The Democratic Presidential Debates

benjs · October 2019

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

Hi! said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Hi! said:

Still hoping for a dark horse to break through. Steyer, Bennet, Klobachar, that dude from Montana.

I like Steyer and Klobuchar. Not sure either can go toe to toe with the Bully in Chief. At least they dont want insurance mandates for the entire country. That's a sure fire way to lose to trump (ahem Liz, time to wake up).

No doubt. Warren will loose the general in my opinion.

I used to think that, but her focus is damn impressive, she's incredibly smart, and I think trying to mitigate her progressivism by asserting how she knows of the difficulties but has plans to make it happen, has been a good strategy for her. The polls reflect that. She's also a beacon of stability, which Biden no longer is now that Trump had his way with him.

So ... Trump had his way with Biden. But you don't think if Warren gets the nomination that Trump will do anything?

It's not a reason to say she has no shot...but to say she is a beacon of stability and Joe is not due to trumps attacks is being a little short-sighted. The attacks will come. And some will be right on. And others will be sensationalist crap....but they will hurt.

Oh, I agree they'll come. They'll come regardless of who the nominee is, because going low is the only game Trump knows how to play. I think she's got the poise and tact to fight them, and I don't think Biden has shown that agility.

But when they accuse the dem of being a socialist, that attack will stick to Warren because she supports single payer. Forcing 100 million off their insurance will not get 270 electoral votes, even if trump is weakened by Ukraine and Syria

Warren's response to this is weak. A moderate can deny the socialist attack, she cant. She is also significantly untested. The only serious attack she had to handle was her dna test and that did not work out for her.

Someone needs to push back hard on her at the debate. Be rude because we know trump will be rude. Bernie took it easy on Hillary last time (except for the Wall St $ issue) and that eventually hurt the dems against trump as hillary was virtually untested.

That's my biggest fear about Warren currently.

I agree on the socialism topic - she's going to have to find the way to sell that or adapt.

On "untested", look at the White House today.

On pushback, I fully agree. Her ability to come out of a rough debate needs to be exposed so that people can become more comfortable with the idea that she could take Trump in a debate setting. Never having been attacked, people will likely, and unfortunately, stick with traditional gender bias and assume she'll be weak.

Lerxst1992 · October 2019

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

Hi! said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Hi! said:

Still hoping for a dark horse to break through. Steyer, Bennet, Klobachar, that dude from Montana.

I like Steyer and Klobuchar. Not sure either can go toe to toe with the Bully in Chief. At least they dont want insurance mandates for the entire country. That's a sure fire way to lose to trump (ahem Liz, time to wake up).

No doubt. Warren will loose the general in my opinion.

I used to think that, but her focus is damn impressive, she's incredibly smart, and I think trying to mitigate her progressivism by asserting how she knows of the difficulties but has plans to make it happen, has been a good strategy for her. The polls reflect that. She's also a beacon of stability, which Biden no longer is now that Trump had his way with him.

So ... Trump had his way with Biden. But you don't think if Warren gets the nomination that Trump will do anything?

It's not a reason to say she has no shot...but to say she is a beacon of stability and Joe is not due to trumps attacks is being a little short-sighted. The attacks will come. And some will be right on. And others will be sensationalist crap....but they will hurt.

Oh, I agree they'll come. They'll come regardless of who the nominee is, because going low is the only game Trump knows how to play. I think she's got the poise and tact to fight them, and I don't think Biden has shown that agility.

But when they accuse the dem of being a socialist, that attack will stick to Warren because she supports single payer. Forcing 100 million off their insurance will not get 270 electoral votes, even if trump is weakened by Ukraine and Syria

Warren's response to this is weak. A moderate can deny the socialist attack, she cant. She is also significantly untested. The only serious attack she had to handle was her dna test and that did not work out for her.

Someone needs to push back hard on her at the debate. Be rude because we know trump will be rude. Bernie took it easy on Hillary last time (except for the Wall St $ issue) and that eventually hurt the dems against trump as hillary was virtually untested.

That's my biggest fear about Warren currently.

I agree on the socialism topic - she's going to have to find the way to sell that or adapt.

On "untested", look at the White House today.

On pushback, I fully agree. Her ability to come out of a rough debate needs to be exposed so that people can become more comfortable with the idea that she could take Trump in a debate setting. Never having been attacked, people will likely, and unfortunately, stick with traditional gender bias and assume she'll be weak.

The only test I've seen her endure was the dna test. She picked the battle field on that on and got humiliated by trump.

IMO her gender helped her so far against the dems. No one is willing to spill blood against her. So far.

JimmyV · October 2019

Warren beat a popular incumbent in Scott Brown to reach the Senate. Yes, a Democrat in Massachusetts should win that race, but it's incorrect to think she faced no challenge.

I personally think she would kick Trump's ass. Both in the debates and in November. Anyone waffling between Trump and Warren, after all this, is deep down a likely Trump voter. Dems don't win by trying to court them.

Lerxst1992 · October 2019

JimmyV said:

Warren beat a popular incumbent in Scott Brown to reach the Senate. Yes, a Democrat in Massachusetts should win that race, but it's incorrect to think she faced no challenge.

I personally think she would kick Trump's ass. Both in the debates and in November. Anyone waffling between Trump and Warren, after all this, is deep down a likely Trump voter. Dems don't win by trying to court them.

I think 2016 proved this wrong. The blue states will support Warren but we need the swing states. Iowa is a perfect example. They vote democrat sometimes, obama twice, but Hillary lost by a solid margin and I dont see M4A rallying Democrats to victory there.

Hi! · October 2019

JimmyV said:

Warren beat a popular incumbent in Scott Brown to reach the Senate. Yes, a Democrat in Massachusetts should win that race, but it's incorrect to think she faced no challenge.

I personally think she would kick Trump's ass. Both in the debates and in November. Anyone waffling between Trump and Warren, after all this, is deep down a likely Trump voter. Dems don't win by trying to court them.

I’ve been thinking about this lately and I may be changing my mind in that it may be more important for dems to drive their base and voters to the polls than it is for dems to try and convince a waffler to the polls. Problem is, Warren is risking pushing away blue dogs, older dem voters, the “blue wall” away with MFA. IDK .
The fact of the matter is, we gonna have to get blacks to come out and vote like they did for Obama.

JimmyV · October 2019

Lerxst1992 said:

JimmyV said:

Warren beat a popular incumbent in Scott Brown to reach the Senate. Yes, a Democrat in Massachusetts should win that race, but it's incorrect to think she faced no challenge.

I personally think she would kick Trump's ass. Both in the debates and in November. Anyone waffling between Trump and Warren, after all this, is deep down a likely Trump voter. Dems don't win by trying to court them.

I think 2016 proved this wrong. The blue states will support Warren but we need the swing states. Iowa is a perfect example. They vote democrat sometimes, obama twice, but Hillary lost by a solid margin and I dont see M4A rallying Democrats to victory there.

I think 2016 proved it true. Clinton didn't lose because she strayed too far left. Her campaign fully expected Republican women to defect to her in droves. It was a catastrophic mistake.

mickeyrat · October 2019

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

Hi! said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Hi! said:

Still hoping for a dark horse to break through. Steyer, Bennet, Klobachar, that dude from Montana.

I like Steyer and Klobuchar. Not sure either can go toe to toe with the Bully in Chief. At least they dont want insurance mandates for the entire country. That's a sure fire way to lose to trump (ahem Liz, time to wake up).

No doubt. Warren will loose the general in my opinion.

I used to think that, but her focus is damn impressive, she's incredibly smart, and I think trying to mitigate her progressivism by asserting how she knows of the difficulties but has plans to make it happen, has been a good strategy for her. The polls reflect that. She's also a beacon of stability, which Biden no longer is now that Trump had his way with him.

So ... Trump had his way with Biden. But you don't think if Warren gets the nomination that Trump will do anything?

It's not a reason to say she has no shot...but to say she is a beacon of stability and Joe is not due to trumps attacks is being a little short-sighted. The attacks will come. And some will be right on. And others will be sensationalist crap....but they will hurt.

Oh, I agree they'll come. They'll come regardless of who the nominee is, because going low is the only game Trump knows how to play. I think she's got the poise and tact to fight them, and I don't think Biden has shown that agility.

But when they accuse the dem of being a socialist, that attack will stick to Warren because she supports single payer. Forcing 100 million off their insurance will not get 270 electoral votes, even if trump is weakened by Ukraine and Syria

Warren's response to this is weak. A moderate can deny the socialist attack, she cant. She is also significantly untested. The only serious attack she had to handle was her dna test and that did not work out for her.

Someone needs to push back hard on her at the debate. Be rude because we know trump will be rude. Bernie took it easy on Hillary last time (except for the Wall St $ issue) and that eventually hurt the dems against trump as hillary was virtually untested.

That's my biggest fear about Warren currently.

I agree on the socialism topic - she's going to have to find the way to sell that or adapt.

On "untested", look at the White House today.

On pushback, I fully agree. Her ability to come out of a rough debate needs to be exposed so that people can become more comfortable with the idea that she could take Trump in a debate setting. Never having been attacked, people will likely, and unfortunately, stick with traditional gender bias and assume she'll be weak.

The only test I've seen her endure was the dna test. She picked the battle field on that on and got humiliated by trump.

IMO her gender helped her so far against the dems. No one is willing to spill blood against her. So far.

humiliated by trump is the litmus test?

she is still standing and at or near the front of the dem field. so how has that humiliation hurt her exactly?

benjs · October 2019

JimmyV said:

Warren beat a popular incumbent in Scott Brown to reach the Senate. Yes, a Democrat in Massachusetts should win that race, but it's incorrect to think she faced no challenge.

I personally think she would kick Trump's ass. Both in the debates and in November. Anyone waffling between Trump and Warren, after all this, is deep down a likely Trump voter. Dems don't win by trying to court them.

I'm not 100% in agreement about your second paragraph. I think pull factors such as the optics on single-payer, to Lerxst's point, are absolutely relevant in the eyes and minds of voters. I also personally can't stand the "if you're not sure at this point, you're a Trump supporter", and think it's incredibly counter-productive. The message is clearly stated by Democrats as a stroke against integrity/intelligence, and that's not conducive to winning a person over. The tactics used by most to influencing people to come around aren't shown to be effective, but we seem to try the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.

Hi! · October 2019

Moments away?
I don’t consider an hour to be “moments away”
as it relates to debate start time.

benjs · October 2019

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

Hi! said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Hi! said:

Still hoping for a dark horse to break through. Steyer, Bennet, Klobachar, that dude from Montana.

I like Steyer and Klobuchar. Not sure either can go toe to toe with the Bully in Chief. At least they dont want insurance mandates for the entire country. That's a sure fire way to lose to trump (ahem Liz, time to wake up).

No doubt. Warren will loose the general in my opinion.

I used to think that, but her focus is damn impressive, she's incredibly smart, and I think trying to mitigate her progressivism by asserting how she knows of the difficulties but has plans to make it happen, has been a good strategy for her. The polls reflect that. She's also a beacon of stability, which Biden no longer is now that Trump had his way with him.

So ... Trump had his way with Biden. But you don't think if Warren gets the nomination that Trump will do anything?

It's not a reason to say she has no shot...but to say she is a beacon of stability and Joe is not due to trumps attacks is being a little short-sighted. The attacks will come. And some will be right on. And others will be sensationalist crap....but they will hurt.

Oh, I agree they'll come. They'll come regardless of who the nominee is, because going low is the only game Trump knows how to play. I think she's got the poise and tact to fight them, and I don't think Biden has shown that agility.

But when they accuse the dem of being a socialist, that attack will stick to Warren because she supports single payer. Forcing 100 million off their insurance will not get 270 electoral votes, even if trump is weakened by Ukraine and Syria

Warren's response to this is weak. A moderate can deny the socialist attack, she cant. She is also significantly untested. The only serious attack she had to handle was her dna test and that did not work out for her.

Someone needs to push back hard on her at the debate. Be rude because we know trump will be rude. Bernie took it easy on Hillary last time (except for the Wall St $ issue) and that eventually hurt the dems against trump as hillary was virtually untested.

That's my biggest fear about Warren currently.

I agree on the socialism topic - she's going to have to find the way to sell that or adapt.

On "untested", look at the White House today.

On pushback, I fully agree. Her ability to come out of a rough debate needs to be exposed so that people can become more comfortable with the idea that she could take Trump in a debate setting. Never having been attacked, people will likely, and unfortunately, stick with traditional gender bias and assume she'll be weak.

The only test I've seen her endure was the dna test. She picked the battle field on that on and got humiliated by trump.

IMO her gender helped her so far against the dems. No one is willing to spill blood against her. So far.

How's that "humiliation" been affecting her? She's been trending upwards on a continuous basis for ages now. If anything, that should yield more confidence (not less) if she's able to do this in spite of that attack.

Her online response is also a sign of strong character in my opinion - https://elizabethwarren.com/pocahontas

On your next point - in this race, gender isn't tracking closely with poll performance either, so that's not only a baseless statement, it's false. Gender may be tracking closely against "attacks on a candidate", but that doesn't matter, polls do.

Will people be worried if they don't get to see her under pressure? Certainly. But if the "humiliation" is all we have to go off of, it's a positive sign, and if the way her campaign has been running is any indication, she's probably well aware of these challenges and waiting for the right time to strike.

The Juggler · October 2019

Wake me up when there's less than a hundred people participating.

You're not going to learn anything about these candidates through 30 second soundbites.

mcgruff10 · October 2019

The Juggler said:

Wake me up when there's less than a hundred people participating.

You're not going to learn anything about these candidates through 30 second soundbites.

Agreed. I will really start paying attention when the field is down to two or three.

JimmyV · October 2019

benjs said:

JimmyV said:

Warren beat a popular incumbent in Scott Brown to reach the Senate. Yes, a Democrat in Massachusetts should win that race, but it's incorrect to think she faced no challenge.

I personally think she would kick Trump's ass. Both in the debates and in November. Anyone waffling between Trump and Warren, after all this, is deep down a likely Trump voter. Dems don't win by trying to court them.

I'm not 100% in agreement about your second paragraph. I think pull factors such as the optics on single-payer, to Lerxst's point, are absolutely relevant in the eyes and minds of voters. I also personally can't stand the "if you're not sure at this point, you're a Trump supporter", and think it's incredibly counter-productive. The message is clearly stated by Democrats as a stroke against integrity/intelligence, and that's not conducive to winning a person over. The tactics used by most to influencing people to come around aren't shown to be effective, but we seem to try the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.

I don't know whether it's a stroke against integrity/intelligence or not, and I'm not a Democrat. But after all that we have seen Trump do, anyone who is undecided between Trump and a Democrat is ok with his conduct. It's not about a policy issue or a tax or a personal concern. It is about being ok with this loathsome human being occupying the White House and leading this nation.

We can argue that voters in 2016 didn't know. We can't argue that today. Sliding to the right in order to woo these people is a mistake. Any Democrat who is able to win potential Trump voters over is unlikely to be able to hold the left together. I would love to be wrong, and I would love a Democratic candidate to prove me wrong, but I don't believe it is a viable strategy to win. Not in 2020.

Jason P · October 2019

The GOP is practically ignoring Warren. I take that as a sign that she either poses no threat to win the nomination or they are hoping she can take the lead and somehow win.

I have no idea what is going on. The script is changing daily. In any other non-trump election cycle there is no way the democrats would go after the Ukraine issue if the prime candidate was in anyway connected to something fishy, yet here. we. are.

JimmyV · October 2019

The Bidens are irrelevant to Donald Trump's crimes.

mickeyrat · October 2019

@mrussel1

Hi! · October 2019

I like everyone except Beto tonight.
Buddha and Klobuchar are my faves.
Warren was under attack tonight and did fine. I love Biden, but dudes old.
I liked having 12 candidates up there, it didn’t seem overcrowded as much as you might think.
I liked Castro’s line, “Locking up kids at the boarder, setting Isis free” , or something to that effect.

Hi! · October 2019

I do think Warren is still a little dodgy on answering the questions on costs and taxes as it relates to MFA. I think she put herself in a box when she decided to support Bernie’s plan. Could be a problem, IDK

mrussel1 · October 2019

mickeyrat said:

@mrussel1

Thanks

mrussel1 · October 2019

Hi! said:

I do think Warren is still a little dodgy on answering the questions on costs and taxes as it relates to MFA. I think she put herself in a box when she decided to support Bernie’s plan. Could be a problem, IDK

Because she knows that it's s political liability. She is very dodgy.

I can't believe how high strung Bernie continues top be. Seriously, he needs to dial it back. He should still be recovering.

The Democratic Presidential Debates

Comments

Categories