Who Won Democrat debate - Does it matter?

Who won 1st Democrat debate

  • Chaffee

    Votes: 1 12.5%

  • Clinton

    Votes: 3 37.5%

  • O'Malley

    Votes: 1 12.5%

  • Sanders

    Votes: 3 37.5%

  • Webb

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    8
I watched a good bit of it and thought Sanders and Clinton handled themselves pretty well, ignoring their lies and extreme positions. Webb seemed nervous.

O'Malley is a fringe candidate but he is legitimately scary. This is a guy whose record includes being mayor of Baltimore and governor of Maryland, where his major achievement was driving Beretta out of the state because of the extreme anti-gun laws they passed. Maryland itself is like a smaller version of Illinois, ridiculously corrupt and its one big city is too dangerous to safely drive through. I feel for the people who live in the rural west and eastern shore, as they are good, hardworking salt of the earth types who are trapped in a liberal nightmare. Their votes are essentially meaningless, as they are held hostage by the welfare blacks of Baltimore and surrounding counties and the wealthy, liberal elites of suburban Washington.

It is interesting that two of the candidates were formerly republicans.
 
The debate kind of reminded me of the liberal "fact check" sites. They view every assertion by a republican, particularly a conservative, as suspect and likely rooted in a desire to deceive the public or smear an opponent. Quesitonable statements by democrats, particularly liberals, are invariably viewed far more charitably. They are often characterized as mere differences of opinion or minor overstatements, rather than obvious lies.

Last night we had one candidate who has a lifelong career of lying, obstructing justice, conflict of interest and the appearance of corruption ( cattle futures anyone?). She and her family have been the recipients of staggering largesse from corporate America and foreign governments, usually dressed up in the form of paid speeches or donations to various foundations they control. She orchestrated attacks and intimidation of women who made credible claims of being sexually harrassed or, in one case raped, by her husband, our former president. In most of these cases she knew very well the women were telling the truth, but still let her thugs go after them. I didn't hear one question about any of that, although I didn't sit throught he whole sordid ordeal.

Another candidate is an unrepentant socialist, who sounds and looks like he slept through the last half of the 20th century. He would have been a nice fit for for FDR's cabinet maybe, a socialist who probably longs for communism. Yet the questions to him treated him as a responsible, rational public servant.

We know very well republicans candidates never get this kind of respectful sounding board. They are challenged to justify their very legitimacy in insulting terms. Every embarrassing or ill-chosen prior word is thrown in their faces.
 
AAAintheBeltway said:
Cooper did go back and repeat questions that were dodged. The problem with the debate was that the questions, except to Jim Webb, were very sympathetic or designed to let them easily swat away perceived weaknesses.
More...
Sympathetic questions? Please don't kid yourself. They were fairly pointed, and certainly not less so than the questions posed during the Republican debates. For the most part, the respondents just handled them better. Maybe that's why you're confused. The questions even addressed what some of the candidates said about one another, allowing for a back and forth, which is something that offended the Right's delicate sensibilities during the Republican debate.
 
jem said:
can I still edit the poll... it should be Webb..
More...
your vote is duly noted by me at least. What was it that most appealed to you about Webb, or why do you otherwise believe in your eyes and hears that he won the debate?

I assume you watched or listened to it all or at least most of it. I am ignoring comments by those who said they didn't watch or only watched part of it.
 
Frederick Foresight said:
Sympathetic questions? Please don't kid yourself. They were fairly pointed, and certainly not less so than the questions posed during the Republican debates. For the most part, the respondents just handled them better. Maybe that's why you're confused. The questions even addressed what some of the candidates said about one another, allowing for a back and forth, which is something that offended the Right's delicate sensibilities during the Republican debate.
More...
If rep candidates don't want tough questions they should stop (repeatedly) saying hateful things about wide groups of people. In other words, they should stop talking.
 
Ricter said:
If rep candidates don't want tough questions they should stop (repeatedly) saying hateful things about wide groups of people. In other words, they should stop talking.
More...

Yes, the truth does tend to ruffle feathers. But that's more the fault of the society in which we are doomed to live in now.
 
AAAintheBeltway said:
The debate kind of reminded me of the liberal "fact check" sites. They view every assertion by a republican, particularly a conservative, as suspect and likely rooted in a desire to deceive the public or smear an opponent.
More...
So their revelations today of the falsehoods told in the Democratic debate last night are suspect. That was my take on them, too!
 
Tsing Tao said:
Yes, the truth does tend to ruffle feathers. But that's more the fault of the society in which we are doomed to live in now.
More...
Like the truth about Mexico sending its rapists?

Like Carson's truth that we're probably in "end times"?

Lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top