I listened to the debate, and thought 1. it was her best debate performance yet, and 2. Klobuchar is still way too boring to go against Trump. She’s still my #3 choice of the candidates on the debate stage, but a pretty distant #3.
Maybe it was the reduced numbers that emphasized it, but this was the first debate where I really noticed the extreme difference between the experienced politicians in the field vs. the outsiders (and Buttigieg is in the latter group). The group of Biden, Warren, Sanders, and Klobuchar were simply head-and-shoulders more versed in national and international topics than the businessmen and mayor.
I also thought it was interesting how close the senators walked to the line of declaring bias against Trump on impeachment, without crossing it. Sanders kept the most distance, while Warren and Klobuchar tiptoed right up to the line, then re-framed it in the context of the election rather than the impeachment trial. While it was subtle, I think it was intentional, just in case it becomes relevant in the context of disqualifying senators (cough, McConnell, cough, Graham) for being biased jurors.
5 Likes
what do you mean by bias against trump?
Senators are supposed to be impartial jurors in the impeachment trial. They have to swear an oath to that effect. Bias could go either way (for or against), so right now senators need to be cautious about avoiding bias specifically about the topics of the Articles of Impeachment. McConnel and Graham have not, and there could be an argument that they should recuse themselves or be dismissed as jurors. No need to weaken that argument by having Dem or Independent senators display bias the other direction.
13 Likes
gotcha! Thanks for clarifying. I was thrown by the immediate thought “how can anyone not have an opinion on trump at this point” ha.
6 Likes
Here’s an interesting poll:
Weird how you basically never hear people condemning white centrists as unreasonable and treacherous purists, isn’t it? That one is reserved almost entirely for hippie-bashing, despite the lack of empirical support.
8 Likes
boggles the mind. Like what kind of person would support Warren, but be like “Oh yeah, but Trump is my second choice”.
But also, very hard to parse what any of that means in practicality, because in the end there will be only one and people supporting other campaigns will jump on board with the winner, and right now each of those candidates are only representing a small proportion of democratic voters… Look, I sucked at algebra. I have no idea. I suppose this is all so fluid none of it means much of anything, except there are about 5% of people who are quite irrational in their voting patterns.
6 Likes
I agree with your premise, but I have to point out that those numbers include Republicans in the polling. It’s pretty irrelevant if Republicans who would pick one Democrat or another in the Dem primary would then choose Trump over a different Dem. When we get down into the single-digit percentages, there’s not much meaning to pull from it.
4 Likes
I don’t know enough about Jane Lynch’s politics to judge whether she’s being facetious or whether she’s so clueless that she can’t identify the wine cave fundraiser as class warfare, itself.
8 Likes
I was just more amused by Jamelle Bouie’s response.
8 Likes
Based upon bio and Twitter feed, she appears to be a fairly standard rich white DNC liberal.
Therefore, extreme classism and unwavering solidarity with the wealthy is to be expected.
6 Likes
Thank you for braving the wilds of Twitter to indulge my question. 
5 Likes
Unsurprisingly, I found this while I was there…
8 Likes
While we’re at it…
The wealthy have class solidarity. Do you?
9 Likes
