden's chemisty with Oona Chaplin really sold that story line.

8, Bran Stark. The low-key way everyone puts up with this weirdo has made me laugh multiple times in season eight. His telling Euron that he's a good man was cringe worthy but his other scenes have been good. And he was so charming before becoming the Three Eyed Raven.

9. Danerys Targaryen. She might just end up on that Iron Throne that she thinks she's entitled to before the night is over. But as, I said above, her character always felt peripheral to me. Emilia Clarke was not ready for this role when she was cast. It's worth noting that she is supposed to be 14 years old when the action begins, but HBO decided to cast an older actress for the very principled reason that they wanted to show off her breasts, a lot.  Emilia's acting got better as the show went on, but she never sold me on being the breaker of chains and the writing this season did not properly set up her heel turn last week. (There's plenty of foreshadowing of it in the earlier seasons, but they mostly abandoned that as she became an obvious symbol of female strength and human virtue.)

10. Rickon Stark.  Adorable child actor who only got two memorable moments-naming his wolf Shaggy Dog and being killed by an arrow because he didn't run in a zig-zag pattern. That is a very Stark death.

11. Viserys Targaryen. The actor was fine in this part but the character was just a plot device. The most interesting thing about that is the fact that he was the rightful owner of the Iron Throne. And look at what good it did him. Because the show is about politics, not legal niceties.  (Good luck Jon!)