- Biden--The conundrum is the pushback made by 45 and his minions about his son Beau's dealings in Ukraine and China. It's all just pushback, and of course 45 should talk with all the millions that his family members have made off of his name and presidency so far, but it looks like all that has rubbed off on him poorly--which is to say, 45's spin may cause his downfall. I don't think it will. I think Biden's own inability to remain focused during the debate is undoing himself, and I can't imagine a new surge of support because of it. 45 will brag on that and then brag that the Democrats have no one else nearly as good.
- Booker--I'm having a tough time, still, trying to figure out what he stands for. What he wants to do is preach Democratic unity, not bad at all, since if anything will serve to unseat 45 it's that. But other than inserting responses, some of them quite good, to other candidates' musings, it has looked for some time like he believes that image-building constitutes a great campaign strategy than any policy initiatives. For the life of me, I can't think of a single significant policy proposal he's put forth. I don't think that bodes well for him. He needs better numbers soon.
- Buttigieg--We saw his claws when he flashed them at Beto O'Rourke, telling him that to suggest that the candidates show up with some courage now and then fell flat when directed toward him. His oratorical skills seem to be getting better as he's leaning into the role. Yet, I'm not inclined to back the top of the ticket with someone who's merely accomplished the mayorhood of a town the size of Green Bay. Sorry, but there it is. Would he have had the chops of, say, even a Julian Castro, he might even be the frontrunner right now. Veeply, though, he has my attention.
- Castro--Smarting from the bad-guy role he played in torching Biden the last time around, he seemed to back away last night. He also did not help himself by using the same states as examples as Klobuchar did right after she spoke; it was as if he couldn't think of any other battleground state where unemployment has been an issue. I was impressed with him early on and could sense his passion about border issues, which come to him quite naturally. But he's oddly down-shifted on that, and the effects aren't doing what he planned. He's veep material at best now (and I think he might be really good there). I don't think he'll get past Iowa.
- Gabbard--Is this lady a Democrat? I'm not comfortable with her. She continues to downplay the importance of impeachment, as if that ship hasn't already sailed. Is she waiting for it to fail to tell everyone I-told-you-so, in which case that won't be a winning commentary anyhow? In trashing Hillary Clinton's "deplorables" comment of the previous campaign (deplorable in and of itself, actually), she seems to be trying to reach out to disaffected Republicans to get them to cross over and support her, that being the magic combination that will get a Democrat, namely her, elected. I have news: They are what they are, and someone like her won't be able to suddenly create the a-ha moment that fuses the country back together. She's Debbie Downer personified: always bitter, perpetually edgy, almost snarky. Maybe I've missed something, but I've never heard her actually upbeat. That attitude alone will get her beat. Unless my tea leaves are telling me something weird, she'll be gone after Iowa, too.
- Harris--She's in that tweener place, where in any other campaign she'd likely be in at least second place if not the frontrunner. She's got it all: Senatorial status, bright mind, quick wit, excellent knowledge of policy, and a genuine talent for noting what hasn't been there and needs to be, a.k.a. reproductive rights. With her grilling of Brett Kavanaugh, too, she has displayed a fearlessness in the moment that the Democrats are going to need on the podium with the chief insulter and shameless cheap-shot artist running for the other side. But the numbers aren't there. I'm not sure if the media's to blame for focusing on the Big Three of Biden, Sanders and Warren, or that they're doing so because of the numbers that are already there. Either way, she's getting muscled out and I'm not sure what can help her besides the sudden withdrawal of one of the aforementioned three. I lean toward her, but Iowa will be her gauntlet. I don't like her as a veep candidate; I'd rather save her for Attorney General or the Supreme Court.
- Klobuchar--In much the same place as Harris. Her sly sarcasm's starting to emerge, and I'm not sure it will raise her status. She's waiting for the party to return to the center, not its center, and I think she may be waiting instead for Godot. She seems to have a long needle, which may come in handy against 45's insults and innuendoes. But she has to show well in Iowa; she's been talking about the vital Midwest since the get-go, and thus must finish at least 3rd, it says here. I doubt that that will happen.
- O'Rourke--Trying too hard to be decisive and significant. His speechifying has been matched by Buttigieg now, so that's no longer setting him apart. I'll say it again: He should stop the effort and go get John Cornyn out of his Senate seat. The fallback position for the Democrats must be to retake the Senate. Having the House has certainly been helpful, especially now that impeachment inquiries are lurching forward like a train, but having only one-fourth of the power (House, Senate, President, Supreme Court) will, too, run its course. O'Rourke would help a lot, and perhaps pave the way to the presidency later, if he took one for the team here. He now has excellent experience in a Senate race. Tomorrow is another day and 2024 or 2028 aren't far away.
- Sanders--78 plus a very recent heart attack. Seen clearly, this should be a no-brainer. He should step aside. But he has his own passionate following and now AOC has thrown her support behind him. I question the wisdom of that, even with good health, at this early date, but there it is. The party will not win with him as the nominee. Will. Not. 45 will throw "socialist" at him until it sticks, which won't be very long. Sanders' goal will therefore be to keep the party together and convince the fence-sitters that socialism isn't the least bit dangerous. I know that, and probably you do, too, if you're reading this. But we're not average voters, and our political backgrounds and attention spans are a great deal deeper. He knows what he wants, he can articulate it well, but he can't pull it off nationally. It didn't work four years ago, and it wasn't just because of the wishers surrounding Hillary. His presence, and that of Biden, are a real problem now.
- Steyer--For the first time out, I was impressed. He said a few things others haven't, and appeared to be more than a one-trick, impeachment-obsessed pony. But it's already late, and he also appears amateurish with not a lot of time to catch up. History will note him as one of the major leaders in impeachment, though, and that's not a bad thing. I don't see him surviving Iowa. We still owe him thanks for being prescient about 45; his energy has helped move that mountain.
- Warren--I like her positive approach about all things, but her schoolteacher persona also strikes as being a bit ivory towerish. Her tax-the-rich's-stuff plan has been called out to some success by Andrew Yang (see below), and feels like something the Republicans can take apart loophole-by-loophole with fuzzy definitions and complicated phraseology--tomayto, tomahto, and the like. It's potentially mockable by more than just 45, too. We don't need any more opportunities to deflect from the real problem here. She also needs to walk herself back from Medicare for All. It's way, way too easy to mock, and to give 45 any chance to sound legitimate about anything will allow him to retake the high ground and regain attention. Let me say this again: She belongs on the Supreme Court, but Treasury doesn't sound bad, either.
- Yang--He was right to call out Warren on her tax plan, but his $1200-per-person scheme reeks with socialistic flavor. It'll turn into red meat for 45 to reply that all Democrats want to do is throw money at everything, as ridiculous as that now sounds with bottomless Republican borrowing, and continue by saying that Democrats don't believe in working for one's money (harking to the Puritan work ethic, as if he's worked a day in his life). That would be low-hanging fruit with Yang up there. This kind of thinking won't get him the White House, but Council of Economic Advisors? Maybe.
Who are we left with? That's a poser. As awful as 45 is, it will take someone with an unusual combination of skills and ability to expand the moment on the stage to keep recalling his massive lies and hypocritical stances, to stay calm and avoid paralyzing shock at new and even more terrible accusations, and also to point out general Republican weaknesses. I'm still not sure who can do that. One more mass debate probably won't produce that person. It's no time to panic, for the primaries will shake the tree well. But with 45's continued plunge toward complete irrationality and his grab-bag decision-making, we haven't a minute to waste.
Be well. Be careful. I'll see you down the road.
Mister Mark
No comments:
Post a Comment