Live Blog: Democrat Presidential Primary Debate #8 in Los Angeles, California

By Lambert Strether of Corrente.

The debate begins at 8 p.m. ET, one half hour from now, and it will run for about three hours. It’s being held at Loyola Marymount University, a private Jesuit and Marymount research university in Los Angeles, California, and one of the largest Roman Catholic universities on the U.S. West Coast with 8,000 students. Here’s a series of videos from the Loyola faculty on debate history and stagecraft.

The co-hosts are PBS NewsHour and Politico. Here is how to watch:

The debate will be televised on PBS and CNN, livestreamed online at, PBS NewsHour,, and, and available on many of the news organizations’ social, mobile and live-TV streaming apps. You can also listen to the debate on SiriusXM channels 116, 454, and 795. will also be streaming special coverage of the debate, and the politics team will provide live fact-checking and analysis throughout the evening.

The moderators:

  • Tim Alberta (Politico)
  • Yamiche Alcindor* (PBS)
  • Amna Nawaz (PBS)
  • Judy Woodruff (PBS)

* Ugh.

The seven candidates, in alpha order:

  • Joe Biden, former Vice President
  • Pete Buttigieg, Mayor of South Bend, Ind.
  • Amy Klobuchar, Senator from Minnesota
  • Bernie Sanders, Senator from Vermont
  • Tom Steyer, billionaire and activist
  • Elizabeth Warren, Senator from Massachusetts
  • Andrew Yang, entrepreneur and philanthropist

The candidates, in stage order:

And those who did not make it: Bennet, Bloomberg, Booker, Castro, Delaney, Gabbard, Patrick, and Williamson. (Seven is the smallest number of candidates yet, and there’s much gnashing of teeth about the lack of “diversity” on the stage, despite a Jewish representation of 14% (general population: 2.2%), and the presence of an American Indian.)

It occurred to me to take a quick look at how the seven were polling:

(This is a little different from Water Cooler’s poll, because it includes debates on the timeline and excludes Bloomberg.)

And since the debate is in California, here is the latest California poll:

Remarkably, Sanders is in the lead:

Politico characterizes this holiday season debate as awkward:

IT’S ALSO A BIT AWKWARD to be holding a debate a day after the House voted to impeach the president, a subject these candidates want to avoid like a drunken co-worker at the company holiday party; they’d rather outline their plans on health care, student debt and family leave. Still, polls show that’s exactly what Democratic voters want to hear about. Impeachment isn’t going to affect their lives one iota, as most realize by now that Donald Trump isn’t going anywhere.

Pelosi has made things even more awkward by delaying sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate (though I suppose that could be resolved before the debate, if Schumer and McConnell want to do that). Awkward for the candidates to be put in the position of justifying both Pelosi’s calendar-driven “hurry up,” and now her “wait,” especially when preventing history’s worst monster from committing more crimes is the ostensible goal. I suppose the campaign staffs will have worked something out. Where’s Malcolm Tucker when we need him? More:

THAT SAID, IMPEACHMENT IS ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY for one of the candidates to cast themselves as something very different from the sturm and drang of Washington. Could this be PETE BUTTIGIEG? The South Bend mayor has been testing an outsider message in a field dominated by D.C. insiders, but he’s been a bit sidetracked by his pillow fight with ELIZABETH WARREN and endless stories about his Harvard days, McKinsey clients and wine-cave fundraisers in Napa.

First time I’ve heard Sanders characterized as a “D.C. insider”!

A debate requires a drinking game — or perhaps a munchies game? I don’t know — so here is a thread of suggestions:

As before, this post does not update; readers may track the debate in real time in comments. Please keep your comments as informative and analytical as possible. There are no points at NC for context-free one-liners (“Boo ____!”) that only those who are also watching can make sense of; that’s for Facebook or Reddit. I think it adds more value if you take a moment, use your critical thinking skills, then comment, and readers can discuss what you say. This is what the NC commentariat is so very good at, after all. Last time, the times before that, and this time. Thank you!

NOTE I can’t find an image of the Loyola stage; perhaps that’s a good sign, and this will be a more serious effort than other debates.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
This entry was posted in Guest Post, Politics on by .

About Lambert Strether

Readers, I have had a correspondent characterize my views as realistic cynical. Let me briefly explain them. I believe in universal programs that provide concrete material benefits, especially to the working class. Medicare for All is the prime example, but tuition-free college and a Post Office Bank also fall under this heading. So do a Jobs Guarantee and a Debt Jubilee. Clearly, neither liberal Democrats nor conservative Republicans can deliver on such programs, because the two are different flavors of neoliberalism (“Because markets”). I don’t much care about the “ism” that delivers the benefits, although whichever one does have to put common humanity first, as opposed to markets. Could be a second FDR saving capitalism, democratic socialism leashing and collaring it, or communism razing it. I don’t much care, as long as the benefits are delivered. To me, the key issue — and this is why Medicare for All is always first with me — is the tens of thousands of excess “deaths from despair,” as described by the Case-Deaton study, and other recent studies. That enormous body count makes Medicare for All, at the very least, a moral and strategic imperative. And that level of suffering and organic damage makes the concerns of identity politics — even the worthy fight to help the refugees Bush, Obama, and Clinton’s wars created — bright shiny objects by comparison. Hence my frustration with the news flow — currently in my view the swirling intersection of two, separate Shock Doctrine campaigns, one by the Administration, and the other by out-of-power liberals and their allies in the State and in the press — a news flow that constantly forces me to focus on matters that I regard as of secondary importance to the excess deaths. What kind of political economy is it that halts or even reverses the increases in life expectancy that civilized societies have achieved? I am also very hopeful that the continuing destruction of both party establishments will open the space for voices supporting programs similar to those I have listed; let’s call such voices “the left.” Volatility creates opportunity, especially if the Democrat establishment, which puts markets first and opposes all such programs, isn’t allowed to get back into the saddle. Eyes on the prize! I love the tactical level, and secretly love even the horse race, since I’ve been blogging about it daily for fourteen years, but everything I write has this perspective at the back of it.


  1. Carey

    Regarding the moderators™: are vehement hand gestures a requirement, these days?
    Also, who’s the spike-haired deGeneres clone?

  2. Carey

    Plan B: my copy of the Bukowski reader finally arrived this afternoon. Quick trip for some
    Bushmill’s and I’m set. Watch a little, read a little, drink..

  3. CarlH

    They are forcing everyone into a corner on impeachment and so far Bernie and Warren have fallen for it. I wish Bernie wouldn’t go along with this farce.

  4. a different chris

    >and the presence of an American Indian

    Ok who’s going to clean the milk and cookies off of my monitor?

      1. Synoia

        If its about Donald, then they do not address other substantive issues (M4A). Donald’s impeachment has all the signs of a distraction – a bright shiny object.

    1. flora

      First time I’ve heard Sanders characterized as a “D.C. insider”!

      Or, er, a putative CIA operative, Buttegieg, cast as a D.C. outsider. heh.

  5. Carey

    Biden making no sense again. Impeachment Q: what a setup. Sanders as on-point as can
    be, in response to the bad question.

  6. nippersmom

    Sanders completely avoided answering the impeachment question.

    Warren thinks we are just now seeing the results of corruption and conveniently forgets the corrupt acts of the last several administrations– including Obama.

    Klobuchar has selective memory about previous impeachment proceedings. Nixon and Clinton also fought having witnesses compelled to testify.

    Buttigieg thinks negative tax rates arrived with Trump.

    Yang is the only one so far who seems to have a clue why people aren’t enthusiastic about impeachment. Thank you, Yang.

    1. Fern

      Yang’s response on impeachment was amazing. It’s great to have someone up there with no chance of winning who is therefore free to speak truth.

      1. ChiGal in Carolina

        He is refreshingly real despite his silly UBI. Did a great interview on Useful Idiots (Matt Taibbi-Katie Halper podcast)

  7. CarlH

    Yang with the best response on impeachment so far by a country mile, which makes Bernie’s answer all the more disappointing.

  8. John

    Judy parrots the same line we keep hearing from the talking heads:
    “The economy is great, the economy is roaring.”

    Does she even know anyone without a million dollar + 401k?

      1. John

        It looks like a bad eye test though.

        Is this fuzzy? How about when it moves the other way?

        That type moving in the background, OMG.

  9. anon in so cal

    We’re not going to watch tonight’s debate so I’ll keep up by reading the comments here and on Twitter. Adam Schiff’s deranged closing statements yesterday were beyond the pale. Tulsi Gabbard is the only candidate who refused to wholeheartedly participate in this lunacy and she’s not participating.

    Otherwise, today the House passed Trump’s revised NAFTA:

    NYT: “Breaking News: The House passed a revision to President Trump’s North American trade pact in a bipartisan vote, giving him a victory hours after he was impeached.”

    1. Tvc15

      In response to an earlier USMCA question, Sanders said he will vote no and Klobuchar strongly supports…yeah, more neoliberal trade policies!

      I’ve been listening on the radio, but have probably had enough now. The crowd really sounds suspiciously embracing of Buttigieg and Warren. The DNC wouldn’t have their hand in crowd selection would they? Those two seemed to receive the loudest applause during the introductions while Sanders / Klobuchar received similar applause levels. Given the DNC’s history I’m thinking they limited Sanders supporters from the audience somehow. Maybe I’m wrong regarding the crowd, but it sounded that way to me.

      1. hunkerdown

        “The DNC wouldn’t have their hand in crowd selection would they?”

        Shirley, you just. No Democrat establishment critter can let a moment go by without showing their inferiors how they should feel about something. Therefore, even the crowd is rigged.

  10. nippersmom

    Klobuchar is trying to trot out her “friend” Sherrod Brown to gain some cred with the progressive wing. She’s so out of touch she doesn’t realize the actual left does not consider Brown to be progressive.

  11. inode_buddha

    It is good that I refilled my blood pressure meds a few hours ago. Being that I don’t own a TV, I want to thank all the commenters in advance. I will continue reading, but probably won’t say much till tomorrow (unless something amazing happens)

      1. inode_buddha

        Thank you. My reasoning was, “Why am I paying people to lie to me? All that will do is encourage them.” I completely got rid of the TV 5 years ago, don’t miss it.

      1. John

        I just don’t understand the reason why we should waste money as a society to pay for someone else, other than the parents, to babysit their toddler?

        Or as Warren calls it, universal preschool childcare.

        1. hunkerdown

          So the PMC can have more cheap, desperate labor to babysit their children, of course. Managers are the most important people in a society, say 9 out of 10 managers. (The tenth one is about to be RIFed.)

          1. John

            Yes, it’s a play to middle class professional women vote who want what they pay to their nannies paid for by taxpayers.

            How does it make any sense to pay someone else to take care of all the kids in this society (when most working women are not getting paid much more than the low paid childcare workers who would do the job). Makes no sense at all.

            Sorry this is so rough, typing and trying to listen.

        2. Kevin

          Same argument could be made about k-12. The early years are critical to becoming a well rounded productive member of society

          Washington dc does it and it seems to be popular and effective

          1. John

            They are talking about childcare for toddlers so the mother can go work in some sh$tty job. Jesus. How warped we have become.

              1. jrs

                Actually in the nordic countries most mothers work, and it works better than what we have. It takes a village and all that. Flexibility for part-time work may make sense.

                1. Carey

                  Are you thinking that taking care of children and a household is not work? The people I know in Scandinavia raised their own children, and with
                  the relatively enlightened family-oriented policies there, didn’t take a huge financial hit in doing so.

            1. Yves Smith

              You seem to forget that most of those lower income mothers NEED that job. The idea that this is an upper middle class entitlement is absurd. Those women hire their own nannies and wouldn’t entrust their kids to *gah* public care.

              And have you managed to forget about single mothers? The majority of children born now are not to a married couple. The guy being involved is even more of an option than by historical norms.

        3. dcblogger

          Because we as a society need to show up for each other. Having children is a social good, so we need to show up for parents. I never married and never had children, but even I understand how I benefit from caring for other people’s children.

          Why should be woman be the one to sacrifice her career? Why not have childcare. Not just daycare, but 24 hour childcare for parents who work from 12 AM to 6 AM. Why shouldn’t we organize our government around providing for basic needs of ALL OF US, not just the few.

        4. sj

          I just don’t understand the reason why we should waste money as a society to pay for someone else, other than the parents, to babysit their toddler?

          Seriously? Apparently you have never met a single parent.

  12. Wombat

    The “Middle Class” trope needs to stop. There is the elite, the professional class, and the financially insecure that lives paycheck to paycheck (almost everyone). It might be easier to fight the problem if they acknowledge it.

  13. nippersmom

    Buttigieg trotting out the middle of the road, means-tested platform again. The populist pose from Mr. McKinsey didn’t last long.

  14. Annieb

    When Elizabeth talks about her wealth tax funding child care for every baby in the US, I think she loses a lot of voters. Not all parents want to put their babies in day care centers. I know that I did not. How about she comes up with an idea for higher tax rebates and/or deductions for families with children under age five. In the past there were plenty of studies showing that children develop better,emotionally and psychologically, under the care f their loving parents. I know, how old fashioned! And I am not even a conservative.

      1. jrs

        Poor women never did. And the problem now is women throw away their careers for it if they do that. Well the top 10% always find a way, and maybe minimum wage jobs don’t care – but lots in the middle will never get hired again for the field they trained for with that type of gap. That is to say they throw their ability to earn a living away AND in a country without social safety nets!!! They become entirely dependent on men to survive etc.. It’s not pretty. Work-life balance maybe, but dependency as a way forward, doubtful.

        1. Shonde

          Also no credits towards social security for the years out of the workforce. Also true for those who do family eldercare who don’t want nursing homes for their loved ones.

  15. nippersmom

    Has Klobuchar been paying any attention at all to the current climate projections? She is utterly clueless.

  16. John

    What they should all say they would do on DAY 1
    is to stop all the methane pouring out of the gas wells.

  17. nippersmom

    Buttigieg trotting out the carbon tax scam now. You probably need to move out of that river side home before you enact your ineffectual policies.

  18. John

    Sanders is right on global warming coming at us like a freight train.

    And gets the biggest applause of the night.

  19. John

    Yang, like a broken record, back to his $1,000 per month universal income.
    Yeah! We can live in poverty as he floods this country will millions of educated foreigners
    (as he said he would do) to take the $10,000 (and up) per month jobs.

      1. John


        We don’t really know if it’s CIA or another SPOOK agency he works for.

        They say there are 17 of them.

    1. Tvc15

      Me too…small town mayor and seemingly out of nowhere he’s a “top” tier candidate or at least polling that way in IA thanks to his big donors. His employment with McKinsey doesn’t mean he’s an intelligence asset, right? Even if I’m a little conspiratorial here, given his clients and work with McKinsey plus his policies, I’m sure he’ll fit in well with the alphabet agencies.

  20. nippersmom

    Biden, Obama had majorities in both houses his first two years in office. You can’t blame Congress for not “letting” him close Guantanamo.

      1. NotTimothyGeithner

        Though, it is good to see Biden put those congressional relationships to work. Obviously, Biden is pro-Gitmo or was thought of so little by the Obama Administration.

  21. Fern

    By focusing gratuitously on “treating our allies better than we treat dictators”, Warren is yet again signalling that she will continue with the hawkish, regime-change politics of the bipartisan neoconservative consensus.

  22. mnm

    They are trying to out do each other about the protests in Hong Kong and coming out hard on China, but no mention of the year long protests in France.
    Corporate PBS too easy on and propping up Bootguy, what is Amy still doing there (she must have a lot of ex-boyfriends), and lastly someone ensured Joe got sleep and slipped him Adderall or Aricept.

    1. Carey

      >someone ensured Joe got sleep and slipped him Adderall or Aricept.

      I didn’t notice any cognitive improvement in D’oh. If anything he was worse this time.

  23. Fern

    Question about Obama’s statement about old white men:

    What a horrible, unethical question for the moderators to ask. As if Obama doesn’t exert inordinate influence as it is. Appalling.

  24. Wukchumni

    One of the bigger applause lines came when Warren made a joke about being the youngest woman President.

    Humor me more, please.

  25. nippersmom

    Buttigieg proving he is the true heir to the third way mantle. “One hand tied behind our back” was their excuse for selling out to corporate interests in the first place.

  26. CarlH

    And Bernie drops the the hammer on Biden and Butigieg by numbering their billionaire donors. A Mjölnir grade hammer.

  27. John

    Bernie slams Biden and Buttigieg for all the billionaires that have donated to them.
    Warms my heart to hear this in a debate.

    Now, Corporate Wh$re Biden defends himself with lies.

  28. Fern

    Buttigieg boasts about his ability to stand up to donors.

    I seem to remember that Buttigieg’s biggest donor for his mayoral campaign was good friends with the racist white policeman who wanted the popular black police chief of South Bend fired. Buttigieg summarily fired/demoted this popular black police chief without consulting with the town council or the black community, infuriating both. That sounds like a very bad start when it comes to standing up to big donors.

  29. John

    Oh god, Sanders on the childcare thing too.

    Why can’t they just say, pay people enough so one parent can stay home and take care of the kids?

    Too retro?

    1. jrs

      It works if there is a job guarantee when one partner goes back in the workforce someday maybe, now not so much, it’s a poverty sentence.

      1. John

        It doesn’t help the kids to be raised by a low wage childcare worker rather than the parent.
        Or to be put in a collective day care when they are one or two.

        1. hunkerdown

          It’s a pretty childish fantasy to expect that sort of thing to materialize instantly, without any intermediate steps. The kids dislocated by “oh well, can’t afford you” would be worse off. Wouldn’t it be better to not create a cohort of children who are extremely damaged by extreme poverty?

    2. Ellis

      That doesn’t work for single parents, unless you have some sort of government stipend for them instead. Which I am all for.

      I think universal childcare is a good thing, but only in conjunction with other things – decent wages, stipend/social programs for single parents, etc. It would allow single parents (mostly women) to not be dependent on a wage earning partner.

    3. Yves Smith

      See my comment above. Majority of children born now are out of wedlock, as they used to say.

      Yes, you are retro. No reason to think the man will do squat save pay child support and in many cases only if the mothers is organized enough to get the courts to go after him. It’s 100% his option to help.

      1. Trent

        Not in Pennsylvania. Courts here are rough on the men with regards to divorce. I browse online dating (36, never married and no kids) and you guys are totally right about the large swath of single mothers. Part of me wonders if people can’t control their lust enough and a lot of one night flings turn into kids. Its sad, I loved having both parents involved in my life growing up. Family is becoming an endangered species.

        1. inode_buddha

          Don’t feel too bad. 53, never married, no kids. Fact is that no, people cannot in fact control themselves. I grew up in a traditional nuclear family with a single wager earner — my Dad. Mom was able to go back to work in a career she loved as we got older. I always wanted to offer this kind of life to someone, but sadly it is not to be unless I win the Lotto. Besides, I am largely ignored by the opposite sex.

        2. jrs

          And then you find out many women who are single parents were actually married but find they needed to end it. I think people often don’t know what they are getting into with marriage.

  30. Wombat

    Anyone hear Klobuchar complain “Dammit, C’mon!”, when the moderators didn’t call on her for the fiftieth time.

  31. Fern

    Sanders is right. The key to winning the election lies more in getting the base to turn out than winning over conservative Trump voters. Bernie’s huge support is exactly among the low-turnout groups that are likely to stay home if they’re not enthused: young voters and Hispanic voters.

    And Amy Klobuchar is right — South Bend Indiana is not the standard conservative mid-Western town that Buttigieg is pretending it is. It’s an elite university town that has voted for only Democratic mayors for decades. When Buttigieg tried to run for an Indiana statewide office, he lost miserably.

    1. ChiGal in Carolina

      Others convinced Obama; a shame he didn’t heed his VP on that one. It wasn’t a secret at the time that Biden argued against it. Who was that general who had an affair with his biographer? Oh, and Holbrooke.

  32. John

    Joe the Corporate Wh$re Bidon starts screaming the Republican line:
    It will cost 32 TRILLION for M4All!

    God he’s disgusting.

    Here comes Klobuchar to defend who she works for: the for profit heath insurance extortion rackets.

      1. Harold

        Yes. I hope he brings that up in future situations. We are spending now and will be spending even more than the figures mentioned if things don’t change drastically.

    1. petal

      Having been in the same room with the guy(he brushed by me at one point), it was like being locked in a room with the greasiest used car salesman you could find. Such a shyster, and it never turned off. I couldn’t wait for it to be over.

  33. Aumua

    Sanders KILLING it on healthcare, as he should. Warren, and everyone else falling short of a real solution.

  34. Fern

    If I were Bernie, I would throw the question back at them and ask how they plan to get a public option through congress when we don’t have everyone paying in. The money will only be there if everyone pays in, instead having the affluent pay the insurance companies instead.

  35. CarlH

    WTF kind of question is this last question? Is this satire? Am I higher than I thought? Okay, Warren is crying now and talking about selfies again. I must be higher than I thought.

  36. John

    I literally look at Klobuchar as a killer for being bought by the bloodsucking health insurance rackets to keep their profits going at the expense of the American people’s health and lives.

    1. John

      Maybe that was the reason for the gift question.
      Personally I stopped watching PBS when they turned into a rather right wing station.
      In other words, years now.
      Oh and that this debate is with Politico (Right Wing) tells you what you need to know about where they are at.

      1. Samuel Conner

        Neoliberal Public Radio.

        I gave up on them about the time of the beginning of the ‘planet money’ series of ‘casts. I was in to MMT by then and could see through the propaganda.

        Thanks to all for enduring this and commenting. I can’t bear to watch debates

        1. thump

          My expansion of the acronym was National Propaganda Radio, after hearing too many stories implicitly promoting austerity.

  37. jaaaaayceeeee

    I love that Kobluchar followed Bernie with her misrepresentation of him and the other candidates, as not focusing on exactly what he focused on (what would you give or ask forgiveness for). Not thinking on her feet, just trying to make herself look good.

    1. Aumua

      Yeah Sanders is the only one who can meet Trump on the level of populism and “crazy” and actually debate the guy. Trump will have Biden stuttering and waffling.

  38. Clark

    Did Warren just pause and say, “Did someone just call my name?” I hope that I somehow missed a joke she was trying to make … The strongest messages were from Yang (when he was given a chance to speak) and Sanders. As expected, so much about “process.” Most of them predictably misdirected simple questions into narratives that did not answer the question presented … even coming from this “friendly” panel.

        1. jrs

          Yea that’s all it is is spin though.

          I mean there were times that Bernie missed a beat too, so they could all be spun as not so young anymore, except those who are younger, but who really wants them? And that’s what that was: missing a beat. It happens, when overall Sanders was extremely strong and Warren strong. Biden regularly misses a bunch of beats, but not his worst performance.

  39. Carey

    Nate’s Liver – Commentary‏ @SilERabbit

    WARREN: So look, this is about costs, so here’s how I approach this. Day one, I say I’m gonna do stuff. Day two, I say it’s hard. Day three, I ask Republicans for a plan. Day four, I compromise and we all get coupons for $5 off nationwide.
    7:17 PM – 19 Dec 2019

      1. Carey

        And this one, on D’oh:

        Nate’s Liver – Commentary‏ @SilERabbit 2h2 hours ago
        BIDEN: My plan is to build on not covering people. We can cover less, I’ll make it work, promise. Bernie put your hand down, I’m dizzy. If you want to die, my plan is for you.

  40. polecat

    These debates are :

    A.) Enlightening ..
    B.) Satire ..
    C.) Hallucinogenic ..
    D.) Brimming with SQUIRRELS ! ..
    E.) An ‘expanded extra feature’ from the film “Idiocracy”
    F.) Cancer inducing

  41. howard w herman

    ” Look behind the curtain”. The billionaires support Buttigeig because they are confident that he can’t defeat Trump. They would much rather have four more years of Trump and the continuation of his billionaire friendly tax and economic policies than deal with a bunch of “socialists” who want to confiscate a chunk of their wealth. If it’s wealth confiscation under Sanders or Warren, they will take Trump without having to think twice. I don’t believe I’m being cynical or jaded. I think it’s just human nature at work. I would imagine the liberal democrats are well aware of what’s taking place and will do what they can to counter it. I HOPE!

  42. CoryP

    My copy of In Defense of Julian Assange just arrived. Sadly and predictably this was not a topic of debate discussion. Still, I think Bernie is the best hope.

    1. jrs

      Not even when people like Klobi went all blah blah blah protecting journalists. Um hello, he’s being left to die with a willful negligence. Forgotten.

  43. doug

    Thanks to all. I did not watch. But this morning after reading here, I did search on the debate, and all the headlines , all the headlines I could find had only Warren and Pete. no mention of biden or sanders. This shit is rigged as much as possible…

    1. jefemt

      Amen. No cable, this is the first I have seen , on Network broadcast TV. The narrative spin doctor takeaways this morning were from an event I did not watch.

      No comments in here about Steyr? Moonshot national emergency on climate change on day one, resolution being an opportunity for millions of jobs, and having to cooperate with China to get there?

      I felt heartened— if anyone was watching, a lot of good talking points were raised by all, in stark opposition to the Trump admin approach to the world.

      Bernie and Klobuchar both made the point- we gotta get out the vote, and change the complexion of both congress and the Executive.

      Its not Rocket Surgery— can we all- and they all- working together, make it happen?

      1. jrs

        My bets on Sanders as THE climate candidate in the race now, in it to win it. But I like Steyer, he prioritized climate on talking with China, good priorities. He’s making good points (well completely silly on term limits but oh well).

        Another strong performance from Sanders whatever the media says.

  44. anonymous

    I cannot find a video clip or news report, but Warren was great in a post-debate interview on CNN. She said something to the effect that our government is not dysfunctional, that special interests make tweaks in legislation to their benefit, and that inaction, that our government’s not doing something, is also to their benefit. As we say around here, going according to plan. I wish I could find a clip to share. Maybe one of the progressive news sites will post it today. Bernie is my pick, but Warren often does an excellent job explaining problems. During a previous debate, I thought she did an excellent job explaining the need for M4A (before she backtracked!).

    1. Carey

      Yes, Warren is a good explainer. So was Bubba in ’92: “I feel your pain!”, et c.
      I have zero confidence in Warren’s proposed solutions. Zero.

      1. anonymous

        I agree with you. I wish Bernie would change his wording a bit, so that people wouldn’t tune out (you know, the billionaire class, etc., etc.) When Warren explains the same problems, I think people listen because the wording is different, if not the content. I’m not referring to her proposed solutions or the likelihood of her following through.

        1. Carey

          Yes, Sanders does have a tendency to harangue, granted. Doubt he’ll change much, though I thought he was a little toned-down (positively) at this event™.

        2. jrs

          An honest answer to what if R’s still control the Senate is: then most legislation doesn’t pass (but some executive orders maybe). That’s honesty.

          But neither does a public option, expanding the ACA etc. pass, anymore than M4A does. And R Senate sucks is just the reality.

Comments are closed.