The second round of Democratic debates came to a catastrophic close for the Democratic Party. Very few candidates demonstrated that they have what it takes to beat President Trump.
Frontrunner Joe Biden, former Vice President under the Obama administration, greeted California Senator Kamala Harris with, “Go easy on me, kid,” belittling her with his lack of respect. Frequently stuttering and cutting himself off mid-sentence, Biden proved himself to be an ineffective debater as he grasped at praise from former President Barack Obama to shield himself. When other candidates began firing at him, calling him out for switching his position on his 1990s crime bill, the Hyde Amendment, trade, and decriminalizing the border, Biden seemed terribly on the spot. They criticized his stance on deportation and immigration policies under the Obama administration. Overall, Biden seemed out of touch, confusing his campaign website with his text prompt, failing to recall his past stances on key talking points, and referring to New Jersey Senator Cory Booker as the future President. He managed to recover when responding to New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s question about his previous sexist statements on working women, but definitely did not have a presidential performance.
Another who was arguably weak during the debate was Senator Kamala Harris, who fell below soaring expectations set for her as she quickly became a target. Harris had few memorable points to make on the debate stage and was not concise when describing her healthcare plan. She failed to defend accusations that her state suffered from segregated school systems and could not form a suitable response when Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard slammed her actions as California Attorney General.
The poetic Tulsi Gabbard did not offer much, but acted as a snake in the grass, waiting for a chance to strike, effectively shutting down another candidate with background evidence. Among the ten candidates debating Wednesday night, she seemed the most thoughtful regarding foreign policy. Additionally, among all of the Democratic candidates put together, she presents herself as the most able to debate President Trump, with her military experience, appealing television presence, and opposition’s evidence at the ready.
Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey was able to confidently uphold one of his main goals, equality for minorities. Nevertheless, he failed to present himself as the best candidate for the presidency. He spent his speaking time pitting viewers and other candidates against Biden and complaining about President Trump and Russian collusion. For example, he claimed that the cause of the Democratic loss of Michigan in 2016 was due to GOP voter suppression and Russian interference. As someone who started at the front of the competition, I feel he is falling behind very fast.
Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro conveyed that “the idea that America is doing fine is just wrong”. He focused on the President’s ‘racist’ comments, presenting his belief that there is enough evidence to go forth with impeachment. Castro said his plan is to repeal Section 1325 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, essentially decriminalizing illegal crossings of the border. Open borders, he claimed, are a “right-wing talking point”, which, of course, is a left-wing diversion to escape the question. You cannot say America isn’t doing fine when facts prove otherwise.
Colorado Senator Michael Bennet, “Rising Democratic star” according to ABC News, was not given near enough screen time on the debate stage. When he did get speaking time, the Senator did not exactly take advantage of it: he spoke very slowly and couldn’t reach his points in the time allotted. One of his most applauded arguments on the debate stage was that “equal is not equal”: that American schools are still segregated, and the school system must be fixed. He was not given the chance to speak on the topic of climate change, but did mention in his closing that President Trump doesn’t believe in it.
Tie-less businessman Andrew Yang promised to give out $1,000 to every citizen over 18 years old every month, similar to ‘passing go’ in Monopoly. It is becoming easier and easier to see which candidates possess the most realistic plans for the presidency – when fulfilled, Yang’s administration would need $3,925,920,000,000 in order to cover each citizen’s monthly pay. $1,000 a month would barely cover the cost of living, and though it appeals to idealistic and younger voters, ‘The Freedom Dividend’ would not be very likely to succeed.
The most notable thing involving New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand last Wednesday was her declaration that her first task as President would be to “Clorox the Oval Office”, a promise that has nothing at all to do with We the People whom she would be serving. Referencing her record of electoral victories since 2006 was a desperate stab at voters’ trust, and to me, a rather selfish reminder. Outside of this declaration and managing to take shots at Biden’s previous statements on working women, she had very few resonating moments and hardly joined the back-and-forth at all.
Washington Governor Jay Inslee shone vibrantly when it came to climate change, devoting his entire opening and closing statements to the subject. With the exception of an argument that the Democrats need to win the Senate in 2020 to make a real change, he did not resonate due to a lack of personality and style on other issues. Additionally, his pledge to end coal use in the United States in ten years, comparable to JFK’s declaration to go to the moon, definitely lost him all 56 electoral votes from leading states in the coal industry. He would be a fantastic leader of a Congress climate change committee.
Unquestionably, the candidate who fell in last place was New York Mayor Bill de Blasio. Moderators questioned de Blasio on lead poisoning in New York City, and he dodged and half-avoided the question. He interrupted the conversation about Iraq and Afghanistan, desperately insisting that Iran be debated, which went unnoticed by bigger candidates and moderators. Like Bennet, he was not given enough screen time. Though de Blasio was able to assault Joe Biden on deportation policies during the Obama administration, his main arguments about taxing the wealthy and putting workers first were weak. Upon his conclusion, he received hardly any applause.
The debate, hosted by CNN and scheduled to run for two hours, wrapped up 45 minutes later than the original end time. Almost all of the candidates referenced their parents, their children, the border, or President Trump during the first several minutes of the debate. Striking to me was that candidates cursed at least seven times on live, national television. Mercifully, no one switched languages when responding to questions.
The Democratic Party, unlike President Trump, seems to have lost solid values to fight for, becoming too involved in the idea of Russian collusion and radical socialism to make rational arguments.
Comments