***
Can any of these candidates beat Trump?
Larry J. Sabato is the founder and director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics and is a contributing editor at POLITICO Magazine.
For better or worse, the candidates on stage in New Hampshire are the finalists for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. And at least right now, it appears only four or maybe five are realistic contenders: Sanders, Buttigieg, Biden, Warren and Klobuchar. Maybe Bloomberg belongs in this group, but we won’t see him on a ballot until March 3.
The finalists’ strengths and weaknesses were on display at the debate. Sanders has passion and purpose, with a consistent message; he’s also a democratic socialist which is a tough November sell. Buttigieg has both youth and maturity well beyond his years; but his rhetoric is platitudinous and his credentials are thin. Biden is the opposite—deep experience and institutional memory, yet no compelling vision of the future. Warren has ideas aplenty and a sharp mind that defends them well; however, she suffers from some of the same handicaps that bedeviled Hillary Clinton, from gender (unfortunately) to her professorial style. Klobuchar has been quite impressive and sure-footed in a series of debates, especially this one, yet she hasn’t caught on enough to break into the top circle and she seems to be viewed more as a good VP nominee than a POTUS choice.
This debate was so 2019. It’s 2020 and much has happened. The jaw-dropping incompetence of the Iowa caucuses was a gift to the GOP that will keep on giving. (“How can a party run health care if it can’t run a caucus?”) Donald Trump just beat the rap on impeachment. He solidified his position as the alpha and omega of the Republican Party and he brooks no opposition. Solid economic reports continue to prop up Trump’s re-election chances.
President Trump begins the campaign as the favorite—not a heavy favorite, but it’s fantasy to pretend that all or even most of the Democrats still running can defeat the incumbent. Democrats have a mountain to move, and I didn’t see a party on stage that was close to meeting the challenge.
‘The field is underestimating Bloomberg’
Beth Hansen is a Republican political strategist and the former campaign manager for John Kasich.
After an exhausting week of twists and turns in national politics, tonight’s debate was by comparison uneventful. The winner was Sanders, whose passion and intellect and unabashed support for socialism was paired with confidence and vigor.
The breakout star of the evening was Klobuchar, whose instinctive common sense and pragmatism was paired with emotion and an aspirational vision of a Democratic administration that could appeal to independent voters in the Midwest and in swing states that Democrats desperately need to win the Electoral College.
Steyer had a similarly strong night, but without the personal connection that Klobuchar made.
Buttigieg and Warren were more subdued, although the former mayor’s performance supported his upward trajectory while Warren’s did nothing to arrest her downward slide.
I continue to enjoy Yang’s responses, which really seem to grasp where our country could be headed if we do not embrace a more “human-centered capitalism” and prepare workers for the changes to the economy that technology is bringing. Unfortunately, his policy proposals are one-dimensional and lack the imagination of his critique of the future economy.
I believe the field is underestimating Bloomberg. The candidates seemed quick to condemn the mayor as a billionaire buying his way into the race—which he is, but which may be insufficient criticism if his ideas and record of experience (and $1.5 billion) begin to catch on.
Biden did nothing—other than his brilliant “Stand up and clap for Col. Vindman” moment—tonight to prove his finish in Iowa and likely finish in New Hampshire are undeserved.
‘Buttigieg failed to capitalize on his Iowa momentum’
Alan Schroeder is a professor in the school of journalism at Northeastern University in Boston. Schroeder is the author of several books, including Presidential Debates: Risky Business on the Campaign Trail.
This was a frustrating debate, because it felt entirely too detached from the freaked-out mood the country is in right now. At the end of this long, emotionally exhausting week of political insanity, the candidates had an opportunity to heighten the sense of urgency surrounding the 2020 presidential campaign, to counterprogram against Trump. Instead they rehashed their health care plans.
Some of the participants captured the uneasiness of the moment better than others. Steyer laid out the stakes at hand quite lucidly, though in no way is he a plausible solution to the problem. Klobuchar was similarly attuned to current realities, being the first to reference the impeachment trial. And Biden’s best moment came when he roused the audience to a standing ovation for Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.
Otherwise, Biden had another inferior debate, wavering between strident and subdued, all but conceding New Hampshire as a lost cause. Warren and Sanders also delivered mediocre performances. After all these years in the business, why can’t Bernie speak into a microphone without sounding like he’s accompanying himself on percussion?
With a lot of eyes on him, Buttigieg failed to capitalize on his Iowa momentum. Instead of upping his debate game, he got rattled as he tried to defend his slim record as an elected official—not an assuring indicator for a would-be participant in the general election debates.
If a debate this sprawling and unsatisfying can be said to have a winner, it was Klobuchar—again. But after eight installments, this series needs an infusion of something fresh. Will it arrive in the form of Bloomberg, 12 days from now at the Nevada debate?
‘Klobuchar has quietly emerged as the dark horse’
Sophia A. Nelson is an American author, political strategist, opinion writer and former House Republican Committee counsel.
The clear winner tonight was Klobuchar. Not because anyone else faltered or stumbled. But because she brought it back to where I think most people are: the center.
She gently swatted Buttigieg about his lack of experience, and reminded voters that we elected a man as president in 2016 with no experience, and you see where that has gotten us. Mayor Pete is impressive, but he simply lacks the global and executive experience to run the world’s last great superpower. Klobuchar also reminded voters of her humble roots and her ability to attract voters across the political divide.
I think Warren had a good night. Sanders and Biden mixed it up but neither scored points or lost points. Biden is never going to be exciting. He is the wise old man on the stage, the elder statesman. Yang turned off a lot of people when he casually dismissed the president’s crimes as misdeeds. Steyer had a good moment when he went on a diversity rant, but beyond that he does not belong on that stage. Sanders is in it to win it, but I think he stalls once the campaign moves south.
Klobuchar has quietly emerged as the dark horse in this race for the White House. It will be interesting to see where she ends up in New Hampshire.
This debate couldn’t salvage this week
Julian Brave NoiseCat is a writer, vice president of policy and strategy for the progressive think tank Data for Progress and narrative change director at the Natural History Museum.
It was a bad week to be a Democratic activist: from the not-yet-settled Iowa caucuses to impeachment to the creeping feeling that the party—and the news media and the candidates and their Twitter supporters—might fail us all at the tail end of a historic four years of grassroots organizing. A debate slated for the Friday night TV slot—where they put the shows before they cancel them, and when only the most fervent, and committed, blue voters will tune in, wasn’t going to fix much.
Buttigieg managed to draw out an uncomfortable back-and-forth with ABC moderator Linsey Davis, who is black, over the rise in marijuana-related arrests of the black residents of South Bend, Indiana, during his tenure as mayor at the exact moment when he needs to win black voters. Biden did not do enough to disprove the increasingly influential theory, originally advanced by the Kamala Harris and Cory Booker campaigns, that he is a paper tiger. (Except now it’s Buttigieg as well as billionaires Bloomberg and Steyer who stand to gain.)
For their part, the progressives—Sanders and Warren—put in consistent performances. But both still need the other’s voters—and delegates—if they want to win. And theirs might be the story of the party writ large. Team blue will cannibalize some of its most talented politicians and salient policies on the road to Milwaukee. Will these debates make us stronger? Or will we look back at these weeks as the ones where our leaders, and our party, lost us the election?
‘Maybe it’s the Opie Taylor thing he has going on’
Michelle Bernard is a political analyst, lawyer, author and president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy.
One week after Iowa, the winner of the night was ABC’s Linsey Davis. Her performance in the two debates she has co-moderated easily make her my top choice for our next commander in chief. She’s brilliant, no-nonsense, gets to the point, forces the candidates to answer the question asked and asks the questions that really matter to the American public. She is a woman who appears to be quite capable of beating Donald Trump. If only she were a Democratic candidate. Better yet, if only the DNC adopted rules that would allow a supremely qualified African American woman to take the stage. But it’s 2020, so despite my wishes, even if Davis could be coaxed into joining the madness that is the 2020 presidential campaign season, the DNC would have erased her as it did Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Julián Castro.
So, since she’s not a candidate, it looks like the winner of the night was—(think obligatory drum roll here)—Buttigieg. And possibly Sanders followed by Klobuchar.
As for Biden, it’s not looking good at all. In fact, it’s looking really, really bad. The Obama magic seems to work only when Biden is standing literally next to Barack Obama. In Obama’s absence, substance aside, there is a certain “je ne sais quoi” about Biden that doesn’t seem to bode well for 2020.
Back to Buttigieg: Maybe it’s the Opie Taylor thing he has going on. Whatever it is, at least for the time being, it’s working. On every issue raised, he consistently delivered a message that combined empathy, respect for the American people and hope for the future that the other candidates just miss the mark in expressing. When he spoke of Medicare, I actually wanted to listen. When the others spoke about Medicare, I wanted to turn off the television. It was like this for every issue discussed over the course of the near-three-hour debate. Maybe the key to 2020 is not beating Donald Trump at his own game. It’s beating him by giving all Americans someone and something to believe in again.
Biden’s campaign is on life support
Michael Starr Hopkins is a Democratic strategist who has served on the presidential campaigns of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Delaney.
Heading into the New Hampshire primary, Biden didn’t do anything to convince his supporters that he can be this cycle’s comeback kid. Biden’s support has always been soft, but it could be non-existent if he doesn’t re-establish the electability argument that has been the foundation of his campaign. With his campaign on life support, the former vice president had a decent performance, but he is going to have a hard time convincing his supporters to not give Mayor Pete a second or third look.
The winner was Buttigieg. He wore the frontrunner status well and didn’t back down from his competitors. Buttigieg sounded calm and comfortable in the debate, while taking incoming from almost all of his fellow candidates. He clearly has momentum and a compelling story, and is hitting his stride at the right time. That’s a recipe for a very good month.
Sanders and Biden both have an optics problem that they may not be able to fix. The optics of two 70-plus year-old men going after a 37-year-old frontrunner—arguing for generational change—won’t help either candidate win over new voters.
The Democratic primary is nowhere near over, but it has quickly shifted to a two-person race between Sanders and Buttigieg, with Bloomberg waiting in the wings.
‘Klobuchar clearly rose to the top’
Jennifer Lawless is a professor of politics at the University of Virginia whose research focuses on political ambition, campaigns and elections, and media and politics.
If Donald Trump were a typical president seeking reelection, if he worried about having to stand on the debate stage alongside the Democratic nominee, if he took seriously attacks on his policies, competence and character, then he wouldn’t sleep well tonight. The New Hampshire Democratic presidential debate showcased a cast of characters who are polished, knowledgeable, empathetic and savvy. A set of contenders who have clearly been at this for a year and have learned a lot in the process. A group of women and men who, when the time comes, are ready to stand together to take on this president. In a lot of ways, Friday night was a win for the Democrats.
How could it not be, you might be thinking? Only Democrats competed! Well, in a week that featured Democratic party chaos in Iowa, an impeachment acquittal, a remarkably well-received State of the Union address and a positive jobs report, it wasn’t out of the question that the debate would play right into Trump’s hands—candidate infighting, party dysfunction, an inability to articulate a vision for the future.
That didn’t happen. Sure, Klobuchar and Buttigieg took jabs at each other. Biden and Sanders pointed out weaknesses in one another’s past records and future plans. Warren didn’t hold back when asked about Buttigieg and criminal justice. But even the most heated disagreements were civil.
More than that, the candidates demonstrated an ability to address difficult issues in a measured way. Klobuchar clearly rose to the top. She was cogent, concise and confident, regardless of whether she was talking about health care, trade, impeachment or campaign strategy. The rest of the performances, however, were nothing to sneeze at. Buttigieg’s defense of Joe and Hunter Biden, and Biden’s acknowledgment of the “gut punch” he took in Iowa, in particular, reflected a compassion and humility that every candidate on the stage has argued must be restored to the Oval Office. Perhaps the most compelling moment—and the clearest juxtaposition to Trump—was Biden’s call for a standing ovation to thank Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman for his service.
So, does tonight’s win for the party have legs? Unclear. Will Donald Trump lose sleep? Probably not. But if Trump was on the fence about whether to debate the eventual nominee, Friday may have tipped the scale.
The loser was Hillary Clinton
Matt Bruenig is the founder and president of the People’s Policy Project, a progressive think tank.
The loser of Friday night’s debate was Hillary Clinton. When the moderators asked the candidates about Clinton’s recent remark that „nobody likes“ Sanders, Klobuchar said she liked him and Biden walked over and gave Sanders a hug. This was in many ways the harshest moment in a debate that was otherwise surprisingly friendly. Clinton, a long-feared figure in the Democratic establishment, is now openly mocked in major television debates. One has to wonder whether she will take the hint and stop trying to throw bombs into the race.
‘Too much of the punditry is focused on just a few candidates’
Stephanie Schriock is a political strategist and president of EMILY’s List.
Friday night, we saw why the current media narrative that has ignored or dismissed the women in the race for too long is just plain wrong. Klobuchar showed the receipts time and again on getting things done and appealing to voters in the middle. Warren repeatedly demonstrated an ability to define the underlying reasons for the challenges we face: the corruption in a government that too often serves wealthy and special interests. I’m so glad that voters got to see their powerful performances for themselves, because too much of the punditry is focused on just a few candidates, including one who underperformed (Biden) and one who hasn’t even shown up on a ballot yet (Bloomberg).
The New York Times endorsement’s last line had it right: May the best woman win. They both did Friday night.
‘The field is rapidly shrinking’
Jacob Heilbrunn is the editor of the National Interest.
Here’s the deal: New Hampshire marked the turning point for Democrats. The field is rapidly shrinking as Warren proved to be a cipher and Biden failed to mount a coherent case for his candidacy. The high point for him came toward the outset: As Donald Trump embarks upon a purge, he movingly implored the audience to stand up and applaud Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and scored by stating that Vindman, not Rush Limbaugh, deserves a medal. But it was Buttigieg, Sanders and, above all, Klobuchar who delivered the most robust performances. With her machine-gun recitation of Trump’s woeful deficiencies, Klobuchar made a powerful case for herself. Buttigieg also came on strong in defending Biden from Trump’s assaults more ably than Biden ever has himself. Can any of them close the deal and defeat Trump? Not yet. But they are getting there.
A night for comfort politics
Jennifer Victor is a professor of political science at George Mason University, a co-editor of the Oxford Handbook of Political Networks and a member of the board of directors of the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics.
After an exhausting week of turmoil, drama and anxiety-filled politics in America, this Democratic debate was downright comforting. Contrary to the rest of what’s been happening in politics, this debate was totally normal. The candidates were vigorous but polite. They challenged one another using respectful rhetoric. They made unreasonable promises, they occasionally misrepresented their records and they pandered to the home audience with all sorts of New Hampshire flattery—and it was all a glorious portrait of textbook political campaigning. What a relief! And such a contrast to the other political spectacles this week.
Given all the political drama of this week, it’s likely that only diehard politicos were able to pay attention to this Friday night event, which is too bad because it was the most conventional thing that happened in politics all week. But low viewership also means that the debate will probably not have much impact on the outcome of the nomination process or the New Hampshire primary. All the candidates performed well. There were no major gaffes or blunders. Of the seven on the stage, it seemed, however, like Yang and Steyer were out of place. Their contributions were substantive and impassioned, but they were also constantly trying to make themselves seem equivalent to the other candidates on the stage, despite their lack of experience in public service or commitment to the party.
The remaining five—Buttigieg, Biden, Warren, Klobuchar and Sanders—engaged vigorously with one another on traditional issues like gun violence, racial justice, social welfare, security and foreign policy. An undecided New Hampshire voter may not have seen a debate that will help them make up their mind about how to vote on Tuesday, but they did get to see grown-up, functional American politics again where all the actors follow the prescribed norms of the game.
Buttigieg stumbled on race and foreign policy
John Neffinger is a speaker coach, lecturer on political communication at Georgetown University and Columbia Business School, former communications director of the Democratic National Committee and co-author of Compelling People: The Hidden Qualities That Make Us Influential.
This was a great night for the party after a week it would really rather forget. Lively and engaging throughout, this debate had more than its share of significant moments: Biden opening the proceedings by modestly conceding New Hampshire, Sanders with a rousing call for party unity, Buttigieg defending Biden against Trump trying to turn father against son, and Biden summoning a standing ovation for Colonel Vindman. Overall, Klobuchar and Sanders were the happiest warriors onstage and, along with Steyer, consistently made the case against Trump.
One notable stumble: Mayor Pete had many eloquent moments, but he was indecisive about assassinating foreign leaders and unprepared for predictable attacks on his record on race, the kind of errors that have felled candidates before. One epic triumph: After cracking the audience up with a series of “Who does that?” lines directed at Trump, Klobuchar adapted one of the best stories in politics—the man crying at FDR’s funeral procession—to craft a close for the ages. It still remains to be seen whether it’s enough to get her a second look from voters.
The pressure is on for Klobuchar
Atima Omara is a political strategist and former president of the Young Democrats of America.
Despite having less speaking time, Warren hit all the high points and served red meat to the Democratic base and as such did the best of the debate. The one with the most at stake in New Hampshire is Klobuchar. She was endorsed by the major New Hampshire newspapers, and it will get harder for her to justify staying in the race if she doesn’t have a strong finish or win this coming Tuesday after a fifth place finish in Iowa.
Foreshadowing the Nevada caucuses, South Carolina primary and many Super Tuesday states, the subject of race and racial justice was a significant conversation for a mostly white debate stage. This reflects an overdue acknowledgement of how important communities of color are to the Democratic Party base, particularly black and brown voters, and what’s at stake in 2020 turnout if the candidates (and eventually the nominee) don’t speak to the issues affecting these communities as well. Expect more of this in future primary debates and on the stump.
Of the first four states, New Hampshire is ‘the forgotten middle sibling’
Charles Ellison is a political strategist and talk-radio host.
It was a New Hampshire debate that struggled mightily to remind voters, in the wake of a messy Iowa caucus, that “oh, that’s right” the first primary is next. Suddenly, the Granite State becomes the forgotten middle sibling sandwiched between Iowa and upcoming Nevada and South Carolina. Like Iowa, it too is grabbing for relevancy given valid critiques of the lack of diversity. There was a lot of focus, for example, on black voter agenda items at the demographic expense of New Hampshire as candidates appeared to prep more for the next two states. You could almost hear the white people in New Hampshire sighing, “What about us?”
This debate was a battle of generations. There was much more muscle-flexing, and plenty of policy meat for voters to chew on. Still, it didn’t clearly establish someone who can scare Donald Trump.
If debates really do change the course of primaries, Friday night might have transitioned away from a presumed two-way race into a three-way race—from Buttigieg vs. Sanders, to now Buttigieg vs. Sanders vs. Klobuchar.
Klobuchar definitely had a standout performance to keep people intrigued (perhaps the first candidate, out of all the Democratic debates thus far, to make a strong statement on voter suppression). But she needs to stop closing every remark with a website plug, because it’s corny.
Warren just couldn’t pull out of her lane and hasn’t yet regained a comeback stride. Buttigieg struggled on questions of race and his black problem back in South Bend, as well as while addressing key questions on experience. Sanders stayed consistently Bernie, conveniently glossing over questions he didn’t want to answer. The big missed moments were competitors failing to take on Sanders more aggressively on his dismal gun control record (where he can “change,” while others so often have to pass his progressive purity test) and why Vermont has such high black incarceration rates. Biden tried hard to polish his elder statesman “look what I’ve done” resume, but couldn’t manage to push through. Steyer caused a comedic old white man quibble over who has more Black Caucus endorsements. Yang didn’t do his homework on opioids, but keeps pushing universal basic income and gave a solid wonky answer on childhood poverty.
Source: politico.com
See more here: news365.stream
