2nd debate reaction part 2.

The candidates at the 2nd debate. CNN.

As you know, part two of the 2nd Democratic Debate was last night in Detroit. I live tweeted the event and watched the entire thing. It was a total mess but it was a significant event. As a reminder, here are the candidates we had debating:

Michael Bennet
Kirsten Gillibrand
Julián Castro
Cory Booker
Joe Biden
Kamala Harris
Andrew Yang
Tulsi Gabbard
Jay Inslee
Bill de Blasio

All of my criticism of CNN and the moderation of the debate I posted in the last post was still true. They were incredibly biased, let Don Lemon say some pretty terrible things unchallenged and generally took forever to actually get to the debate. They just do not do a good job. Moderation was non-existent but I will say that the moderators did ask some tough questions.

Once again, the cracks are showing in the Democratic Party. I do have to say that this debate was even more diverse in terms of policy than the other one. In addition to the socialist and centrist candidates there was also Andre Yang off to the side and Tulsi Gabbard's isolationist foreign policy.

Very notable were the protesters. From what I understand they were protesting about the Eric Garner case, which seems odd given how old that case is and how irrelevant it is. It was fairly hilarious, but you could tell it shocked some of the candidates to the point where they were flustered. They were not expecting this kind of disruption and I think it threw Corey Booker and Kamala Harris off of their games.

Everyone beat up on the front runners. Like the last debate where Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren got most of the flack, this time it was Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. It seemed clear that the people lower in the ratings wanted to bring down the two front runners.

This time, it didn't work with Joe Biden. He was a lot more animated and actually fought back. He completely blunted Kamala Harris' attack and gave her some big body blows as well. He also was able to shrug off Kristen Gillibrand's shrill attacks on him about an op-ed he wrote in the 1980's. He might have lost a few points from the feminist fringe but I think Biden won just based on how unlikable Gillibrand was.

Biden still got beat up this debate. Though Harris and Gillibrand didn't really land any blows, Corey Booker did, having some of the more memorable moments of the debate. Biden also seemed a bit flustered, especially at the end where he completely flubbed his website name. Joe30330 was a huge meme after he said it and it's still not clear what he was trying to say. He also accidentally endorsed Corey Booker, which was kind of funny.

Kamala Harris was the big loser of the night. She tried to focus on taking down Joe Biden but she just wasn't able to do it and Biden himself was able to hit back hard on her health plan or lack there off. Even more disastrous for Harris was the fact that Tulsi Gabbard just eviscerated her on her record as Attorney General. She called her out for jailing people for pot while smoking it herself and trying to keep an exonerated prisoner in prison. Gabbard was mostly done after that and withered under pressure.

The non-Biden/Harris candidates needed to stand out and some of them did. Most of them did not. I will say that Andrew Yang had a much better night than at the first debate and though he didn't get much time, he made good use of what he had. He also had laser like focus on the issue he cares about most, the Universal Basic Income. I didn't agree with much, if anything, he said, but he was a lot better about getting his ideas across.

Tulsi Gabbard had a mixed night. Her taking down Kamala Harris is going to live up there with Chris Christie destroying Marco Rubio back in the 2016 debates. However, she didn't keep that momentum because she went full kook several times in the debate. She claimed that President Trump supported al-Qaeda (possibly referring to al-Nusra in Syria?) and her closing argument said we are on the brink of nuclear war, which isn't anywhere close to being true. It would have been alarmist and unrealistic even if it was taking place during the Cuban missile crisis or the Able Archer exercises, let alone in a post Soviet world where nuclear tensions are much less of a threat. For a person who is running on foreign policy, it wasn't a good moment.

I'm pretty sure that Kristen Gillibrand lost her candidacy last night. She wasn't as annoying as she was in the first debate but she probably alienated her only possible support base, white women. She basically called them all racist and suffering from "white privilege". Her attacks on Biden probably backfired too as it made her look incredibly unlikable.

Everyone else didn't make much of an impact. Corey Booker was effective in attacking Joe Biden but didn't really do much else. Jay Inslee didn't do much and neither did Bill de Blasio. And Julian Castro was a total no-show. Michael Bennet was kind of interesting. For most of the debate he acted like he had been drugged with no excitement and was difficult to understand. But for about a minute he was extremely animated and easy to understand, but then he went right back to being on Thorazine. It was weird.

So who won the debate? Probably President Trump. Neither of the front runners came out unscathed and the Yang and Gabbard factions got fed some red meat. Other than Biden, Harris, Yang and Gabbard, and possibly Corey Booker, I doubt we will see any of these candidates at the next debates.

I do think that after both debates Biden's position as a front runner is probably safer and Kamala Harris is going to fade quickly. Warren and Sanders will probably be stuck neck and neck behind Biden while Yang and Gabbard keep hanging around. And Marianne Williamson may emerge as a force.

Either way, watching two debates in a row like this is exhausting especially considering these debates were very long in the first place. I am pretty glad that the next one isn't until September. I will of course be live tweeting that debate as well. Until then, I will probably be blogging about other things!