The Second Night of Debate and the Future of the Primary

Last night was a humbling experience for those who thought they knew who was going to be the nominee. If you asked someone a week ago who the nominee is they would have likely told you Biden, Bernie or even Elizabeth Warren. Now, you probably would get a different answer. Last night's debate was structured the same as the first with the topline candidates being Biden, Bernie, Mayor Pete and Kamala Harris. There were no sound blunders like the first night leaving President Trump without a funny video to tweet the next morning of him walking out in a dramatic smoke show. My initial reaction was that this debate was a lot more intensive than the first night. The first night was 10 democrats with very small policy differences who just wanted to get their names out there. The second night was a little different. The candidates made policy and borderline personal attacks against each other. While it never lived up to the hype of the tsunami that was the 2016 election primaries, the two hours were filled with excitement and yes, even stupidity.
The obvious winner last night was Kamala Harris. She was able to masterfully take control of the debate from the very beginning and not let go of the hold. Many expected the night to be a clash between the more moderate Biden policies and the socialist agenda of Bernie Sanders, however, the two often paired up in defense of attacks against their old age. Candidates have been going after Biden, the presumptive front runner, after he made comments emphasizing his relationship with segregationists in order to prove a point about bipartisanship.While Cory Booker utterly swung and missed against Biden, Kamala was able to land a solid punch last night. Not only did she call Biden out for his comments, but she also questioned his role in Civil Rights more specifically about his stance on the policy of bussing. While bussing turned out to be a failed policy that Biden had a more nuanced stance against, he was able to fight back with his other legislative history in regard to civil rights. Overall though, Kamala was able to land the bunch and left Biden in an awkward spotlight that democratic voters were sure to take notice of.
Aside from the shots from Kamala, Joe Biden didn't have an awful night, but much like Elizabeth Warren the first night, he didn't completely stand out. Biden represents an older generation of Americans, one that grew up being told that socialism and communism were bad. Now, the democratic party has seemed to forget the dangers of these policies and have made them mainstream. Perhaps the reason that Biden didn't really stand out was because he doesn't belong. Fundamentally, he likely disagreed with just about every solution that was brought up. He was not afraid to take a stance on healthcare that fell to the more moderate side in terms of solution, however, he did, like every democrat, raise his hand when asked if his health care plan would provide full coverage to illegal immigrants. If Biden were to suggest this 20, maybe even 10 years ago, they woulda called him crazy and a radical. However, these are officially mainstream positions in the democratic party. At the end of the day, however, it is the primary and they must appeal to the progressive base of the party if they want to win. Just how big that progressive wing is, however, has not been determined.
  Bernie did not have a great night himself. He was one of the only ones to suggest that we should abolish the private health care industry. This is a losing issue for democrats. Only about 20% of Americans are in favor of abolishing the private health industry in favor of a government ran program. Besides his proposed failed policies, Bernie was not a main voice in discussion and was not called on by the moderators as much as Biden or Kamala.
   One of the most interesting moments of the night was Mayor Pete addressing the issues going on in his community of South Bend. As mentioned, an officer involved shooting has brought the community into turmoil. This has been a big problem for the mayor as he has had to go back home to address the issue in town halls and community interaction, often met with distaste for his lack of presence in his community due to his presidential run. Buttigieg immediately came out and said he has failed in making the police representative of the community and both implicitly and explicitly bashing the "systematic racism" that is engrained in law enforcement, literally ten seconds after admitting that he was not allowed to take sides before a conclusion had been drawn. Furthermore, Buttigieg bragged about being denounced by the Fraternal Order of Police for his comments and actions against law enforcement. If Barrack Obama saying that if he had a son he'd look like Traevon Martin wasn't bad enough, there is now candidates for president who may as well come out against law enforcement completely. These comments are not only dangerous to the lives of the thousands of officers who put their lives on the line on a daily basis for the safety of their communities, but also do little to mend the broken relationship that exists between law enforcement and communities around America. Shame on Pete Buttigieg.
   Two of the most interesting candidates on the stage, Marianne Williamson and Andrew Yang, had little time to talk, yet spiced things up when they did. We can all pretty much agree that Williamson was on something when she walked on that stage last night. Not known to many, Williamson was labeled an "author". Little was brought up about her opposition to vaccinations but she did find a way to win what Ben Shapiro calls "the woke fest". She attempted to transcended the politics of policy formulation and debate by talking about "love", "happiness" and other vague symbolic words that have little to do with the prosperity of the country. Look for Marianne to drop out sooner than later as she is polling at 0% and those numbers will somehow find a way to go down in the next few weeks. Andrew Yang, on the other hand, was a rebel on the stage wearing no tie and speaking by far the least out of all the candidates. Therefore, Andrew Yang is the winner by default for speaking the least amount of dumb statements. Andrew Yang could have established himself as a legit candidate, however, if he did speak up about his proposals and maybe even took a shot at some of the other candidates. One of the things I noticed about Yang was that he was the only one to simply say "thank you" at the end of the debate in his closing remarks. While a small gesture of gratitude is overlooked, it goes to show that he is one of the only candidates who believes they're entitled to be on the stage fighting for the presidency.
In terms of the primary going forward, I think we have shifted to the point of it being up in the air. Again, if you asked me last week who would get the nomination I would have told you Bernie or Elizabeth Warren. Now, you have candidates like Kamala, Julian Castro and even Cory Booker who are making better names for themselves. Personally, I don't think Biden stands a chance to be the nominee. While he would stand the best chance against Trump among the nominees, Biden will only have the support of the old time working class democrats. Therefore, I would say he will cap out at around 38%, not nearly enough to secure the nomination. The rest of the electorate will rally behind progressive candidates. Once they come to their senses and realize that there can only be one progressive candidate to beat Biden, they will rally behind the one with the best chance not only to beat Biden, but also Trump (none of them will). At the end of the day, it will ultimately be a progressive going up against President Trump. They will more than likely pander to their coastal elitist interests which will cause the rust belt states to again vote for the president and Donald Trump will be looking at a second term. If I am wrong and Biden does win the nomination, it will be a bloodbath in a fight for states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida. Against a generic democrat I would make the prediction that Trump will win Ohio and one other rust belt state (Penn., Mich. or Wisco.), lose two rust belt states, win Florida thus setting up a massive showdown for the state of Arizona to determine who will win the election. Traditionally, Arizona is a red state but has moved more to the center as of late. The state elected Krysten Sinema against a Trump-supporting Republican in Martha McSally. The race was extremely close with both ending up in the senate due to the death of John McCain. Arizona will be a major battleground state in 2020 and could ultimately decide the presidency.

The First Night of the Democratic Debate

The first night of the first Democratic debate is complete. The night featured Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Julian Castro, Tim Ryan, Tulsi Gabbard, Robert Francis O'Rourke, John Delaney,  Bill de Blasio, Amy Klobuchar and Jay Inslee (who?). My initial reaction to the debate was that after three years after Donald Trump's stunning election victory, Democrats have still not learned their lesson. 

You heard the common phrases like "a women's right to choose", "transgender abortions" and "death by climate change", yet rarely did you hear the candidates take up the issues that matter to middle class, blue collared voters. Trump won in 2016 because he was able to resonate with these voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. While democrats continue to argue the best way to kill a baby and tax the wealthy 70%, middle class voters are pondering a second term for Mr. Trump. While I'm sure Democrats understand this predicament they're in, they also realize that a heavy progressive wing of the party is emerging and could very well determine who will be standing on the debate stage with Donald Trump in 2020. Therefore, while democrats take a progressive stance in the primaries, look for most of them to make a move towards the center when the general election comes around. 

There were two winners from last night's debate. The first winner, and the one with the best chance to get the nomination going into the night, was Elizabeth Warren. Warren has had a bump in the polls recently and is looking to overtake Bernie as the progressive option for voters. She did not need to do anything special to keep the momentum going but a blunder on-stage could have been costly. She coasted her way along, getting a solid amount of speaking time and finishing with a decently strong closing. She avoided getting involved with the identity politics aspect of the debate which seemed to dominate at some points. She set herself apart by advocating for abolishing the private health insurance industry in which most democrats refuse to commit. Overall, Warren got the short end of the stick by drawing the first night and being the only one on stage polling above 10%, yet was able to make the most of it. 

The second winner of the debate was Julian Castro. While Castro is fairly unknown in politics, he does have a background of HUD secretary under Obama and the mayor of San Antonio. Castro's primary issue is immigration. Having roots that trace back to south of the border, Castro made radical proposals like making crossing the border not a criminal offense. Castro brought in a specific article within immigration law that he claims that President Trump is using in order to detain illegal crossers. While Democrats in the House are likely to refuse funding the crisis at the border, Castro simply suggested that we no longer detain those who illegally crossed the border. He even went as far to "challenge" everyone on the debate stage to support abolishing the provision in the law.   More moderate candidates,like Klobuchar declined to do such citing the fact that it would prevent US officials from prosecuting drug dealers and human traffickers who attempted to enter the country, a very fair point. Castro shot back by saying there were other provisions that would allow prosecution of these individuals, yet declined to say what exactly those provisions were. However, at the end of the night, Castro did what he needed to do. He made his name known to the Democratic base and put himself in a position to raise some money and start some serious campaigning. 

The biggest loser of the night was Robert Francis. "Beto", as he is known, did not get too into policy, yet made it very clear that he could speak Spanish, to the demise of Cory Booker. Beto was not assertive during the debate and even faced tough scrutiny from Julian Castro on the issue of immigration, with Castro going as far to suggest that Beto was not educated on the issue of illegal immigration. When asked about a progressive tax policy, Beto spoke in two different languages, both in which he did not answer the question. During the 2018 midterms Beto was portrayed as the second coming of JFK, maybe even Abraham Lincoln. After Texas voters came to their senses and reelected Ted Cruz, the media abandoned Beto and left him out for the sharks that existed in the Democratic party. Now Beto is left with no assertiveness, no media portrayed charm, close to zero policy and a very low number of supporters (polling at 3%). If Beto were smart, he'd realize that he has absolutely no chance to win this primary and would be best as a vice presidential candidate that could potentially make Texas a battle-ground in the general election. 

One topic that was brought up was the issue of the Senate and what would happen if the Republicans keep it, which is more than likely going to happen. Two names consistently brought up throughout this discussion were Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham, more specifically their plans to get them out of office. If Democrats implementing their agenda means that Mitch and Lindsay need to go, the dems have already lost. Not only are these two likely to be reelected in 2020, but it shows the democrats lack of being able to work in a bipartisan manner. Mitch McConnell isn't the one who refuses to fund the crisis at the border, that would be Nancy Pelosi. Mitch McConnell, however, was the one to let Obama have two supreme court appointees. It was the democrats who refused to vote for Juges Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, not Mitch McConnell.

Overall, there was little debate in the first debate. The candidates had small policy differences here and there, especially with issues such as healthcare, however, the debate felt like an echo chamber of progressive leaning ideas that appeal to the elites of the democratic party. The one pretentious moment of the debate was between Tim Ryan and Tulsi Gabbard, in which Gabbard came after Ryan after Ryan made a statement about the Taliban being involved in 9/11. At the end of the day, however, a lot of the same ideas were echoed throughout the debate. One candidate whose campaign was founded on the working class was Tim Ryan. Besides his blunder with Tulsi, from a conservative standpoint, Ryan had a decent night. He made arguments that appealed to working class voters. However, after the debate, after going on the abyss of humanity known as Twitter, many users made the claim that Ryan meant white voters when bringing up the middle class. This is the key friction that exists in the party right now. There is a clear disconnect between progressive, social justice warrior democrats and blue collared workers in the rust belt who have been loyal to democrats such as Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama, but switched to the likes of Donald Trump in 2016. If this tension can't be resolved and the Democrats put up a progressive who refuses to talk about unions or even the Constitution, look for those voters to stick with Trump in 2020.