4th Democratic Debate Grades and New Rankings

There were profound events in the world this week. The President of the United States left an ally to be slaughtered by Turkish militias. He did this because his lazy, weak and corrupt.  Tonight's debate should have focused on that, but it did not.

That said, this debate was more substantive than the earlier debates. The biggest headline is that Warren took a lot of flak, as befits her status as the new front-runner. As for how she did, the news is mixed. Overall she did not do great. But there might be a silver lining in this-the folks who did best at attacking her, are pretty far back in the polls. 

As with the previous debates, I'll give a tactical and a strategic grade for each candidate.  And in  day or two I will update my rankings of the candidates.

WINNERS:

1. Amy Klobuchar   Tactical: A  Strategic: A

If you read this blog regularly-and there are at least six of you who do, then you know Klobuchar is my preferred candidate. Tonight she was the only person who mentioned Trump's betrayal of the Kurds  in the first hour of the debate. She also did a good job of pointing out the weaknesses of Warren's policies and campaign.  She needed a big night and she really should get a bounce from it. I don't think it will be enough to get her near the top but I hope it's enough to get her in the next debate.

2. Pete Buttigieg  Tactical:  A-  Strategic A

Solid on all points. An adult and a skilled debater. I am beginning to think he might be ready for this job after all. (And I never thought I would say that.)

3. Bernie Sanders  Tactical:  A- Strategic:  A-

Bernie had one important job tonight-look healthy.  He did that. And he wasn't bad on the substance, given how played out his shtick is.  No harm done to him tonight and he might rebound from a recent dip.

4. Cory Booker   Tactical:  B+   Strategic:  A-

Cory usually plays the voice of reason and he did again tonight. But he never seems to get traction after his strong performances, in part because he usually says something annoying. Tonight he brought up his veganism three times.  That is four times too many.

5  (TIE) Julian Castro and Beto O'Rourke   Tactical: B+  Strategic:  B+

They were fine. But I don't see either of them rocketing up the ranks anytime soon.

7. Andrew Yang  Tactical: B  Strategic: B

He's not a serious candidate, so I don't grade him based on whether he's going to be president. But he made some good points and probably will raise some more money for his future podcast and multi-level marketing empire.

8.  Joe Biden    Tactical: B  Strategic:  C

Joe avoided any huge gaffes, which counts for something but it's impossible to watch him speak for even one minute without thinking about his age.  He gets visibly confused in ways that make me uncomfortable.  I don't know if there is a solution to that.

9. Elizabeth Warren   Tactical:  C+  Strategic:  B-

She looked evasive and even duplicitous in her half-assed explanation/defense of Medicare for All plan. 

10. Kamala Harris  Tactical: B-  Strategic:  C-

She went for some very easy applause line on reproductive choice by saying things that literally everyone on the stage agrees with. But then she really went hard at Elizabeth Warren on the silliest issue possible-banning Donald Trump from Twitter.  That diminishes her already fading candidacy.

11. Tom Steyer:  Tactical:   C  Strategic:  C

The moderators were correct to give him the bare minimum of attention and he did his best to make them not regret that decision.  Some of his answers were delivered competently. He's obviously been rehearsing for this moment. He had a neat thing of starting every answer with a compliment of someone other candidate.  But this is the saddest middle age crisis I've ever been forced to watch on television.  If he wanted to do good with his fortune, he has a ton of options.  This verkhakta campaign ain't one. 

12. Tulsi Gabbard  Tactical:  Incomplete  Strategic: Incomplete

She is loathsome. But I can't grade her fairly because I'm not sure what her objective is. Maybe she wants to be the presidential nominee of the Democratic party. Maybe she wants to build some kind of political movement based on.....God knows what. But she did nothing to dispel rumors/conspiracy thinking that she intends to run as an independent or third party candidate.

I want to state that I was and am firmly opposed to our military invasion of Iraq. But for her to act like Trump's betrayal of the Kurds was a price worth paying for bringing 1,000 soldiers home* is despicable.

*They are not coming home yet. They are going to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, because the Saudi government is renting them from a man who thinks our military is a revenue center and our soldiers are Hessians. 

The President Will Be Probably Be Impeached

I write to record my recent realization that it is likely that Donald Trump will be impeached by the House of Representatives. I believed that the Mueller investigation resulted in enough evidence to warrant an impeachment inquiry, but the House leadership was reluctant to open one. They were probably content to just fight him in an election next november. But then Trump did himself in.

Just one day after Robert Mueller testified before congress, Donald Trump called the president of Ukraine and pressured him to open an investigation of Joe Biden's son.  And when a whistle-blower came forward, Donald Trump acted like it was perfectly normal for a president to use his office to get dirt on a political opponent. 

The dam broke tonight, as evidence by two extraordinary pieces in the Washington Post. 

1. At 9:00 PM Eastern, the posted an Op-Ed by seven freshman Democratic Represenatives. (Reps. Gil Cisneros of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Elaine Luria of Virginia, Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey, Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Abigail Spanberger of Virginia.)  All seven are veterans of the armed forces or America's intelligence services. None of them have been controversial during their eigh months in office. They wrote to say that if the allegationw are true, that Donald Trump must be removed from office.

You can read that here:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/24/seven-freshman-democrats-these-allegations-are-threat-all-we-have-sworn-protect/?outputType=amp

2. At 10: 40 Eastern, three Washington Post reporters broke new details on the Ukranian scandal. They report that President Trump ordered $400 of military aid to Ukraine to be withheld just days before his conversation with Ukraine's president. 

You can read that here:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/trump-ordered-hold-on-military-aid-days-before-calling-ukrainian-president-officials-say/2019/09/23/df93a6ca-de38-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html?fbclid=IwAR148xEQ_O-SRw9Tjuz101x5XXEEzOzCVwaqPodbMjANnroAeQIY-JPKjvM

This is naked corruption. If the allegations are proven, he must be removed from office. The House probably still did not want to go down this road, but he has given them no choice.  

It's now just after midnight on the east coast. I think the next few days will be massive news days. We will probably learn more about the whistle blower complaint. I expect the house to move to officially open an inquiry and for events to unfold quickly.

Three hours ago I would have said that Trump was going to avoid an impeachment process. I no longer believe that. I think hearings will be held, articles drafted and if I had to be right now, I would say that a majority of the house will vote to impeach him.

After that, things move to the senate. There is almost no indication that any Republicans are ready to vote to convict him, although Mitt Romney has made enough half-hearted statements of concern to draw the president's ire.

Donald Trump got away with solicitiing foreign interference in his first presidential election.  Just one day after Robert Mueller testified to the contents of his report, Donald Trump began asking for that interference from a different country.  But this time he was president. And this time he got caught.  It now appears that there will be a meaningful attempt to get justice for this High Crime and Misdemeanor.

Third Democratic Debate Grades

The nine most serious candidates for the Democratic nomination were finally on the stage tonight. So was Andrew Yang.  Here are my thoughts on how they all did. I give each candidate separate tactical and strategic grades.  I think it's construct to evaluate how well they performed tonight in the immediate sense but more importantly whether or not that performance will actually improve their chance to be the nominee. 

1.  Elizabeth Warren  Tactical: A+ Strategic: A.

Warren is probably the smartest person in this field. And tonight she was definitely the best prepared. She knew that she would get plenty of screen time, so she didn't fight for more. She seemed to know that most of the flak would be directed at Joe Biden. She also knows that most Democratic primary voters do not like when a candidate goes hard at another Democrat. So Warren answered her questions and she answered them well. But she didn't go for cheap applause lines and she didn't offend anyone. This is exactly how a front-runner should perform.

2. Pete Buttigieg  Tactical: A, Strategic:  A

He is both young and intelligent. He obviously has the temperament for this job and a pretty good feeling for where both the Democratic base and the general election persuadable voters are, politically.  He is still a long shot to be the nominee because his resume is too short and I don't think the left wing will embrace him. But he did great tonight.

3.  Cory Booker:  Tactical A, Strategic: A-

I do not like Senator Booker. I think he is a phony. But he was great tonight. He was charming and witty without seeming too rehearsed. I do no think he will shoot up in the polls, but he helped himself as much as possible tonight. 

4.  Joe Biden  Tactical:  A-, Strategic: A-

Biden was better prepared tonight and he excelled in the first half of the debate. His team obviously told him to avoid using names and to not get bogged down in details. But his presence was pretty good and he conveyed his message well. Of course in the last 45 minutes or so he had a few of his usual slips. (He even talked about 'record players' during a question about education reform.)  But I don't think he said anything that will gain traction in the media so he probably still stays at the front of this field for now.

5.  Amy Klobuchar  Tactical:  A-, Strategic:  B+

Her substance was very good.  Like Buttigieg, she has views that are sensible and popular generally. But she's not charismatic on television and I would be surprised if she gets much of a bump out of tonight's performance. That's too bad because she would make an excellent president and is the perfect antidote to Trumpism.

6.  Kamala Harris  Tactical B+, Strategic: B+

She was comfortable and relaxed. I am inclined to like her, so that played well with me. Her plan was obviously to make the night about bashing Trump and she got a couple good lines off, but I don't think that made her stand out particularly.  She does deserve credit for improving on the subject of criminal justice reform. 

7. Beto O'Rourke  Tactical:  B+, Strategic: B

Beto is handsome and he can articulate a talking point well.  Perhaps the most telling moments tonight was that he was complimented so frequently by other candidates on the stage.  They know he is popular in Texas. They also know he's not much of a threat to become the nominee.  But he did not cost himself any votes tonight.

8.  Bernie Sanders  Tactical:  C+, Strategic: C

I have a friend who saw Flock of Seagulls in Concert about 20 years ago.  They played "I Run"...twice. Because what the hell else do you want to hear Flock of Seagulls play?  Bernie too only has one hit and he plays it as often as the crowd will let him. But his team failed him by not giving him cough drops before the debate. He is mailing it in now.

9.  Julian Castro     Tactical: C, Strategic: D

He sucked. And he took a shot at Biden's age. That probably cost him an ambassadorship. 

10. Andrew Yang  Tactical:  D, Strategic:  Not Applicable.

This clown is not running to be president. He is running to be a celebrity. And he actually started the night by offering a bribe to voters.  That gimmick will probably get him some email addresses and exactly 10 votes.  But he really showed his hand tonight. He is not running to be president. He is not running to win a cabinet spot or to be the ambassador to Aruba. He is running to be some combination of Joe Rogan and Tony Robbins.  Fuck him.

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.