The Final Debate
The last Democratic presidential debate was held tonight on CNN, broadcasting from New York City. This debate was not originally on the schedule the Democratic National Committee had approved, and was added due largely to popular demand. It will be the final time Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton face off against each other on a stage -- the next debate to happen will be between the Democratic and Republican nominees, later in the year.
I personally thought both candidates were a lot sharper tonight than they have been in previous debates. In fact, I'm one of those political wonks who would have been happy if there had been more debates held, because I think they provide one of the only opportunities for the public to see candidates being forced to occasionally think on their feet and spontaneously come up with answers to unexpected questions. So, in general, I'm pretty pro-debate. I think that no matter which candidate you prefer in the Democratic race, you'd have to agree that they both looked a lot sharper in this debate than in the first few they held.
I wasn't very happy with the moderators, but then I seldom am. We didn't get a whole lot of unexpected questions tonight, and we didn't get a whole lot of questions that hadn't already been asked and answered at previous debates. Having Wolf Blitzer host didn't really help, either. In fact, the most interesting exchanges of the night took place when the two candidates veered off on their own preferred tangents, and brought up subjects that the moderators hadn't even asked about. For Hillary, the best example of this was her strong support (while chastising the moderators for not even asking about it) of abortion rights for women. For Bernie (at least for me) the best example was when he strongly asserted he'd move marijuana off the controlled substance schedules entirely. Neither answer was prompted by anything the moderators said, but at least the answers were something new on the stage.
Being a New York audience meant a lot of boisterousness from the crowd. Both Clinton and Sanders seemed to have their own cheering sections, but by the end of the night it seemed that around two-thirds of the people were cheering for Bernie and only one-third for Hillary. This could just be that Sanders fans were cheering louder, though, it was tough to tell just by watching it on television.
Hillary obviously wanted to turn her fire on the Republicans, and she rather cleverly worked "New York values" into a lot of her answers (in rebuke to Ted Cruz). Bernie's big theme was captured in an early statement: "We should be thinking big, not small." Hillary countered with her theme, which she also repeated throughout the night: "Describing the problem is a lot easier than trying to solve it." Both kept focused on their overall theme quite well, I thought.
Bernie certainly wasn't pulling any punches tonight. Hillary got in some zingers of her own, but compared to previous debates she didn't seem as aggressive tonight. This isn't unusual, considering she's up in the New York polls -- underdogs are normally the ones who attack hardest.
Both candidates stumbled over issues that have been brought up previously. Hillary Clinton still doesn't have a good answer for refusing to release the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches, and she was pressed on the question harder than I've ever seen in a debate. She tried to respond by pointing out Bernie still hasn't released his tax returns, which is a valid complaint (it's pretty late in the season to not have done so).
Bernie hit Hillary hard on her "support" for a $15-an-hour minimum wage, and he scored some points. Clinton wants to have it both ways on this issue, and this equivocation showed badly. "I'm for $15 except when I'm not" isn't really a great answer, because it doesn't match up with her campaign slogan of "Fighting for us" -- she's saying she won't lead the fight, but will follow along if other Democrats manage to somehow make a $15-an-hour federal minimum wage happen. That's not exactly a profile of political leadership, to put it mildly. Sanders drove in on this point repeatedly, since he's been supporting $15-an-hour all along.
Bernie, as always, stumbled on the question of gun control. Since this is the only issue where Clinton is clearly to his left, she hit this point as hard as she could, although she had to sheepishly dodge why her campaign has been cherry-picking bizarre statistics to try and make it seem like Vermont is flooding New York with illegal guns (short answer: they're not). In the midst of all this, Clinton actually apologized for the bad parts of the 1994 crime bill, which may have been the first time she's said the words "I'm sorry" on the issue.
Bernie went for the jugular on the issue of using the term "superpredators," saying bluntly: "It was a racist term. Everyone knew it was a racist term." This was right before he spontaneously brought up the War On Drugs and his promise to deschedule marijuana. Hillary, as she's done the entire campaign, ignored the marijuana issue entirely.
Bernie also made some good political hay on his support for banning fracking -- which is a huge issue in New York. Hillary sounded like a politician who wanted to, again, have it both ways on the issue, as she tried to defend her record (as Secretary of State) of promoting fracking around the world. She also completely dodged the question of whether she'd support a carbon tax.
This led to a very interesting back and forth on Clinton's entire foreign policy record, which showed clearly the two candidates' differing views on American interventionism around the globe. No new ground was covered (I personally would have loved to hear Clinton questioned about the coup in Honduras), but the differences between the two were adequately defined.
There was an amusing segment where both Clinton and Sanders essentially agreed with (!) Donald Trump on NATO -- that America pays too much of the bill, and that Europe should be made to contribute more generously.
On Israel, Clinton got a chance to show her personal experience ("I negotiated a cease fire"), which put her in a pretty good light. Bernie spoke of his time on a kibbutz in Israel, which is not a subject he usually brings up, but it did serve to personalize the issue for him.
After a commercial break, Bernie was pressed hard about his numbers "not adding up" for all the agenda items he'd like to enact. This was more of the "get stuff done" versus "dream big" thematic battle between the two candidates.
Bernie scored a solid hit on Clinton in the segment on Social Security, though, because Hillary simply refused to answer whether she'd support raising the cap on income. Each time she tried, she had to qualify it in one way or another. What it added up to was, again, if a Democratic Congress decided to do that, she'd "follow" their will and sign it. Once more, this isn't exactly "fighting for us," and it certainly isn't showing the leadership on the issue that Bernie is. He drove in hard on this question, repeatedly asking "are you or are you not" in favor of lifting the cap, but never getting an unqualified answer.
Finally, closing statements arrived. Bernie's was pretty standard stuff for him, but it certainly fired up the crowd to a fever pitch. Hillary had to politely wait for the "Bernie! Bernie!" chanting to die down before speaking. She made the case that she had been New York's senator and again tossed out the "New York values" line.
As I said at the beginning, I thought both candidates did fairly well tonight. Both have improved since their first debates. Perhaps Bernie Sanders has improved more, but that's likely because Hillary Clinton started debating at a stronger level in the early debates. This was not only the final showdown between the two, next Tuesday could be the final meaningful primary of the year. Bernie had the most to gain tonight, but I'm not sure either candidate really wound up convincing many people to vote for them (who hadn't already made up their minds). The real test will be to see if their polling numbers shift in the next few days, and ultimately to see what the returns look like next Tuesday.
To close on, I am proud to say that both candidates are now performing in debates at a level that will allow them to easily take on the Republican candidate in the fall. I think both Bernie and Hillary would, at this point, truly relish the prospect of debating either Donald Trump or Ted Cruz (or whomever else the Republicans come up with). That, at least to me, means tonight was a very successful debate.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
bernie and hillary are fine. however, there was a full blown debate in the teachers' lounge...
Hillary Clinton still doesn't have a good answer for refusing to release the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches, and she was pressed on the question harder than I've ever seen in a debate.
Why do people think that they are entitled to something for free that others pay a large amount of money to receive? This is also the issue with the recent complaints that Hillary used white noise machines to keep people from hearing her speak at a fund raiser held outdoors. People paid $30,000 a couple to be at that fundraiser. Do you think people would feel cheated if they could have heard the same message for free just by standing across the street? Hillary does speaking engagements as a side job like most high level politicians do when they leave office. Why should she give away a speech for free that corporations will pay back big money to hear her give at their event?
Why Clinton hasn't just been straight forward with her reasoning is beyond me.
Why Clinton hasn't just been straight forward with her reasoning is beyond me.
Because that's NOT her reasoning.. It's yours.. But I must admit, it's pretty fanciful... And almost logical...
Why should she give away a speech for free that corporations will pay back big money to hear her give at their event?
Because the people have a right to know what she is telling big and evil corporations.. Is it the same thing she is telling Joe & Jane SixPack???
Hillary's integrity and honesty quotient is in the toilet... Every time she evades and hides things, her quotient sinks lower and lower...
If Hillary wants to be POTUS, she needs to be transparent..
THAT is why she should release those transcripts.. The fact that she refuses proves it in the minds of Americans that she is hiding something...
Michale
bernie and hillary are fine. however, there was a full blown debate in the teachers' lounge...
Details, man!! :D
Michale
The biggest loser of this debate was Prime Minister Netanyahu and his strange strategy for seven years of disrespecting an American president and administration that has merely been Israel's strongest supporter and defender, bar none.
The biggest loser of this debate was Prime Minister Netanyahu and his strange strategy for seven years of disrespecting an American president and administration that has merely been Israel's strongest supporter and defender, bar none.
Obama put the needs and desires of an enemy before the needs and desires of an ally..
Netanyahu's disrespect of Obama is completely and unequivocally logical and deserved..
Israel is LESS safe now, than it was before the JCPOA..
As it has been abundantly proven beyond any doubt, Obama's appeasement of Iran hasn't produced the desired effect. Iran has NO desire to join the International community and it's obvious to all that Iran was just playing Obama to get much sought after billions of dollars to continue their ballistic missile work..
Obama has made the region AND the world less safe...
These are the facts. And they are indisputable...
Michale
Netanyahu will rue the day that he injected politics into the relationship between the US and Israel.
He is playing with fire, literally, when he stakes Israel's security on a Republican party that is headed toward the political wilderness for a very long time, number one, and, number two, on a Republican party that does not have the best interests of Israel uppermost on its agenda.
Netanyahu will rue the day that he injected politics into the relationship between the US and Israel.
It was Obama that did that when he sided with Iran against Israel..
He is playing with fire, literally, when he stakes Israel's security on a Republican party that is headed toward the political wilderness for a very long time, number one, and, number two, on a Republican party that does not have the best interests of Israel uppermost on its agenda.
And THAT's a load of malarkey.. It's evidence that Israel's security is in better hands with the GOP than with Democrats..
Biga's anti-Semitism proves that beyond any doubt because THAT is the rule with the Left Wingery...
Michale
Well (sigh), it's clear I have trouble implementing the ol' HTML stuff.
My immediate reaction to The Final Debate was:
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2016/04/13/the-15-revolution/#comment-73837
To me, the modern broadcast version of a Presidential Debate is an awful lot like watching the mating rituals of tropical birds on PBS...vocalization, lots of dancing, bobbing, spreading of plumage etc. All the apparent silliness is somehow vital to political fitness. Rather than moderators, what viewers need is a political David Attenborough explaining (in hushed tones) what's going on and why, in real time. What we get, sadly, is Wolf Blitzer popping up now and then with a vacuous remark.
Both Clinton and Sanders are effective debaters, but with distinctly different styles. Clinton has fancy footwork, Sanders is more of a puncher. As these things go, the final bout was a good one.
TS,
Yer in stereo!!! :D
Michale
A Democrats dilemma:
"Gold, I like you. You remind me a lot of this famous country singer from Texas I'm crazy about, a fellow calls himself Kinky Friedman, the Original Texas Jewboy. Kinky's smarter, but I like you more."
Joseph Heller, Good as Gold
....but don't automatically assume Sanders = Kinky.
....but don't automatically assume Sanders = Kinky.
I guess that's up to Mrs Sanders... :D
Michale
Let me guess, Michale, you're a Netanyahu fan, too.
Obama has made the region AND the world less safe...
These are the facts. And they are indisputable...
These are right-wing-o-sphere blowhard talk, and completely disputable.
In fact, in just about every way this deal has made the world safer. It has pissed off:
1. Israel - they wanted us to fight their war for them
2. Saudi Arabia - they are busy drumming up a proxy war with their old allies, Iran, probably to 'pull a Putin' to keep their homies distracted
3. Republicans who are against anything Obama is for. If Obama had pulled the plug on the deal early, your point would have been 'Obama is putting everybody at risk by letting the coalition against Iran fall apart' - which it certainly would have done as China and Russia weren't going to stay on board much longer anyway.
referring to something as safe, unsafe, more safe or less safe are not factual statements - they are statements of opinion, regardless of whether or not those opinions are well-supported by facts.
Fact: Israel is in the middle-east.
Fact: Netanyahu is the elected leader of Israel.
Opinion: Netanyahu made a poor decision by throwing in with the Rebublicans
Opinion: The Iran deal made us more/less safe.
Perhaps Arthur can clear this up:
http://pbskids.org/arthur/games/factsopinions/factsopinions.html
Liz,
Let me guess, Michale, you're a Netanyahu fan, too.
I LOVE that guy!!! :D
In the vernacular of the military, he is a LEADER...
Neil,
In fact, in just about every way this deal has made the world safer.
I disagree.. And I have two and a half decades of experience to back it up...
PLUS over 80 years of history...
Appeasement *NEVER* works...
*EVER*...
Michale
Netanyahu is a leader who, left unchecked, would lead his people right off a cliff.
Israel is infinitely safer today than it was before the JCPOA, if you believe the Netanyahu rhetoric in the months and indeed years leading up to the nuclear agreement between Iran and the P3+3 countries.
I disagree.. And I have two and a half decades of experience to back it up...
Where have you been, Michale? Haven't you heard that 'experience' is now a four-letter word. :)
Because the people have a right to know what she is telling big and evil corporations.. Is it the same thing she is telling Joe & Jane SixPack???
Remind me, again, what "right" that is and where exactly in the Constitution is it mentioned? Funny, you always seem to think everything you agree with is someone's "right". If you want to know what is said at one of her fund raisers, all you have to do is donate the required gift. If you want to hear her corporate speech, hire her to give it to your company.
An opinion based on fact is more reliable than an opinion based on ... well, based on less than the facts.
Appeasement *NEVER* works...
It wasn't appeasement - it was "Stand down Iran" - the right-wing-o-sphere can't get anything right if it means that they might have to give Obama credit.
The deal with Iran was us holding up our side of the deal whose terms we dictated - the sanctions imposed for the nuclear program would be dropped if Iran stopped the program and allowed verification.
We imposed the terms of the deal, Iran capitulated under the concerted and uniform pressure from the coalition that included China and Russia.
We won.
Let me guess, Michale, you're a fan of the novel, 1984, right?
Liz,
Israel is infinitely safer today than it was before the JCPOA, if you believe the Netanyahu rhetoric in the months and indeed years leading up to the nuclear agreement between Iran and the P3+3 countries.
Yea??? What about those Ballistic Missiles that have TEL AVIV and HAIFA written on them??
You call that "SAFER"???
Let me guess, Michale, you're a fan of the novel, 1984, right?
Considering ya'all's support of Obama's domestic surveillance and whistleblower prosecutions, I could ask ya'all the same question, eh? :D
Listen,
Remind me, again, what "right" that is and where exactly in the Constitution is it mentioned?
You DO realize that the US Constitution is NOT the sole province of rights... Right?? :D
. If you want to know what is said at one of her fund raisers, all you have to do is donate the required gift.
It's all about the money with the Left Wingery, ain't it? :D
If you want to hear her corporate speech, hire her to give it to your company.
Hillary is asking for my vote.. THAT gives me the right to know what she said to those 'evil' corporations..
If she wants to hide what she said, then she has no right to expect ANYONE to vote for her...
Neil,
It wasn't appeasement - it was "Stand down Iran" -
And it magnificently and impressively FAILED...
The deal with Iran was us holding up our side of the deal whose terms we dictated - the sanctions imposed for the nuclear program would be dropped if Iran stopped the program and allowed verification.
The deal with Iran was ALSO supposed to "bring Iran into the international community" and have them stop other bad things like terrorism and ballistic missile testing..
The deal with Iran has failed..
"Failed.. Failed... IMPRESSIVELY failed."
-NASA Doctor, ARMAGEDDON
We imposed the terms of the deal, Iran capitulated under the concerted and uniform pressure from the coalition that included China and Russia.
We won.
Yea.. Tell that to the families of the people killed by Iran's terrorism. I am sure THEY will believe you, Charlie Sheen... :D
Michale
JL,
referring to something as safe, unsafe, more safe or less safe are not factual statements - they are statements of opinion, regardless of whether or not those opinions are well-supported by facts.
Fine..
I am willing to concede that my statements regarding the viability of the JCPOA vis a vis the safety of Israel is an opinion, backed up by decades of experience in the military and security career fields..
IF....
If those who think the JCPOA is the best thing since frozen pizza are willing to concede that THEIR statements are also opinions backed up by nothing but an ideological agenda..
Deal?? :D
Michale
Liz,
An opinion based on fact is more reliable than an opinion based on ... well, based on less than the facts.
Exactly..
And my opinion is based on FACTS.. AND experience, training and expertise.. PLUS Obama's own statements that Iran is not fulfilling the spirit of the JCPOA..
Whereas they only thing ya'all have in yer corners is an ideological agenda.. :D
Michale
And my opinion is based on FACTS..Whereas they only thing ya'all have in yer corners is an ideological agenda.. :D
That is about as ass-backwards as is humanly possible to achieve, not surprisingly.
Damn.
That is not what I meant.
Let's try that again!
And my opinion is based on FACTS..Whereas they only thing ya'all have in yer corners is an ideological agenda.. :D
That is about as ass-backwards as is humanly possible to achieve, not surprisingly.
There, that's better!
Seriously, Michale ...
You are the only one here, save for possibly one or two, who has an ideological agenda.
Which is why it is futile, more often than not, to attempt to discuss anything of political consequence with you.
Obviously, you are not going to abandon that tack. Which is a shame, as there are many worthwhile discussions to be had and this is the ideal place for it.
And, because I am SUCH a sucker for punishment ...
Michale,
What are the most significant ways in which Iran's nuclear program has changed during the months since the JCPOA was signed by the P3+3 countries?
Try and stick to the facts of Iran's nuclear program as it is currently constituted as compared to what the situation was in this regard before the JCPOA, when Prime Minister Netanyahu feverishly addressed the United States congress on this very subject.
You are the only one here, save for possibly one or two, who has an ideological agenda.
That's funny considering how ya'all TOTALLY denigrated and attacked Bush for so many things that ya'all give Obama a pass for..
If THAT's not an ideological agenda at work, what is?? :D
What are the most significant ways in which Iran's nuclear program has changed during the months since the JCPOA was signed by the P3+3 countries?
They have accelerated their ballistic missile program and their attacks on other countries..
Of course, you want to limit the discussion to the nuclear program because there is no overt goings on there...
But the goal of the JCPOA was to bring Iran into the international community.. And THAT goal is a dismal failure..
Don't take my word for it.. Even OBAMA says that Iran is violating the spirit of the JCPOA..
I noticed how you ignore that.. :D
Michale
Of course, you want to limit the discussion to the nuclear program because there is no overt goings on there...
No overt goings on there!? You can't be serious!
But the goal of the JCPOA was to bring Iran into the international community.. And THAT goal is a dismal failure..
False. Demonstrably.
The goal of the JCPOA to restrict Iran's nuclear program to a strictly peaceful utility was to ... wait for it ... restrict Iran's nuclear program to a strictly peaceful utility.
So far, it has worked as advertised. Consequently, Israel is much safer, if you believe PM Netanyahu's assertions about how unsafe Israel was in the months and years before the JCPOA was completed.
Of course, you want to limit the discussion to the nuclear program because there is no overt goings on there...
No overt goings on there!? You can't be serious!
But the goal of the JCPOA was to bring Iran into the international community.. And THAT goal is a dismal failure..
That wasn't the goal of the JCPOA, that is a continuing work in progress within the context of the successful JCPOA implementation. A work in progress that is currently not showing a lot of progress but one in which more effort and patience will be required, assuming the context of a successful implementation of the JCPOA.
So far, it has worked as advertised. Consequently, Israel is much safer, if you believe PM Netanyahu's assertions about how unsafe Israel was in the months and years before the JCPOA was completed.
Yet, Obama has explicitly stated that Iran is violating the spirit of the JCPOA..
So, according to Obama, it's NOT working as advertised...
Michale
It will come to you on the bus home, Michale, I am quite sure. :)
It will come to you on the bus home, Michale, I am quite sure. :)
Hopefully it will come to you BEFORE Tel Aviv or Haifa is nothing but a nuclear hole in the ground.. :D
Michale
Forget about Obama, Michale ... just take my word for it!
Forget about Obama, Michale ... just take my word for it!
"If only..... If only...."
-Hades, HERCULES
:D
Michale