Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
AAABatteries

Democratic Debates

Recommended Posts

Thought this would be thread worthy - they’ve now announced the lineups.

The first debate on Wednesday, June 26, in Miami will include:

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren

Former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke

New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker

Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro

Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee

Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio

Former Maryland Rep. John Delaney

Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan

 

The second debate on Thursday, June 27 will include:

Former Vice President Joe Biden

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders

South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg

California Sen. Kamala Harris

New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand

Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet

Author Marianne Williamson

California Rep. Eric Swalwell

Businessman Andrew Yang

Former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Warren doesn’t stand out in her debate then it’s a big loss for her, IMO.  She’s basically the only one I give a chance on that’s side.

If you are a Mayor Pete fan you have to think this is a dream lineup - he gets to face the two current front-runners and showcase the age difference and demeanor difference.  If he does well here I think he takes off.  Biden just needs to hold serve but everyone assumes he’s screw up.

:popcorn: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

If Warren doesn’t stand out in her debate then it’s a big loss for her, IMO.  She’s basically the only one I give a chance on that’s side.

If you are a Mayor Pete fan you have to think this is a dream lineup - he gets to face the two current front-runners and showcase the age difference and demeanor difference.  If he does well here I think he takes off.  Biden just needs to hold serve but everyone assumes he’s screw up.

:popcorn: 

Yeah, this draw completely marginalizes Warren and puts Harris and Buttigieg in a position to go after Biden and Sanders. Interesting. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

With so many people involved, will each person get more than a few minutes each to speak?

Seems ridiculous

We finally agree. 

It’s absurd. And we saw how it worked in 2015. The person who says the most outrageous thing is the one who gets the most play afterwards. 

How well one performs in a 30 seconds response to a scripted question has very little to do with how well one will perform as President. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AAABatteries said:

If Warren doesn’t stand out in her debate then it’s a big loss for her, IMO.  She’s basically the only one I give a chance on that’s side.

If you are a Mayor Pete fan you have to think this is a dream lineup - he gets to face the two current front-runners and showcase the age difference and demeanor difference.  If he does well here I think he takes off.  Biden just needs to hold serve but everyone assumes he’s screw up.

:popcorn: 

Beto is going to crush in the "Warren debate." He will be right back in the mix of things after it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

Yeah, this draw completely marginalizes Warren and puts Harris and Buttigieg in a position to go after Biden and Sanders. Interesting. 

My advice to them would be to leave Sanders alone. I don’t think Bernie can increase his numbers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, timschochet said:

My advice to them would be to leave Sanders alone. I don’t think Bernie can increase his numbers. 

Mayor Pete will not attack either candidate directly.

 

 

DJ Judd‏Verified account @DJJudd 14h14 hours ago

Taking a question on debating competitors without tearing them down from the audience, Mayor Pete Buttigieg tells supporters in Alexandria, VA, "we have a fantastic field right now," adding, "the 22 people who don’t become the nominee have to support the one who does."

 

Instead, I think Mayor Pete will take veiled shots at Biden in particular about how we can't accept simply going back to the Obama era - we have to have a plan for the future.  He will obviously talk about issues that millennials face, and that Millenials are best positioned to solve.  So, he will highlight the generational gap - without naming Biden or Sanders specifically. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

With so many people involved, will each person get more than a few minutes each to speak?

Seems ridiculous

It’s counterintuitive maybe but the funny thing is I’m guessing news ledes will be that a lesser candidate broke out in each debate, further muddying the waters.

I also think the cutoff is ridiculous considering a single governor Bullock and a single Rep Moulton were left off the debates. Incredibly unfair to them and pointless when folks like Williamson, Delaney & de Blasio are included.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, whoknew said:

Beto is going to crush in the "Warren debate." He will be right back in the mix of things after it.

I think it sets up for him to make a move if he does well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Mayor Pete will not attack either candidate directly.

 

 

DJ Judd‏Verified account @DJJudd 14h14 hours ago

Taking a question on debating competitors without tearing them down from the audience, Mayor Pete Buttigieg tells supporters in Alexandria, VA, "we have a fantastic field right now," adding, "the 22 people who don’t become the nominee have to support the one who does."

 

Instead, I think Mayor Pete will take veiled shots at Biden in particular about how we can't accept simply going back to the Obama era - we have to have a plan for the future.  He will obviously talk about issues that millennials face, and that Millenials are best positioned to solve.  So, he will highlight the generational gap - without naming Biden or Sanders specifically. 

Yep, not his style for direct attacks but more indirect and intellectual.  He should continue that but most of us want to hear more policy talk from Pete.  @NCCommish

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I also think the cutoff is ridiculous considering a single governor Bullock and a single Rep Moulton were left off the debates. Incredibly unfair to them and pointless when folks like Williamson, Delaney & de Blasio are included.

I am going to disagree here - sort of - 20 is too many, 23 is even worse.

DNC is going overboard to make up for the 2016 debacle - to give anyone who is remotely viable a chance to be heard by a national audience.

 

I don't think the criteria set by the DNC - 1% in polling, and 65,000 donors - is onerous.  I think that is the bare minimum you need to show you are a serious candidate.  Sure, its harder on the latecomers - but that is part of the calculus you have to undertake when making this decision.  Also - the cable news shows have shown a willingness to have people on for town halls and the like leading up to this stage.  If you are a serious candidate and need to reach voters, its incumbent on you to make that effort.

 

Having said that - Williamson and de Blasio, in particular, are pretty egregious examples of people who do not belong on the stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Yep, not his style for direct attacks but more indirect and intellectual.  He should continue that but most of us want to hear more policy talk from Pete.  @NCCommish

This won't be that format.

Take a listen to his Foreign Policy speech I posted in his thread.  Also, I think he has a speech planned this weekend(?) addressing racial inequality - laying out his Douglass Doctrine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DJ Judd‏Verified account @DJJudd 14h14 hours ago

Asked what he'd do to appeal to black voters, Pete Buttigieg says, "replacing racist policies with neutral policies won’t get the job done," adding rolling more [policies] at the Black Economic Alliance tomorrow in Charleston, and discussing them next week in even greater detail"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

I am going to disagree here - sort of - 20 is too many, 23 is even worse.

DNC is going overboard to make up for the 2016 debacle - to give anyone who is remotely viable a chance to be heard by a national audience.

 

I don't think the criteria set by the DNC - 1% in polling, and 65,000 donors - is onerous.  I think that is the bare minimum you need to show you are a serious candidate.  Sure, its harder on the latecomers - but that is part of the calculus you have to undertake when making this decision.  Also - the cable news shows have shown a willingness to have people on for town halls and the like leading up to this stage.  If you are a serious candidate and need to reach voters, its incumbent on you to make that effort.

 

Having said that - Williamson and de Blasio, in particular, are pretty egregious examples of people who do not belong on the stage.

It's incredibly frustrating to watch a debate like this when Joe Schmoe who you know will never win winds up some crazy plan or controversial statement to get attention and meanwhile the 4-5 people who really have skin in it aren't talking. 

They could have either just added 1 per debate (yes), done some proper rigging (ok yes I'll say a Governor should be on the stage, not the deep thinking author, just make that call DNC), or just made a smaller cutoff, like 6 + 6 in the 2 debates or something similar. This seems like the worst of all worlds.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that there are 12 debates scheduled.  These early ones will be frustratingly large but there will be plenty of opportunities for the top candidates to debate once the field  whittles down.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

It's incredibly frustrating to watch a debate like this when Joe Schmoe who you know will never win winds up some crazy plan or controversial statement to get attention and meanwhile the 4-5 people who really have skin in it aren't talking. 

They could have either just added 1 per debate (yes), done some proper rigging (ok yes I'll say a Governor should be on the stage, not the deep thinking author, just make that call DNC), or just made a smaller cutoff, like 6 + 6 in the 2 debates or something similar. This seems like the worst of all worlds.

I hear you.

I think the DNC recognizes that they have too many non-contenders - which is why they shifted the criteria for the 3rd debate to 2% of the summer polls and 130,000 donors - which will probably cut the field to 8.

 

And, if the Governor is serious about a national bid - then the governor needs to be out drumming up support.  Its that simple.  If a mayor from South Bend can build that level of support, then a Governor should have no problem (even without detracting from his day job).  Get on CNN, MSNBC, FOX - go on the Sunday talk shows, sit down for interviews with reporters who are dying for new original stories to tell.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1st Group:

Warren has really been showing in the chances she has had. I think her focus on plan plan plan is paying off, she's talking in specifics. And I actually think her placement can help her. First debate, she will be treated like the lead in that group and I think politics thirsty people will be tuning in to the first debate of the season. I think she's ready and she'll be helped.

And some other single person in that 1st group will be viewed as showing well, someone will emerge. The real pressure is on O'Rourke and Booker IMO. Klobuchar or Castro can move up.

I mentioned this in the other thread, but I think viewers will be looking at things in a moderate/liberal/DNCe vs progressive/DemSoc/Changemaker prism, so if Warren is the favorite in the latter category someone will have a chance to shine in the former. I think Kobuchar at least can jostle her way into that lead tier of 6-7 candidates with a good showing.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2nd Group:

I think Hickenlooper, Yang and Bennet would have been better served by being in the 1st group. This will be all about Biden/Sanders/Buttigieg/Harris. 

And actually - assuming Biden doesn't flop or do something foolish (if) - I think the bigger risk is on Sanders. He has to transcend 2016 somehow. Harris is a hell of a debater. Buttigieg is clear as a bell in his rationality and dead lethal in his likability. 

Gillibrand IMO like Booker and BOR in the 1st group has the most to lose. She's a well known name with fundraising resources and she can't afford to end up in the middle here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

How well one performs in a 30 seconds response to a scripted question has very little to do with how well one will perform as President. 

I agree strongly with this.  Our modern "debate" setting is ridiculous way of evaluating candidates.  If we picked a winner by having them play a series of Fortnight battles, that would be equally legitimate and would correlate just as strongly to performance in office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I agree strongly with this.  Our modern "debate" setting is ridiculous way of evaluating candidates.  If we picked a winner by having them play a series of Fortnight battles, that would be equally legitimate and would correlate just as strongly to performance in office.

I’d rather see them get questions about what they actually know about, you know, how government works or foreign countries, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I agree strongly with this.  Our modern "debate" setting is ridiculous way of evaluating candidates.  If we picked a winner by having them play a series of Fortnight battles, that would be equally legitimate and would correlate just as strongly to performance in office.

Let’s add some more points to this insanity:  

1. Most people aren’t going to watch either debate. What they’ll watch instead is whatever few highlights the news decides to show us. This gives the media incredible amounts of power. Consider what they showed us about the first debate in 2015: nearly 100% of the coverage was devoted to Trump’s outrageous remarks. 90% of that wasn’t even about the debate, it was about Trump’s comments after the debate: “she had blood coming out of her whatever.” Some people thought this would destroy Trump early on (I wondered about it), but instead he became the only candidate anybody wanted to talk about. And that set the tone for the entire campaign. 

2. The immediate moments after the debate are also extremely important because they set the conventional wisdom for months: for example, if Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow both say “I was really impressed by Beta tonight; I thought his points were outstanding” that becomes the truth and impresses far more people than the actual debate does. People like being told what to think despite their insistence that they don’t. 

3. Given the way it has shaken out, Warren is oh so lucky she’s on Night #1. If her group was scheduled Night #2, almost nobody would watch. Even so, this splitting into two nights is fundamentally flawed because very few people are going to watch both nights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a far better way to handle this but the DNC would have had to be far more ruthless about it, and that is this: over a year ago, they make the following announcement: we’re taking the top 5 in polling for the debates. That’s it, no exceptions. I don’t care how well known you are, you need to be in the top 5 or you don’t make it in. Full stop. 

Then we would have a serious set of debates, instead of this nonsense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

There is a far better way to handle this but the DNC would have had to be far more ruthless about it, and that is this: over a year ago, they make the following announcement: we’re taking the top 5 in polling for the debates. That’s it, no exceptions. I don’t care how well known you are, you need to be in the top 5 or you don’t make it in. Full stop. 

Then we would have a serious set of debates, instead of this nonsense. 

That is basically what they have done for the fall debates.  These first debates won't be very revealing - it just gives the candidates one more chance to reach a large audience.

 

I am not going to lose any sleep over summer debates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a nachul-born handicapper, let me say that the draw moves Klobuchar up more than anyone. The top two in that the first draw are natural blusterers, and Miss Amy has a good chance to be the grownup in that one.

I wish Yang had drawn the top one. That debate could use a technocrat.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, timschochet said:

My advice to them would be to leave Sanders alone. I don’t think Bernie can increase his numbers. 

I think they can increase theirs by lumping Biden in with Sanders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I agree strongly with this.  Our modern "debate" setting is ridiculous way of evaluating candidates.  If we picked a winner by having them play a series of Fortnight battles, that would be equally legitimate and would correlate just as strongly to performance in office.

The Hunger Games!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I’d rather see them get questions about what they actually know about, you know, how government works or foreign countries, etc.

Aleppo?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I’d rather see them get questions about what they actually know about, you know, how government works or foreign countries, etc.

I agree. The questions drive everything, and they often focus on recent controversies and high concept issues. What do these people actually know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/stage-set-first-democratic-debate-here-s-primer-night-1-n1018551

 

It looks like the stage order has been set - based on current polling.  Good boost for Beto who will share center stage with Warren on Wednesday night, each flanked by Booker and Klobuchar respectively.

 

Biden and Bernie will be center stage on Thursday - with Buttigieg next to Biden, and Harris next to Sanders.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also - Bullock has qualified for July debates - not sure if they will squeeze him in, or squeeze someone else out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Also - Bullock has qualified for July debates - not sure if they will squeeze him in, or squeeze someone else out.

Aren't they using same rules as for June, maxing out at 20? Assuming so, they can't squeeze him after holding firm to 20 in June.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Mystery Achiever said:

Aren't they using same rules as for June, maxing out at 20? Assuming so, they can't squeeze him after holding firm to 20 in June.

He just got a qualifying poll - but too late for the June debates.  Originally the DNC was going to hold firm on 20 total - with some tiebreakers involved if more than 20 qualified. It remains to be seen how they handle that in July. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too bad on the timing. But if they don't hold to 20 in July,I imagine there will be blow back from the four on the outside for June. I look forward to getting this down to eight or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mystery Achiever said:

Too bad on the timing. But if they don't hold to 20 in July,I imagine there will be blow back from the four on the outside for June. I look forward to getting this down to eight or so.

The 4 did not qualify for June - so the DNC did not prevent a qualified candidate from participating in the debate.   That may or may not happen in July. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also like first name Trump tweets will be De Blasio at +700

Interesting prop on number of Trump tweets at +/- 1.5 - its really just a question: "Do you think Trump will tweet during the debate?"  Because if the answer is yes, it will certainly be over 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they attack each other and then one veers off course and starts attacking Trump or vice versa. I also want to hear about all the free stuff they are gonna give me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2019 at 12:52 PM, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I agree. The questions drive everything, and they often focus on recent controversies and high concept issues. What do these people actually know?

I think we need to see how strong their Twitter game is to really evaluate them.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The General said:

How is Deblasio even on the stage? 

A reporter on MSNBC just said she's covered him for six years and he's the luckiest politician she's ever covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mystery Achiever said:

A reporter on MSNBC just said she's covered him for six years and he's the luckiest politician she's ever covered.

I thought I read he’s about as popular as Trump in NY. Also saw he was at “0” in many states polling, not even 1, zero point zero. That’s what The General is polling at in Iowa AND New Hampshire. 

Guy has no chance and will just be a distraction. The bar they set to get on stage is ridiculously low

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He may be less popular in NY than Trump because neither side seems to support him. Just asked a NY friend how he won re-election and she said he didn't have decent competition. I don't remember the election.

Edited by Mystery Achiever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mystery Achiever said:

He may be less popular in NY than Trump because neither side seems to support him. Just asked a friend how he won re-election and she said he didn't have decent competition. Idon't remember the election.

In the limited times I’ve seen him speak he’s come across annoying and extremely unlikable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cannot wait for the outrageousness of the wannabes tonight and tomorrow night. That Philo Beto guy is already becoming unhinged.

 

Edited by lod001

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lod001 said:

Cannot wait for the outrageousness of the wannabes tonight and tomorrow night.

 

This quote could have easily come from me before the 2016 Republican debates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.