USA Politics

The deadline to qualify for the third democratic debates is tonight at midnight and so far it looks like “only” 10 candidates qualify. This is good news because now we will be guaranteed all the front runners on one stage and the 1%ers won’t be stealing oxygen. We still have to deal with a large debate stage though.

Fortunately it’s a pretty good mix. I’m glad to see Yang still in it, even if he has no chance. Booker, Castro, and Klobuchar are all worthy dark horse candidates with something to bring to the table. Hopefully we see a wave of dropouts after this, although the weird rules make it so that candidates who miss this debate may qualify for the October debate.

Edit: And gillibrand is out. Damn, I was going to predict she’d be first but wanted to wait until the deadline officially passed. Didn’t think it’d be this quick. Her campaign was definitely the most disastrous, considering her high profile status as a NY senator.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jer
Gillibrand was someone I thought had a real chance until she actually ran. Then it turns out that she had a much smaller national profile than I thought.

This debate should be interesting. However I think the DNC should tighten the requirements for the 5th debate.
 
I may have said so on here even, but Gilibrand was an early favorite of mine. I think her biggest problem is that she is a follower rather than a leader on almost every policy. It reeks of inauthenticity and political calculus, which is really unpopular right now. I reckon she also personifies what a lot of people see as the stereotypical “annoying middle aged white woman.”

I too hope the debate requirements are tightened. Nobody who couldn’t qualify for the next debate shouldn’t be able to qualify for the one after (Gillibrand was actually one of the few for whom this was a possibility) and they should shoot for closer to 5-6 candidates.

I think the voting starts in February. Not every state votes at the same time so the process will be a few months.
 
Tulsi never stood a chance. She could hang on for the October debate, but at some point she’s going to have to prepare for re-election and a possible primary for her house seat.
 
Plus, I’d prefer to have at least one major party candidate in the general election who doesn’t have Vladimir Putin’s endorsement...
 
Putin’s endorsement doesn’t matter if the candidate’s stances are better than everyone else’s.
 
For what it’s worth, I believe Obama was the Putin endorsed candidate in 2012. Obviously Tulsi’s Russian ties are much more problematic, but there’s an element of non interventional candidates being better for Russia’s interests.
 
I've been having a good chuckle at Trump's latest gaffe which has turned into something way sillier than it should have. It's basically a hurricane in a tea cup, but last Saturday he tweeted that various states, including Alabama, would be hit by Hurricane Dorian. However, the most up to date forecasts from NOAA did not suggest that Dorian would affect Alabama. NOAA repeatedly tweeted clarification that Alabama would not be affected by Dorian, but Trump either ignored or did not know bout these tweets and continued to assert to reporters that Alabama would be affected.

After the media began to criticize him for speaking a load of shit, he tweeted this graphic from the NHC as proof that Dorian was forecast to enter Alabama:

10362

However, this graphic shows possible tracks of the storm as calculated by various different centres, but the NHC projection stays east of Florida and does not go near Alabama. The disclaimer at the bottom even says "If anything on this graphic causes confusion, please ignore the entire product" - advice obviously ignored by Trump as he knows more about hurricanes than anyone.

There's also this video where he presents a big version of the official NHC track and cone of Dorian. Note the black line extending the cone to the west over Alabama - that's not in the official graphic! Trump, or one of his aides, drew the extension on with a sharpie so he could tell everyone he was right. It turns out that altering official weather maps produced by NOAA is illegal, so the Dems really have him now!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1169300628000124929

There was absolutely no need for this. He could have just admitted he was wrong straight away by saying "Our great hurricane experts at NOAA have told me that Dorian will not affect the Great State of Alabama after all! They do such a great job, very smart people. #MAGA" and this nonsense would never have occurred. But of course he can't admit he's wrong. Fucking idiot.

Fake News CNN: have made a very handy timeline of the Dorian Debacle: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/06/...f-trumps-alabama-dorian-map-fiasco/index.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jer
It's not just a gaffe, it's a crime. This is my favorite Trump scandal so far I think, just because of how ridiculously Trumpy it is. He slipped up and made minor mistake, and instead of being a grown up and correcting the mistake he doubles down and breaks the law in the process. Incredible.

Third debate is tomorrow, which is probably the most important in terms of people actually paying attention and starting to make up their minds with regards to a favorite candidate. It's also only one night with ten candidates. The person to watch is Warren. She's been having a great last few weeks and is finally going to get to share the stage with Biden. If she has another good night and Biden has another mediocre night, she could start to lead. This will also be a do or die moment for lower polling candidates, and even to some extent Kamala Harris and definitely Mayor Pete. Expect lots of manufactured soundbite moments.
 
What a relief to have people like DeBlasio, Williamson, and Bullock out of there. We still got a little fringe flavor from Yang, but not in an annoying way. I still can’t wait to get O’Rourke and Castro out of the picture, though.

My thoughts:
  • O’Rourke had an OK moment talking about the El Paso shooting, but he’s still the ultimate lightweight, repeatedly trying and failing to channel JFK. And the video he just provided where he outright says he’s going to take people’s guns away just made him nationally unelectable. He can’t disappear fast enough, IMO.
  • Castro looked mean and desperate trying to rake Biden over the coals for supposedly contradicting himself, and couching it in a way that suggested Biden was senile. Then he had the gall to pretend that that wasn’t what he was doing. Butting in on Buttigieg to yell about it being an election also made Castro look angry and small. He needs to take a hike.
  • Harris is starting to get smarmy and condescending, and her attempts to turn away from her opponents and go directly at Trump as if she were the frontrunner look presumptuous and ring hollow. Her delivery also comes off as both rehearsed and unpolished, which isn’t a good combo. And she’s been all over the map on health care, which is the Democrats’ #1 issue. I don’t understand the interest in her, frankly.
  • Klobuchar didn’t really stand out enough to make a dent, but I still think she has a narrow window open to her if Biden implodes and the party decides to lean moderate in the end.
  • I like the fact that Yang is still hanging in there, and I enjoy having his ideas in the mix. He won’t go the distance, but I hope he sticks around for a while yet.
  • Booker had a good night. I won’t ever let him off the hook for that Spartacus bullshit, but he probably looked as credible as he’s ever looked at this debate.
  • Buttigieg again came off as the polished adult in the room. Though he hasn’t blown up in the polls yet, he’s definitely a serious contender.
  • Sanders was a bit weaker in this debate than in the previous one, but his vigorous defense of the cost of his health care plan vs. Biden’s misleading criticisms and the moderator’s gotcha questioning about raising taxes was good, and his ringing the bell again about his credibility in standing up to corporate fat cats was also good.
  • Warren also had a weaker night than in the last debate, but remained solid overall. She and Sanders have a lot of overlap in their positions and their credibility on issues, so it’s got to be tough to carve out space without them eventually going after each other.
  • Biden looked less sleepy than in the last couple of debates, but he still came off as really scattered. While Castro’s digs at him were over the top, he did have a bit of a point. If Biden gets the nomination and keeps mixing up his thoughts, calling people by the wrong title, and throwing out random word salad as if he’s making a coherent point, Trump will crush him. If Biden can’t tighten up his game ASAP, then the party needs to move on to greener pastures. The way he is right now, he’s a huge liability.
I would be most comfortable with Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg, or Klobuchar at this point. Of those four, I think Trump would have the easiest time making fun of Warren, beating the Pocahontas meme to death. Trump would try to make fun of Sanders as being crazy, but Sanders could go toe to toe with him in angry grandpa mode and it would be interesting to watch. And I don’t know what Trump would be able to do with Buttigieg or Klobuchar — Buttigieg has an obvious counter for any gay stereotypes Trump might try to drill home (not a wimp because he’s a veteran and Trump’s a draft dodger, not amoral because he’s religious and monogamous and Trump’s not, etc.), and Klobuchar doesn’t really have anything major to latch onto for Trump to make fun of.
 
Also, why the hell is Jorge Ramos a moderator at so many debates? The guy is horribly biased and flagrantly non-journalistic, and constantly asks candidates leading questions about how many people they’ll stop deporting and what immigration violations they’ll rush to decriminalize first. It’s outrageous, and it doesn’t do the party any favors, other than facilitating blatant pandering to the Latino community.
 
Jer said:
Biden looked less sleepy than in the last couple of debates, but he still came off as really scattered.
Click to expand...
The BBC put together a compilation of each candidates highlights: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-49670326/democratic-debate-who-had-the-best-one-liner

The "record player" nonsense from Joe Biden is super awkward. What the hell was he even talking about? Trump will be laughing all the way to a second term and beyond if Biden gets the Democrat's nomination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top