My take on last nights democratic debate.

The Democratic candidates for President. CNN/AP.

As promised, here's my response to last night's debate. Sorry it is so late, but I have been busy. As someone who disagreed with almost everything that was said last night, it will be hard to be objective. And obviously, I'm on the right politically, so please keep that in mind  I don't think there was any clear winner, though it is clear that some candidates did way better then others. As far as I am concerned though all the candidates are ripe for criticism. 

Before I get into I have to say that this debate had much more mixed moderation then the other two. I do think Anderson Cooper was pretty good most of the time, and he did ask some decent questions. But at other times he backed down, especially when Clinton managed to dodge the e-mail issue. And it was completely clear that Lincoln Chafee, Jim Webb and Martin O'Malley did not get as much speaking time as they should have. Clinton and Sanders dominated the debate. I do have to give Cooper credit for asking a few of the questions I did not think they would have asked, such as what the candidates thought about Edward Snowden and what socialism actually is. 

Another thing is that this debate was not nearly as entertaining as the last one. Some will say that is because there was no Trump, but I think it was because it almost completely the Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders show. They just aren't funny, charismatic or interesting, compared to the Republican field. 

I do have to say that the smaller format was helpful. With only 5 people participating, it was much easier to determine where people stand. In the two Republican debates, I still don't have any clue where Donald Trump, for example, stands on the NSA issue. I now know for sure where everyone in the Democratic field stands on that issue because Anderson Cooper was able to ask the question to each candidate. 

I don't think any one candidate actually won or lost this debate. I do think that some candidates did much better then others, but on policy, I didn't really agree with any of them. But it is clear that some candidates had a better performance then others. Anyways, here's my take on the various candidates.

Hillary Clinton:

The consensus seems to think that she won the debate. In terms of performance, I think that is probably true. She didn't really have any huge gaffes, other then her gutless defense of her e-mail scandal. She also dominated speaking time and at least sounded like she knew what she was talking about. Clinton also spoke clearly and didn't have any moments where she stumbled on her words or forget like she was talking about. I think on a purely technical level, Hillary did win this debate. Forgive me for saying this but she sounded presidential in a way nobody else at the debate did. 

Too bad she was wrong on the issues. I was completely disgusted that she tried to turn her e-mail scandal into a partisan issue. If President Obama agrees that it is a real issue then that means it has bipartisan support and it means that she can't claim that it's a "vast right wing conspiracy" out to get her. Unless Barack "communist in all but name" Obama is secretly a republican, she doesn't have a leg to stand on. She may be sick of hearing about the issue, but I think it's completely valid because it shows terrible judgement. If she is so reckless to put official e-mails on a private server, where it is vulnerable to enemy action, just to evade accountability, then there is a case to be made that she should not be allowed to be president. To say nothing of the criminal implications. To dismiss it as a non-issue was the low point of the debate.

I also think her attempts to defend herself from accusations of flip flopping. She has changed her mind on so many things. The short list during this debate was the TPP agreement, gay marriage and the Iraq War. To me her protests about this issue fell completely flat. I don't believe for a second that her views evolved because I don't think she has any actual viewpoints. She just goes wherever the wind blows and she supports whatever views that will get her more power. Though I am no fan of the other Democrats in the race, at least they stand for something. Hillary Clinton does not stand for anything but herself. 

Furthermore I think she is making a mistake by trying to outflank Bernie Sanders. She's trying to be more to the left then she is and I don't think it is working. Though going far left on gun rights may help her in the primaries, it is a terrible strategy for the general election. Bashing the NRA all night and implying that Bernie Sanders is practically a member of the group, is not going to help her long term. Indeed, I am seriously considering giving money to the NRA because of her constant attacks on gun rights. And I don't think for a moment she actually cares about the issue at all. Instead she found the one issue where she could hit Bernie Sanders for not being far enough to the left, so she made it a huge issue again. And by doing so, there is a decent chance that the Republicans will win no matter who they put up against her if she wins the nomination. 

Bernie Sanders:

This was my first long term exposure to Bernie Sanders other then when he was completely shut down by Black Lives Matter. 

Posting it again because of course I am.

That video there is why I would never vote for Sanders. He just doesn't have the strength to be president. If he can't handle a couple of protesters without completely losing control of his event, then he does not deserve to be president. I didn't hear anything last night to change my mind about that. And I think it was completely cowardly of him to bow down to these protesters by saying their slogan during the debate. All lives matter and anyone that says anything else does not belong in the White House. 

On a purely technical level, Sanders did ok. Much like Clinton I don't think he had any major gaffes that would shut him down. He made his points and to his credit, he didn't stoop to attacking anyone. He mostly stuck to the issues, which really is his best option. 

But on the issues I didn't agree with him. I was especially disgusted with his "damn e-mails" comment where he dismissed a criminal investigation into a major presidential candidate as a distraction. Sure, the issues are important, but Hillary Clinton, at the very least, demonstrated incredibly poor judgement. At the worst, she's a criminal, who should be in jail. That is a real issue, no matter what Bernie Sanders thinks. 

As for his actual policy positions, I think Jim Webb was right when he asked Sanders, how on earth is he going to deliver on his promises. Free college and destroying the big banks may appeal to some people but congress will never go along with it. At every step of the way Republicans will fight Sanders proposals, and many of the Democrats will probably fight him as well. I do have to say that I liked his response to the NSA question. Though I disagree with him on gun rights, at the very least I don't think he is some kind of radical like Clinton and O'Malley made themselves out to be.

I also have to say there was a moment where Sanders was picking at his ear. It was pretty gross. 

Martin O'Malley:

What a joke his debate performance was. For most of the debate, O'Malley may not have even been there. His personality was absent for most of the debate and at one point during the debate I noted that it sounded like he was on Thorazine. The man just doesn't have much in the way of a personality. Though he sounded like he knew what he was talking about and didn't have any really embarrassing moments, he just did not make a positive impact on me. 

On the issues, I don't remember him saying much about anything else but bashing the NRA and supporting gun control. I've said before that gun control is a losing issue for the Democrats and trying to base your whole campaign on it is a sure way to fail. And if by some miracle O'Malley is the candidate, there is pretty no chance of him winning. Since he is polling around 1% there is pretty much no chance of him winning anyways. 

I do have to say that him running on his record in Baltimore is pretty hilarious. Back in my college days I wrote a report about him and his record. The best thing I can say him is that he is better then the other mayors that the city has had. But that's is damning by faint praise. He did crack down on crime, but other then that his record was pretty terrible. And long term, Baltimore is now is terrible shape. I don't think O'Malley can be blamed for what happened after he left, but trying to say that his record is a selling point when the city he ran fell apart is not going to work out for him.

Jim Webb:

This is a tough one. I think on the issues Jim Webb blew the other candidates out completely. But as a performance he was terrible. He wasted so much time complaining about not having any time to speak that he didn't really have much time to speak. He also seemed unprepared and had quite a few stumbles and awkward moments. 

Which is really too bad because he had the best performance on the issues. Out of any of the Democratic candidates, Webb is the only one I would even consider  voting for. He was the only one to say that all lives matter, not just black ones. He was also the only one to have a reasonable position on gun rights. In short, he sounded a lot like the Democrats of old, who were at least reasonable. 

He's also a damned war hero. His war record is exemplary and he won both the Navy Cross and the Silver Star. Here's the description of what he did to earn both of those awards. During the debate, Webb was asked who his worst enemy was and he said it was the guy that threw a grenade at him and pointed out that he isn't around anymore because Jim Webb totally killed him. I don't care what you have to say about the man, that is bad ass. That alone makes him a better candidate then anyone in the Democratic field. 

I also have to say that I appreciate that he is doing his best to keep the Democratic Party near the center. Unlike Bernie Sanders who is trying to pull the party far, far to the left. 

Lincoln Chafee:

He should have just stayed home. His performance was laughable. Chafee had so many awkward moments and he barely talked. He really did not contribute much and it makes sense that he is barely there in the polls. 

He also had a ton of bad moments. When challenged about his voting record, he had the lamest excuse I have ever heard from any candidate ever. The man actually tried to use the "it's my first day" defense. 

When hit hard about his various votes in the senate, instead of copping to them or defending them, he said that he wasn't prepared because he had just been elected and his dad had just died. That's incredible coming from a presidential candidate. The obvious criticism is that if he was so unprepared during his senate campaign then what would happen if there was a crisis during his first week on the job as president? "I wasn't ready for it" is not an excuse anyone wants to hear from their president. Chafee completely destroyed any chance he had at winning during this debate. 

Conclusion:

Overall I wasn't all that impressed with this debate. I disagreed with just about everything was said and some of the candidates were just terrible. And unlike the Republican debate, it was boring. I do think that Hillary Clinton probably won the debate, though I think Bernie Sanders will get more followers from it as well. Still I didn't like what they had to say, and I am looking forward to the next Republican debate to cleanse the bad taste in my mouth that this debate gave me. 

As a final note, I did live tweet the debate. My spur of the moment tweets can be found here.