Earlier today, the latest episode of the Faith 2020 Podcast was released with my updated review of the state of the race, and my rankings of the candidates. But things could change after tonight.
Let’s watch this debate together. What are you looking for tonight?
Seriously though, the reason why Bernie was confused is because Warren's claim is intentionally confusing. Yes, Biden and Bernie haven't beaten an incumbent Republican in 30 years...because they won their seats over 30 years ago. "I'm the only candidate on this stage to have defeated an incumbent Republican in the last 30 years" is a weird claim.
I'm so glad there's follow-up to Sanders on his acknowledgement the USMCA is positive, but he'd vote against it because it's not good enough. In other words, he'd refuse to help the American people, because it does not meet his ideological demands.
Important to know that Warren's team has really invested in that message Warren just delivered on how she can bring the Democrats together. Michelle Goldberg wrote a NYT op-ed on just that message in the last few days. The Warren folks think that's an important message to break through.
Klobuchar is right that M4A is not going to pass through the current senate, and even a slightly bluer Senate may not help, but does that point ring with the Democratic primary voters?
I'm looking forward to Yang talking almost as much as he did in the last few debates!
Seriously though, I'm hoping to hear the candidates address the now lack of diversity in the field. Also hoping to hear some substantive policy discussion on the environment, healthcare and social policies like family leave, minimum wage, etc.
Nothing in this debate seems to be game-changing, but the question is whether Iowa voters are tuning into this debate in a way they haven't been tuning in yet.
In other words, just because this debate hasn't incited a major turning point or development in the narrative of the primary, that doesn't mean that it won't change the course of the Iowa caucus by virtue of who is just tuning in now.
Warren's answer here about her brothers is her go to, and it would make a lot of sense if she would explicitly say that she's going to put these unifying issues at the center of her presidency and downplay more divisive issues, but she doesn't say that.
Really odd. Warren, who is weakest on foreign policy (with the exception of Steyer), probably had the best answer on that question. She didn't knock it out of the park, but she was really solid there.
1. Can Sen. Amy Klobuchar make a deeper, more nuanced case tonight than "I'm from the midwest, have won there and will win there in 2020." It's not the worst case, but it's a little too straightforwardly utilitarian. She needs something more tonight.
2. How does Buttigieg seek relevance? What's the message he wants to take into Iowa, a critical state for him? Over the last week, he's been more unity-minded in his rhetoric, and will be interesting to see if he tries to crib off Booker a bit. While Klobuchar has the most ground to gain tonight, this debate is just as essential for Buttigieg. If he can't finish top three, it's difficult to see a path forward for him.
3. Warren appears to want to outflank Sanders by being more confrontational and antagonistic toward conservatives on cultural issues. Does Warren take that approach tonight, particularly with Booker, Castro and Harris gone? Does she see the most space open there?
4. Does Joe Biden simply try to take the fight to Trump, and get out of this debate as unscathed as possible given his relatively strong standing, or does he think he needs to unload some critiques of his fellow candidates, especially Sanders?
5. On that note, Bernie is the top-tier candidate who has taken the least fire in this primary. Aside from the conversation about his reported comments in a private meeting with Warren, are major lines of attack opened up on Sanders tonight? Be on the lookout for Sanders' opponents to raise issues for the press to mine in the coming days.
Let's watch tonight's debate together
Both Biden and Klobuchar much better on their second turn in the foreign policy segment
Seriously though, the reason why Bernie was confused is because Warren's claim is intentionally confusing. Yes, Biden and Bernie haven't beaten an incumbent Republican in 30 years...because they won their seats over 30 years ago. "I'm the only candidate on this stage to have defeated an incumbent Republican in the last 30 years" is a weird claim.
I'm so glad there's follow-up to Sanders on his acknowledgement the USMCA is positive, but he'd vote against it because it's not good enough. In other words, he'd refuse to help the American people, because it does not meet his ideological demands.
https://twitter.com/MelissaMWear/status/1217272330306703360?s=20
Really smart of Biden to go after Warren here on removing all combat troops from the Middle East. She's wrong on this one.
What a start! Wolf Blitzer actually started with a question on Iran! God bless, Wolf (Buffalo-native, by the way)!
Is Pete really doing that much worse among black voters than, for instance, Klobuchar? It is interesting just how much this has been tagged to him.
Klobuchar comes with RECEIPTS on M4A
Klobuchar's strong tonight. Not sure it's enough at this point, but she's reaching folks who are just tuning in to this process, I'm sure.
Important to know that Warren's team has really invested in that message Warren just delivered on how she can bring the Democrats together. Michelle Goldberg wrote a NYT op-ed on just that message in the last few days. The Warren folks think that's an important message to break through.
When you don't really have a record, you have to try to prove to voters you really mean what you say by saying how "personal" it all is to you.
Biden is way too apologetic and defensive with this answer. Polls show voters trust Biden on foreign policy.
I'm glad Pete brought up poverty and the Poor People's Campaign.
Klobuchar is right that M4A is not going to pass through the current senate, and even a slightly bluer Senate may not help, but does that point ring with the Democratic primary voters?
I'm looking forward to Yang talking almost as much as he did in the last few debates!
Seriously though, I'm hoping to hear the candidates address the now lack of diversity in the field. Also hoping to hear some substantive policy discussion on the environment, healthcare and social policies like family leave, minimum wage, etc.
Mayor Pete on healthcare was STRONG contra Sen Warren... His delving into specifics was compelling instead of esoteric.
“Practical and progressive” and “a plan, not a pipe dream.” That’s good... again, why isn’t she leaning on this more?
Klobuchar was READY for the “can a woman win the presidency?” question...
Will Bernie’s answer on the USMCA bite him in Iowa? Seems like that could go either way...
Steyer reinforcing the idea that he's incredibly weak on foreign policy.
OK! What are your takeaways?
Nothing in this debate seems to be game-changing, but the question is whether Iowa voters are tuning into this debate in a way they haven't been tuning in yet.
In other words, just because this debate hasn't incited a major turning point or development in the narrative of the primary, that doesn't mean that it won't change the course of the Iowa caucus by virtue of who is just tuning in now.
Warren's answer here about her brothers is her go to, and it would make a lot of sense if she would explicitly say that she's going to put these unifying issues at the center of her presidency and downplay more divisive issues, but she doesn't say that.
It's so interesting how explicit Pete is about how his biography can be a political tool
Warren gave argument on USMCA that I'm sure Klobuchar would have loved to say first
Really odd. Warren, who is weakest on foreign policy (with the exception of Steyer), probably had the best answer on that question. She didn't knock it out of the park, but she was really solid there.
Well...at least Perez isn't proposing picking our nominee off of Wall Street.
(Yes, yes, I get it was a reference to Trump's comment about how he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue, but the line was still weird)
Here's what I'm looking for:
1. Can Sen. Amy Klobuchar make a deeper, more nuanced case tonight than "I'm from the midwest, have won there and will win there in 2020." It's not the worst case, but it's a little too straightforwardly utilitarian. She needs something more tonight.
2. How does Buttigieg seek relevance? What's the message he wants to take into Iowa, a critical state for him? Over the last week, he's been more unity-minded in his rhetoric, and will be interesting to see if he tries to crib off Booker a bit. While Klobuchar has the most ground to gain tonight, this debate is just as essential for Buttigieg. If he can't finish top three, it's difficult to see a path forward for him.
3. Warren appears to want to outflank Sanders by being more confrontational and antagonistic toward conservatives on cultural issues. Does Warren take that approach tonight, particularly with Booker, Castro and Harris gone? Does she see the most space open there?
4. Does Joe Biden simply try to take the fight to Trump, and get out of this debate as unscathed as possible given his relatively strong standing, or does he think he needs to unload some critiques of his fellow candidates, especially Sanders?
5. On that note, Bernie is the top-tier candidate who has taken the least fire in this primary. Aside from the conversation about his reported comments in a private meeting with Warren, are major lines of attack opened up on Sanders tonight? Be on the lookout for Sanders' opponents to raise issues for the press to mine in the coming days.