Discussion: Last Night's Debate: Democrats Vs. CNN

Discussion for article #241741


I wanted to like Webb. He’s a decorated, Purple Heart veteran and a democrat against a sea of pseudo tough guy, war-first republicans. However he came across as our McCain: curmudgeonly, and seemingly steering every question awkwardly toward his service. Chaffee kept wandering from his podium and bringing up his ‘no scandal’ past essentially turning himself into Fox News.


Great summary. We definitely watched the same debate. Thanks, Ed.


Don’t agree, this ED KILGORE comes across as being REPUG biased…

1 Like

“forever representing progressive dissent against Democratic centrism”

a subtle change that might be more accrate would be

“forever representing centrist dissent against Democratic conservatism”

Bernie’s stated platform is not nearly as far left as it has been posed by the inherently, obsessively conservative Big Money machine that owns both parties at the top.

That may just be because the fulcrum of our entire political lever has moved so far to the right during the Tea era, Bernie’s common sense, essentially centrist ideas are now viewed as liberal extremism.

I realize this is an exercise in incremental semantics, but I really do think my version is much more accurate. I know I regularly criticize the “lefties” among us for their persistent attempts at reminding us all just how distant we really are from Marxism, and anything else that might be considered real “socialism.”

But that debate was a good example of how the fulcrum has been moved so far to the right, we perceive some very vital and inevitable historic transitions, like admitting immigrants, raising the minimum wage, providing healthcare and social security, and (yes, I’ll go there) even eliminating poverty altogether, as some sort of gateway to perpetual communism, instead of seeing those achievements as the best reward of a successful hybrid economy.

The Democrats struggle in the center, not on the left, while the Republicans toil over the far right, in what has become a mud bath in a manure pit.

There’s been NOTHING akin to “socialism” even discussed thus far, and those who try to relegate single-payer and minimum wage discussions to some sort of extreme left-wing status have been caught up in that profound rightward movement of the fulcrum of our political philosophy.


Moderator Anderson Cooper, normally the most irenic of talking heads, got in touch with his inner Jake Tapper and began barking harsh criticisms at the candidates.

Irenic, wow I had to google that, not because I couldn’t remember what it meant, but because I’d never heard of it. And even the coment spell checker was suggesting ironic.

Republicans have worked themselves into such a far right corner. I’m glad to see the Democrats staying on the issues and proposing what I, as a fairly left of center Democrat, feel are decent answers. That said I am a “conservative” on many issue like living within our means, savings wild and natural resources, trying to wean ourselves off using a lot of energy and onto renewable resources etc. It’s sad to me that none of those “conservative” ideas ever seem to get noticed by Republicans, the party of the EPA.


I didn’t actually care for the tone of Ed’s summary. It seems a poor mix of MSM expectations and random archaic words. This was a well presented debate with tough questions for the candidates that were met with informed responses. Which is in sharp contrast to the side show that has been the Republican race.
Clinton and Sanders both did well. Webb was not assertive enough, while Chafee almost invisible. And I thought O’Malley, while still trying to get some national name recognition, was also positioning himself as a viable choice for vice-president.


I totally agree.


“Sanders was in a word defiant, and if you shared his outrage at inequality and corporate power his tone was appropriate.” I take it Mr. Kilgore doesn’t share Sen. Sanders outrage? How else could he report knowing to whom Sanders’ tone would be “inappropriate”? Also, what of outrage at the current election finance situation? If I recall correctly, every candidate but HRC agreed with Sanders that it is dangerously corrupt.


Solid analysis, but “lick-lipping MSM/GOP ghouls”?

O’Malley is an unknown from Maryland, a relatively insignificant state Electoral College-wise. Hillary - looking once again as the presumptive nominee - is surely going to pick someone who can bring home a basket of EC votes.

1 Like

The candidates didn’t let CNN run the debate and that was a win for everyone.

The candidates did what they each needed respectively (and respectfully).

Omalley gains the most as his support will double (to 8%)

Hillary showed Bernie supporters that she is strong and can do well should she be the nominee. And very much, vice versa.

I think Bernie gains more than Hillary as he was being introduced for the first time for many (see most googled etc) so he had the most upside opportunity.

Bernie gains nationally because of this, Hillary gains in IA and NH as they know Bernie already and his upside was already built in there, so her competence reassures many that her recent slump is temporary.

Great debate, and great contrast to the republicans.

I listened to a little right wing am radio this morning and even they had to admit the substance that was there (of course they disagreed with the dems, but couldn’t deny the substance)


CNN…At least most people are on to FOX.

Given that, I agree with the analysis, save the Bernie Sanders “outrage” bit…one more example of the acceptance of G.O.P. hyperbole and the criticism of justifiable concern by the (comparative) adults of the Democratic Party.


Great summary. This is why you write for a living while I commentary as a hobby.


“…got too far down in the weeds to score points. As a result, if you don’t
understand the significance of a “no-fly zone” in Syria, or know a lot
about banking regulations, it all became mush.”
I was going along with the review until this pushed me over. This is why I’ll go to the BBC and more so, Al-Jazeera, for news that doesn’t insult my intelligence. CNN (and I guess Ed Kilgore) are part of the dumbing down of this country.


I largely agree with this summary.

And I must say I was surprised at the fairly even-handed tone of the debate, given the intro.

I caught the intro, and it sounded like a big pay-per-view boxing championship match from Vegas was coming on. “Hillary The Front Runner! Bernie the Challenger who has to prove he can go the distance!”

It all seemed so over the top, and it was a relief they dialed it down for the actual debate.


Well said. I particularly liked…

…THAT is a clear image of the ‘modern’ conservative movement.

Bernie may call himself a “Democratic Socialist” but he’s really pretty light on the actual socialism (as an economic organizing principle). It doesn’t really help him that your average person on the street apparently has zero understanding of what that word means - it’s become just another dog-whistle epithet for the Foxy Nooz crowd.

1 Like

Agree, he’s more in line with old school liberalism from an era when it included blue-collar Joe Lunchbox.


I had to google that one as well.

Given the definition (particularly the theological aspect) it’s gonna be pretty darn hard to work that word-of-the-day into casual conversation.

Oh, give them a few more hours.

Any recognition or acknowledgement of “substance” will be down the memory hole shortly…

1 Like