DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE I: A CLEAR CONSENSUS

It’s been a week and a half since the first Democratic debate in

Miami. We’ve had gobs of punditry, our own time for contemplation, and the first polls reflecting that debate’s impact. Surprisingly, little space separates our individual and collective views and those of the pundits. With some minor differences, we agree on three points: (1) California Senator Kamala Harris and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren emerged as winners in the two-night format; (2) former Vice President Joe Biden performed poorly and must improve in the July 30-31 debate in Detroit; and (3) a small group of candidates positioned themselves for future moves, though differences exist about who’s on that list.

The second night attracted a record audience for a Democratic primary debate as 18.1 million people watched on television and another nine million followed on streaming services. The large audience indicates the depth of Democratic desire for a candidate who can defeat President Donald Trump and that Democratic voters continue shopping for that candidate since many in the field of over 20 remain relatively unknown.
 

Harris and Warren

Hardly anyone disputes that Harris offered the most dynamic performance. She clearly planned on attacking Biden for his

Biden/Harris Faceoff

remarks about working with segregationist U.S. Senators years ago and the fact he opposed some forms of busing for school integration. By injecting her own story of being bussed as a student, Harris personalized the issue and further introduced herself to a public still relatively unfamiliar with her. Every poll taken after the debate showed her moving up and one had her grabbing second place behind Biden. 

Harris’s performance also suggested she can stand toe-to-toe with Trump on a debate stage. Her prosecutorial experience, which she flashed in questioning Judge Brett Kavanaugh and U.S. Attorney General William Barr during congressional hearings, should serve her well in a debate-stage fight with the bare-knuckled Trump. 

Warren shone for a different reason. She dominated the early parts of the first night and cruised home, untouched by any other

candidate. Voter interviews confirmed that she impressed with her command of policy and the specificity of her proposals. Warren still must get out her personal story of Oklahoma roots and a hard scrabble existence as a young mother, but she possesses the knowledge and communication skills needed for pushing her progressive message. Trump’s people reportedly fear her discipline and doggedness.

Warren’s rise contrasts with the accelerating fall of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. He dropped in most of the post-debate polls. Warren has found more attractive ways of presenting many of his ideas. There is not room for both of them in that lane.       

Biden

We’re not sure whether the former Vice President performed poorly because of inadequate preparation or age and time have dissipated his skills. Given his pre-debate dust up with Harris and New Jersey Senator Cory Booker over the segregationists, Biden should have anticipated Harris would pounce about that. That he didn’t suggests an apparent lack of foresight. Even so, as Woodson observes, his responses on stage lacked “mental and verbal dexterity.” Maybe, at 76, he’s just lost a step.

Biden, Harris, Booker

Photo Courtesy of CNN

Whatever the reasons for his performance, Biden dropped in every post-debate poll we’ve seen. He lost some of the African-American support that fueled his rise after entering the race. Biden, like all other Democratic candidates, can’t win without black voters. In the next debate, he must show he’s on his game or it’s likely he’ll end up as another early front-runner who couldn’t go the distance.

The Others

Three candidates – former San Antonio Mayor and Housing Secretary Julian Castro, South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, and Colorado Senator Michael Bennett – led the list of those who may have positioned themselves for a future move. Castro might have single handedly ended the hopes of former Texas Congressman Beto O’Rourke with his grasp of immigration policy. Buttigieg performed well with an honest admission he hasn’t solved racial problems in his city and a heartfelt condemnation of Republican invocations of religion while supporting inhumane immigration policies. Bennett took on Biden for some of his senatorial budget policy actions.

Each, however, has a major flaw. Castro, as a Latino, could suffer an anti-immigrant backlash. Buttigieg raised 24 million dollars in

the last quarter but has little black support and hasn’t yet shown he can get any. Bennett remains mostly unknown outside his home state and must fundraise quickly so he can get on television in the key, early states. He doesn’t have much time.

Some people thought a few others -- New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, and Booker -- belong in the potential breakout category. Others suggest candidates like Marianne Williamson, Erick Swalwell, John Hickenlooper, and John Delaney should save themselves the agony of a drawn out defeat and go home now. Fair enough, but many, including Henry, thought every candidate had at least one good moment. 
  

The first debate served its purposes of better introducing candidates

and initially separating the field, even though somecomplained the participants didn’t put enough emphasis on attacking Trump. Most decided they’d use their time introducing themselves to an America still mostly lacking information about them. As Rob points out, Trump has committed so many sins, plenty of material and time remain for ripping into him.