Fourth 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate: Winners and Losers

I thought the fourth 2020 Democratic presidential debate, just concluded on CNN, had far more winners and far fewer losers than in any of the previous debates.  Meaning: just about everyone did well.

Among the highlights:

• Biden, who started off a little less than totally coherent in his phrasing - as he often does - did far better in the second half of the debate, and distinguished himself with powerful statements on the need to hit the ground running as President, and his copious experience on many issues ranging from foreign policy to gun control.  He also offered a good critique of Warren's proposals lacking specifics of how they'd be financed.
• Warren gave a strong defense of her progressive policies, and, on the process of campaigning, I was glad to hear her say (with a bit of sarcasm) that "selfies must be the new measure of democracy" - which is almost precisely the point I made after her four+ hours of selfies to all who wanted them after a rally and talk in New York last month (see my McLuhan in an Age of Social Media). 
• Bernie also gave a strong defense of his policies, very similar to Warren's, and he also was almost charming in some of his banter with other candidates.
• Buttigieg gave an excellent defense of his proposal to expand the Supreme Court, and/or in some way to get out of the cut-throat politicization of the Court that currently grips this country.  On the other hand, I though he was unnecessarily aggressive in challenging Beto on Beto's proposal to have a mandatory buy-back of all assault weapons in the U. S. (which I support).
• I thought Beto, in general, was the most effective he's been in the debates so far, finding a good balance between passion and logic in his presentations, and offering an excellent, vivid example of working with a Republican (whom he got to know sharing a car ride from Texas to Washington, DC).
• Harris gave one of the best arguments I've ever heard on the urgency of women having complete control over their bodies.
• Klobuchar was also more effective than she's been in the past, and offered a believable mix of pragmatism and idealism in addressing our myriad problems.
• Even Andrew Yang made some good sense tonight, pointing out that breaking up monopolies - splitting of behemoths like Amazon - is using an old solution to the new problems of the 21st century.   On this one point, I agree with Yang not Warren.
• Tom Steyer the billionaire made his debate debut tonight.  He didn't get much time, but gets points from me in siding with Bernie and Warren that billionaires should be taxed far more than they are currently.
• Booker had the second best example of a social relationship with a surprising person: Booker the vegan had dinner with the "meat eating" Texan Ted Cruz.  He also was good in saying that women are entitled to control their own bodies, because that's a right intrinsic to all people. 
• Castro was typically lucid and reasonable, especially his observation that "police violence is also gun violence, and we need to address that".  I don't know why he isn't doing better in the polls, but this may well be the last time we'll see him on the debate stage.

That leaves just one candidate - Gabbard - for whom I can't think of anything positive worth noting in her debate performance.  Gabbard is wrong on so much many issues - especially foreign policy, and she's friends with Trey Gowdy? - that I'd find it hard to vote for her, unless somehow she were the Democrat running against Trump.

Third 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate: Winners and Losers

The third 2020 Democratic Presidential debate just concluded in Houston on ABC-TV.  It was longer the first four - nearly three hours - and was just one debate, of the ten leading candidates, rather than the two debates of ten each, one day after the other, which is the way the Democratic debates proceeded in June and July.  I thought tonight's debate was also better.

Joe Biden, in his quiet way,  had a very strong and successful night.  He was excellent on a variety of topics, including health care.  Contrary to Castro's calling out Biden for forgetting that Biden just said that Biden's health care plan required people to "opt in," Biden did say that people who couldn't afford any health care would be automatically enrolled.  (More on Castro below, who owes Biden an apology.)  Biden was also strong on both defending Obama's immigration policy and saying, also, that times have changed - I think that's a fair and accurate appraisal.  Biden was also Presidential in the public appreciation he expressed to Beto about his comforting the survivors of the El Paso shooting. And Biden's closing response about the personal tragedies in his life and how those gave him purpose rang deep and true.

Amy Klobuchar also had a good night.   She consistently was a unifying voice, and was 100% on target in her attack on Mitch McConnell.   It's important but easy enough to say Trump is a disgrace to his office.  But McConnell's freezing of the Senate on everything from gun control to immigration is also a crucial piece of why our country is in such difficult straits.  Beto O'Rourke was especially good on gun control and his insistence on taking away the most dangerous guns that are out there in so many hands.  And Kamala Harris had an effective night, with her blend of social sensitivity and prosecutorial zeal directed at Trump.

Elizabeth Warren was ok, and didn't get enough time.   Cory Booker did a little better than in his previous two debates, but loses points for saying "dagnabbit".   Pete Buttigieg were good but didn't really break any new ground.

And then it went seriously downhill.  Bernie seemed haggard and haranguing, and also said nothing new.   Yang was irrelevant.  And, I truly think Castro talked himself out of Presidential contention with his ill-informed and graceless attack on Biden.

I'll see you back here after the next debate.

See also First 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate, Part 1 of 2: Winners and Losers ...   First 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate, Part 2 of 2: Winners and Losers ... Second 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate, Part 1 of 2: Winners and Losers ... Second Democratic Presidential Debate, Part 2 of 2: Winners and Losers

Ejection of Breitbart Reporter from Beto Speech Is Inconsistent with Democracy

I just saw the news that a Breitbart reporter, Joel B. Pollak, who actually is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News, was ejected, apparently for no valid reason (he wasn't being disruptive, his mere presence was deemed as such) from a Beto O'Rourke speech at Benedict College.

Before I tell you why I think that was such a bad move, let me make two things clear:

1. I intensely disagree with Breitbart's political views.  The last and only time I voted Republican was for John Linsday for NYC Mayor in 1969 (because he was an early opponent of the Vietnam War).  He won, and two years later became a Democrat.

2.  I don't think what Beto's people did is literally a violation of the First Amendment.  A political candidate not currently in office is not a member of Congress ("Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press") or of any government (prohibited from abridging speech by the extension of the First Amendment in the Fourteenth Amendment).

But, the removal of any reporter on account of his or her political views is grievously in violation of the spirit of the First Amendment, and flies in the face of what the First Amendment is designed to protect, which is the public's right to information and opinions about people in office and people running for office.  How else can a democracy work, if we're not as thoroughly informed as possible, meaning exposed to the entire gamut of political views and actions?

Trump's daily denunciation of the press he finds unwelcome as fake news echos Hitler's attack on the press in 1930s Germany as the Lügenpresse or the lying press.  Trump's characterization of the press critical of him as "enemies of the people" picks up a favorite phrase of Stalin.  Further, Trump not only speaks these epithets, but acts upon them, recently revoking CNN political correspondent Brian Karem's press pass after an exchange between Karem and Trump supporter Sebastian Gorka.  Karem has taken this to court. (The White House backed down last year after taking away CNN correspondent Jim Acosta's pass, and Acosta filed suit.  Acosta and CNN were lambasted as "fake news" by Trump even back when he was President-elect, in January 2017.) 

In tossing out Pollak, Beto's campaign is joining Trump in his contempt for the press, and by extension the American people, which I assume is the last thing that Beto wants to do.  People on Twitter, typically seeking to justify any attack on the right, have sought to explain what happened to Pollak by saying he isn't really a reporter and Breitbart not a legitimate source of news.  That, alas, is a traditional fascist tactic, used to justify suppression and even killing of human beings by arguing that the victims are not fully or really human.

Beto O'Rourke and his campaign can do better than emulating Trump and his fascist tactics.  I hope they see the light and apologize to Pollak.  It would amount to an apology to our democracy.

First 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate, Part 1 of 2: Winners and Losers

I thought the first Democratic debate - the first of two - was excellent and inspiring.  Here are my thoughts on the winners and losers:

There were no outright gaffs by anyone - the closest was Ryan saying the Taliban were responsible for 9/11 (the Taliban did support Al Quaeda) - so I'll share what I thought were the strongest moments.  If I don't mention someone, that means in my opinion she or he did not do very well.   The following is in descending order of what I thought were the best performances:

I thought De Blasio made the greatest number of excellent points, beginning with his opening statement on the soul of the Democratic Party.  He followed with a powerful denunciation of the greed of health-insurance companies, and the need to replace them with Medicare for all.  He later  made the astute point that Americans have lost their jobs not due to immigrants but the actions of big corporations.  He was also eloquent on the need to do more about police victimization of minorities, and on the need for Congressional approval of U.S. military actions.  And I liked his answer on the biggest threat to the U.S.: Russia and its interference with our elections.  (Given the number of times that the 2-hour MSNBC broadcast was interrupted by blank screens, I wonder if the Russians weren't hacking some of MSNBC's computers.)   All in all, I thought De Blasio established himself tonight as a passionate and articulate candidate.  Given his low standing in the polls, his performance was the biggest surprise.  As someone who works in NYC, and lives close by, I'm happy to see this.

Booker was excellent, too.  He was right on about health-care insurers profiteering, and on ICE and their Nazi tactics (my word not his).  I also liked his vision of the Democrats not only winning the Presidency but both Houses of Congress in the next election.  And it was good to hear him talk about the need to protect LGBQT communities.

Warren started out great on the need for healthcare for all, and for Roe vs. Wade to be enacted by Congress into Federal law.  But she wasn't strong enough on gun control, and was silent or didn't say enough on some major issues, including immigration.  Given that she is pretty high up in the polls, her performance was not as good as expected.

Klobuchar, on the other hand, was better than expected.   I liked her brief for a sane foreign policy, and she was excellent on kids leading the charge for better gun control.   I think she came out a lot better than she went in on this debate.

Castro was likable and very effective on ending the criminalization of illegal immigrants (those violations should be civil offenses).  And he was 100% right when he said the tragic drownings of a father and daughter in the Rio Grande today should not only break our hearts but "piss us all off".  I think his performance tonight made him much more of a contender.

And ... that's it.  No one else made much of an impression, including Beto O'Rourke, whose weak performance tonight might be the effective end of his campaign.

See you here tomorrow after Part 2.

See also First 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate, Part 2 of 2: Winners and Losers