Well, if last week’s debate is an indication, tonight should be a tense, conflict-ridden affair that includes attacks on character as well as policy. Let’s watch it together with an eye toward the common good, not just the horserace (though the two are connected, of course!).
Here’s what I’m looking for tonight:
Is the focus on Bloomberg as it was last week? Are attcks concentrated on Bernie now that he’s the clear frontrunner? Or, do we see a team-up on Biden to try and weaken him and knock him out of the race, even if that gives Bernie a pass ahead of SC and Super Tuesday? I personally doubt Bloomberg will be as much of a focus as last week, but I honestly don’t know whether there will be more focus on Sanders or Biden. Perhaps we’ll have a more scatter shot debate, but there are only so many opportunities to really throw a punch that can land and make a lasting impact. Choices have to be made.
Speaking of, Steyer’s back on the stage tonight. How disruptive is he in this debate? Will he step on what could be potent lines of attack from, say, Warren? Does he receive some real testing given the fact he’s polling so well in South Carolina, or does he continue to skate by because a) the other candidates have accepted and want to continue to receive his money b) he’s not taken seriously as a candidate?
Do any of the candidates give an indication they are thinking about dropping out after SC? Or, and we shouldn’t count this out, is there a chance a poor performance in this debate would lead one of the candidates to drop out before South Carolina? How much pressure is placed on Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Warren? Do they say anything about the future of their candidacies that sets up a kind of ultimatum?
I think we’ll have plenty to talk about this evening.
Warren has to do what can get through, but one risk of going so strongly and personally against Bloomberg is because it risks making her principled message about corporate greed a personal vendetta.
Earlier, Bloomberg said that the government spends $4 trillion, but collects $3 trillion per year in taxes. Actually, that sounds like a good deal for the American people. We get to keep an extra $1 trillion.
The health care debate is so tedious! I hate this 'pay for it' discussion. We're already spending the money in the private sector. It doesn't cost an additional $XX trillion to shift it to the private sector.
I fully believe Steyer's best line of attack is to go after Bloomberg. Comparing their records as "billionaires" who have had very different approaches over the last ten years will be a way to highlight his policies, attack a rival, and appear as a feisty enough candidate to win. I don't know that it would work, but I think that's the best bet.
Steyer coming back is interesting. He actually seems like a decent person, but I'm still not sure why he's running. He likes to say he can beat Trump on the economy, but hasn't explained why or how he can beat Trump on the economy.
After Yang dropped out, I don't really know who to support. Warren might have been my number 2. She seems like she's actually interested in solving problems and she's definitely done a lot of research on economics. But I really don't know what her path to the nomination is anymore.
If Bernie kept all the exact same policies, but just stopped saying the word socialism he'd have a much better chance.
Melissa (or Michael!), where would you start with studying policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? I'm relatively familiar with the history and the generic disagreement, but I'm not sure how to move beyond talking points and actually ask the question of: what can work, how can it work, etc
Warren plays like she's not strategic politically, but my goodness has she been strategic in last debate and in this opening comment tonight.
Biden has just been on the top of his game tonight
Warren has to do what can get through, but one risk of going so strongly and personally against Bloomberg is because it risks making her principled message about corporate greed a personal vendetta.
Let's see if Warren tries to jump in early here with a strong punch since it worked so well for her last time
Earlier, Bloomberg said that the government spends $4 trillion, but collects $3 trillion per year in taxes. Actually, that sounds like a good deal for the American people. We get to keep an extra $1 trillion.
Bloomberg just said he bought politicians.
The health care debate is so tedious! I hate this 'pay for it' discussion. We're already spending the money in the private sector. It doesn't cost an additional $XX trillion to shift it to the private sector.
*public sector
I fully believe Steyer's best line of attack is to go after Bloomberg. Comparing their records as "billionaires" who have had very different approaches over the last ten years will be a way to highlight his policies, attack a rival, and appear as a feisty enough candidate to win. I don't know that it would work, but I think that's the best bet.
smart
Steyer coming back is interesting. He actually seems like a decent person, but I'm still not sure why he's running. He likes to say he can beat Trump on the economy, but hasn't explained why or how he can beat Trump on the economy.
After Yang dropped out, I don't really know who to support. Warren might have been my number 2. She seems like she's actually interested in solving problems and she's definitely done a lot of research on economics. But I really don't know what her path to the nomination is anymore.
If Bernie kept all the exact same policies, but just stopped saying the word socialism he'd have a much better chance.
To be fair, he's not really bringing up the word socialism too much on his own
True. I wish he would distance himself from it.
"It matters if you can actually get things done." -Sen. Klobuchar
Biden's oppo is on point tonight
Really strong start for Biden
That "worked like the devil" comment is not playing well on my twitter feed but we all know that means nothing
it really doesn't
Melissa (or Michael!), where would you start with studying policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? I'm relatively familiar with the history and the generic disagreement, but I'm not sure how to move beyond talking points and actually ask the question of: what can work, how can it work, etc
What do you think about ending the filibuster? I'm starting to think it needs to go.
I think Mitch McConnell's absolute abuse of it might make scrapping it inevitable, but I think it's a mistake
This crowd seems to be really, REALLY fired up about Bloomberg.
they want that money
Legit (and probably naive) question: is this, like, a common practice in debates?
I'm just joking...though the audience does appear stacked. Bloomberg's campaign has already come out and said they did not pay folks to attend.
I read the tickets were somewhat expensive though