2nd Debate Scoreboard

[BmorePat87]

I am awarding points that are as legitimate as those on Whose Line

Marianne Williamson: -10,000. She said nothing but contradictions and is a reminder that people on TV do not belong in government. She argued that detailed policy plans on substantial health care reform is a "superficial fix" and then said that Donald Trump didn't have plans, just a simple slogan... but that you can't win with a simple slogan, you need to go deeper. Huh?

John Hickenlooper: 150. Solid performance for a lesser known candidate. Made great points and mentioned a solid record.

Andrew Yang: 100. Made it through the debate poised and calm and explained his main idea(s). Didn't tank his 1% chance.

Pete Buttigieg: 300. Had some solid remarks, differentiated himself on some key ideas, and made good mention of his age. Fumbled a bit on the recent shooting. Enough to keep him going and get some google searches. Not enough to put him up there with Biden or Bernie or, now, Warren and Kamala.

Joe Biden: 500. Solid for all but the bussing part. His campaign had previously explained, and noted support for him from AA leaders in his state at the time, that the bussing issue was over how Delaware did it and the need to have local fixes that work. Still an awful look and that prevented him from being the winner of the debate. Besides that, he did what he needed to do.

Bernie Sanders: 300. Came off as angry. Repeated the same red meat his supporters eat up. Probably didn't win anyone but did what he does. Deflecting away from his comments on diversity by just yelling "the 1%" wasn't the best move. Him shouting over everyone on nearly every question early on wasn't a good look.

Kamala Harris: 1000. The clear cut winner. No contest. Her "food fight" comment shut up Sanders and Gillibrand. She took Biden to task and delivered the sharpest blow to him. Her experience as a prosecutor serves her well in this debate and people are imagining her debating Donald Trump in the way a prosecutor might question a petty criminal on trial.

Kirsten Gillibrand: 150. She started the debate poorly but ended it on a better note. Showed her broad appeal, but she will always be compared to the other female candidates, and she did not outperform Kamala or Warren.

Michael Bennet: 200. Held his own but, like Hickenlooper, didn't do enough to break into the next tier.

Eric Swalwell: 100. Credit for the torch line earlier, but then Biden "clapbacked" with "I'm still holding it" like "what have you done to take it?". After that, he was mostly forgotten. Solid little back and forth with Bernie on guns that showed Bernie doesn't respond well when he is called out and knows he's wrong.

[Dill]

(06-28-2019, 12:25 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Marianne Williamson: -10,000. She said nothing but contradictions and is a reminder that people on TV do not belong in government. She argued that detailed policy plans on substantial health care reform is a "superficial fix" and then said that Donald Trump didn't have plans, just a simple slogan... but that you can't win with a simple slogan, you need to go deeper. Huh?

Pete Buttigieg: 300. Had some solid remarks, differentiated himself on some key ideas, and made good mention of his age. Fumbled a bit on the recent shooting. Enough to keep him going and get some google searches. Not enough to put him up there with Biden or Bernie or, now, Warren and Kamala.

Joe Biden: 500. Solid for all but the bussing part. His campaign had previously explained, and noted support for him from AA leaders in his state at the time, that the bussing issue was over how Delaware did it and the need to have local fixes that work. Still an awful look and that prevented him from being the winner of the debate. Besides that, he did what he needed to do.

Bernie Sanders: 300. Came off as angry. Repeated the same red meat his supporters eat up. Probably didn't win anyone but did what he does. Deflecting away from his comments on diversity by just yelling "the 1%" wasn't the best move. Him shouting over everyone on nearly every question early on wasn't a good look.

Kamala Harris: 1000. The clear cut winner. No contest. Her "food fight" comment shut up Sanders and Gillibrand. She took Biden to task and delivered the sharpest blow to him. Her experience as a prosecutor serves her well in this debate and people are imagining her debating Donald Trump in the way a prosecutor might question a petty criminal on trial.

LOL you beat me to it.

Agree Harris came off best. She presents BETTER in debate.   Her best moment was the Biden challenge, but she made solid points on every issue--except for the last question regarding 1st day priorities.

Biden:  Sleepy Joe Had a number of good moments. He does have a very good record, and actual foreign policy experience   But that bussing vote.  You don't defend a bad civil rights vote by affirming "Local issue-Local control."  
The segregationists defense?

Buttigieg did well, and owned his problem back in Indiana.   Poised throughout.

Sanders--something is wrong. He is not as articulate as he was three years ago. He was harping on the most important point--the lobbies and the 1% run the country. Nothing changes until that changes.  But then we need data, cases, examples. Sanders stock is dropping.   

I don't think Williamson did badly. She is not a politician and she is not going to be elected, but I liked a lot of her points  

One last comment--Yang will not get much traction after this. He is a one trick pony, and doesn't know how to elbow his way into the debate.

[CJD]

This debate was all Kamala to me. Wow. I predict this debate will make her skyrocket in the polls.

[NATI BENGALS]

Wrong

Marianne +1,000 for me not knowing who she was and her ability to use words in sentences

Hickenlooper +2000 shit I should know more about this guy

Yang -500 he keeps saying the same thing. Every time I see him.

Buttigieg +3000 he gets a 1,500 point bonus for being a veteran and another 1,500 for representing America as a citizen who can form logical sentences.

Joe Biden -1000 shit man... pass the torch

Bernie +1 love ya bud... pass the torch

Kamala >9000!! So this is kind of like a Trump nightmare. strong woman+law enforcement+black=triple omg!

Gillibrand +500 better than I was expecting

Bennet +2000 shit I should know more about this guy too

Swalwell -5 this was the guy I was hoping would run. I don't even have a gun. I have a conman prez kissing ass with dictators. Not a good time to talk about taking guns from Americans.

[Dill]

(06-28-2019, 01:20 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Wrong

Marianne +1,000 for me not knowing who she was and her ability to use words in sentences

Kamala >9000!! So this is  kind of like a Trump nightmare. strong woman+law enforcement+black=triple omg!

Gillibrand +500 better than I was expecting

Agree. Williamson is coherent articulate. An idealist--but good ideals.

Would love to see Trump debating Kamala. She wont put up with circus nonsense.  When he get's around to nicknaming her, that will raise her pool numbers 5 more points.  After tonight here support among black voters is finally going to spike.

Gillibrand did do better. But came in 5th or 6th at best.

[treee]

Joe Biden is a turd and I hope he gets canned sooner rather than later in the primary process. There were so many better candidates on both the 1st and 2nd nights.

Edit:Also Swalwell came off like a clown with his silly catch-phrases and attempted "gotcha" moments. He needs to pass the torch to someone who doesn't make a fool of themselves.

[BmorePat87]

I guess I was the only one who thought Williamson said nothing while speaking a lot of words.

[Vas Deferens]

you thought the racist sleaze that oozed out of the GOP base was disgusting with Obama? the birthers and the things they said about Michelle?

Wait til they start in on Kamala.

there's a deplorable half wit outside orlando stomping around his gated community racking his CTE denegrated noggin for cute nicknames right now.

[Vas Deferens]

(06-28-2019, 08:46 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I guess I was the only one who thought Williamson said nothing while speaking a lot of words.

nope.  im with you.  her participation was completely useless imo.

[BmorePat87]

(06-28-2019, 09:37 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: you thought the racist sleaze that oozed out of the GOP base was disgusting with Obama?  the birthers and the things they said about Michelle?

Wait til they start in on Kamala.

there's a deplorable half wit outside orlando stomping around his gated community racking his CTE denegrated noggin for cute nicknames right now.

He's in Europe right now at the G20 summit laughing with Putin as he says "Don't interfere in our elections, please" (wish I was joking about that exchange). 

[Dill]

(06-28-2019, 08:46 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I guess I was the only one who thought Williamson said nothing while speaking a lot of words.

Diction: rich. Syntax: coherent through complex, flowing sentences. She does not shift topic in mid-sentence or speak in fragments. Low on middle school superlatives (the best, the greatest, the most, the biggest).

That matters now.

As an inspirational author she is trying to tap the better side of human nature after Trump's appeal to xenophobia and nativism. She is also an activist for women's rights, aids awareness, California liberal stuff.

She may sound vacuous to you because where others are working up specific policies and identifying which levers of government they need to work, she is still talking about "love" and changing people to change the world.  There may be a gender thing here too; lots of women may like what she says; men don't go for that "love" crap.

I'm a materialist. We need to focus on changing the world if we want to change people. But the fact the the Democratic field includes someone placing "love of humanity" front and center, in fluent English, speaks volumes for the forces opposing Trump.

[Dill]

(06-28-2019, 10:42 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: He's in Europe right now at the G20 summit laughing with Putin as he says "Don't interfere in our elections, please" (wish I was joking about that exchange). 

See. No one has been tougher on Russia.

[Dill]

(06-28-2019, 09:37 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: you thought the racist sleaze that oozed out of the GOP base was disgusting with Obama?  the birthers and the things they said about Michelle?

Wait til they start in on Kamala.

there's a deplorable half wit outside orlando stomping around his gated community racking his CTE denegrated noggin for cute nicknames right now.

"Gorilla"--the preferred nickname for Michelle--may make a comeback.

But it will be very hard to get something effective as "little Marco," or "sleepy Joe," or "crooked Hillary," or "low energy Jeb" without declaring oneself openly racist and misogynist.  Harris is no deer in the headlights.

[Dill]

(06-28-2019, 07:20 AM)treee Wrote: Joe Biden is a turd and I hope he gets canned sooner rather than later in the primary process. There were so many better candidates on both the 1st and 2nd nights.

Edit:Also Swalwell came off like a clown with his silly catch-phrases and attempted "gotcha" moments. He needs to pass the torch to someone who doesn't make a fool of themselves.

Remember how astonishingly bad Obama was in his first debate with Romney, and the surge of GOP hope ("I told you Obama was a paper tiger!") that followed? For once it seemed like a Republican fantasy had come true--a competent, knowledgeable Republican with "the facts" crushing a clueless Dem before the whole world. For a week it seemed the bubble charge was a lie. Then came the foreign policy debate ("please proceed Governor" lol), with an awakened Obama. Fantasy over. Another four years of government led by a competent politician and decent man.

We need to see how Joe rebounds from this wake up call before writing him off.

[GMDino]

(06-28-2019, 10:42 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: He's in Europe right now at the G20 summit laughing with Putin as he says "Don't interfere in our elections, please" (wish I was joking about that exchange). 

It's even worse when you hear and see how he did that.  (Posted on the Mueller thread.)

He's a clown.

[CJD]

I know it's early...and voters shouldn't be rash right now...but I went into these two debates saying "I'm 90% sure I'm going to vote for Bernie. We'll see what happens." and I left the two debates thinking "I like Bernie, I like Kamala, I like Mayor Pete. I can't wait until the next debate to see them talk even more!!"

Being excited for more debates is a ***** bizarre thing.

[CJD]

(06-28-2019, 08:46 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I guess I was the only one who thought Williamson said nothing while speaking a lot of words.

God, her closing statement was painful XD.

She addressed Trump all dramatically like 4 times in 45 seconds "You sir...harness fear. And YOU SIR...harness hate. AnD yOu SiR.....will lose to love"
It was so excruciating to watch haha.

[Dill]

(06-28-2019, 11:22 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I know it's early...and voters shouldn't be rash right now...but I went into these two debates saying "I'm 90% sure I'm going to vote for Bernie. We'll see what happens." and I left the two debates thinking "I like Bernie, I like Kamala, I like Mayor Pete. I can't wait until the next debate to see them talk even more!!"

Being excited for more debates is a ***** bizarre thing.

You are being a competent voter C-dawg. 

When we get enough of those we get competent politicians.

[Belsnickel]

Right now, based upon clips and what I've read, the one I'm coming closest to supporting is Harris. That's tough for me to say because even though she is on the very edge of the range, she is still a Boomer and I have been saying since 2016 that I won't back a Boomer running for the White House. Call it ageist if you want, I'm just tired of Boomers ***** things up and think it's time for Gen X to get a shot before Millennials start taking over (since we can officially run for POTUS now).

[BmorePat87]

(06-28-2019, 11:08 AM)Dill Wrote: Diction: rich. Syntax: coherent through complex, flowing sentences. She does not shift topic in mid-sentence or speak in fragments. Low on middle school superlatives (the best, the greatest, the most, the biggest).

That matters now.

As an inspirational author she is trying to tap the better side of human nature after Trump's appeal to xenophobia and nativism. She is also an activist for women's rights, aids awareness, California liberal stuff.

She may sound vacuous to you because where others are working up specific policies and identifying which levers of government they need to work, she is still talking about "love" and changing people to change the world.  There may be a gender thing here too; lots of women may like what she says; men don't go for that "love" crap.

I'm a materialist. We need to focus on changing the world if we want to change people. But the fact the the Democratic field includes someone placing "love of humanity" front and center, in fluent English, speaks volumes for the forces opposing Trump.

I think calling the detailed policy proposals of the other candidates "superficial fixes" that don't address paying for healthcare is an incredibly silly statement and one made by someone completely out of their depth. 

In her flowery words and can do attitude, there's little substance in all of it that's relevant to what is needed. The fact that we have an qualified president who cannot speak well and is not empathetic doesn't mean we need an unqualified one who speaks well and is empathetic.