July debates

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:10 am

Who's watching tonight? I don't think I'll be home. I'd like to see Bernie and Warren on the same stage, but they're expected to join arms to beat back the B-list centrists rather than go at each other for the progressive mantle. Warren in particular doesn't have much to lose, but Sanders has been sliding and is going to be on the defensive. He's going to be standing next to Buttigieg, a man 40 years his junior who has a good shot at making the A list, so the Sanders/Warren rivalry could be decided by proxy.

Maybe I'll make a new flash poll after the second debate tomorrow night, if it seems like the landscape has changed.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:12 am

I'm planning to watch what I can. The time (8 pm eastern) is not a great fit for our kids' bedtime, which is centered around lights out around 8:30ish). Ideally I'd like to watch the first 15ish minutes with my daughter so she sees a bit of this part of our democratic system, but we'll see how it plays out.

How long is the debate going to go?

rittchard · Post by **rittchard** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 1:08 pm

I think it's 2 hours long, but the recording set it for 3. I'll be watching while playing Dota Underlords or Fire Emblem lol.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 1:20 pm

I'll be doing something far more constructive with my time - I'll be playing board games. I might watch some of it after, but with so many candidates I don't find it particularily useful. (That's probably going to be true of the next one, too, as it looks like we might get as many as ten candidates that qualify for that one, too)

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 2:29 pm

I'd like to see Biden, Warren, and Sanders mix it up without interference from the peanut league. Maybe add Harris and Buttigieg, but that's enough. Maybe the next two nights will change my opinion.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 3:05 pm

Who has missed the cut so far?

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 3:27 pm

Saw an ad for this the other day. Looked like an MMA promo. Just more bullshit bread and circuses.

"Two days! Twenty contenders! Don't miss The Delectable Debate, the Diatribe in Detroit, it's Rrrrrrrrround Two!!!"

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 3:38 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 3:27 pm Saw an ad for this the other day. Looked like an MMA promo. Just more bullshit bread and circuses.

"Two days! Twenty contenders! Don't miss The Delectable Debate, the Diatribe in Detroit, it's Rrrrrrrrround Two!!!"

Alas, the Silverdome is gone. (Though I guess it would need to be round 3)

https://www.wwe.com/videos/hulk-hogan-v ... ship-match

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 3:56 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 3:05 pm Who has missed the cut so far?

No one who wasn't there before (though one person dropped out, and one of the people who barely didn't make it last time made it this time. Don't ask me their names).

coopasonic · Post by **coopasonic** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 4:02 pm

I believe it is the next round that has requirements that will actually make a meaningful difference in the size of the debates.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 5:21 pm

My wife organized a Philly For Warren debate-watching party at a nearby bar tonight.

Of course it's a public event, so I wonder if the room will be contentious.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 8:07 pm

As the candidates march out it’s funny to hear the raucous applause for the front runners slowly diminish to polite applause for everyone after Beto.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 8:50 pm

Holman wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 5:21 pm Of course it's a public event, so I wonder if the room will be contentious.

Just shout, "Warren peace!"

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 9:30 pm

I'm not a registered Democrat, so I won't be voting in the primaries. That means that this presidential election doesn't involve any real choices for me. I'm perfectly happy to read the cliff notes afterward, at least until the actual election.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 9:56 pm

This debate:

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:00 pm

I thought Warren and Butti "won," but that might just reflect my biases going in. Warren/Butti would be unstoppable together. Sanders made it clear that he is the real revolutionary, if that's what America wants.

IDK if I can sit thru 2+ hours again tomorrow. I want to hear more from Harris, and I want to see Biden taken out. Harris might be the one to do that. But geez, I feel Democratted out after tonight.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:23 am

The most interesting discussion to me was Anderson talking to Williamson after the debate. Much as she sometimes sounds like an essential oil nut she makes a great point that there is something bigger happening and talking about shades of Medicare 4 all isnt going to get the job done against Trump.

She at least gets that the Democrats keep getting smoked on the message. Buttigieg gets it too but has a more practical approach. I think Pete's is more doable and less wacky sounding. In the end what I fear is that the need for a clear moral voice will get drowned out by the nerdy politics the Dems are peddling.

That is why punting on impeachment in my mind is a huge failure. It is the springboard they can use to show that they dont subscribe to this immoral society that Trump wants to build for himself.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:35 am

I like a lot of Warren's prescriptions for saving capitalism from itself but decriminalizing illegal immigration and getting rid of private insurance are giving Trump huge gifts. He'll harp on open borders and having your insurance taken away (not that he hasn't tried that himself with Obamacare but he doesn't care if he's a hypocrite). He'll pound her on these two things - the first will turn out his base ("see I told you they want open borders!") and the latter will sway some independents towards him. Terrible optics for the election.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:54 am

Grifman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:35 am I like a lot of Warren's prescriptions for saving capitalism from itself but decriminalizing illegal immigration and getting rid of private insurance are giving Trump huge gifts. He'll harp on open borders and having your insurance taken away (not that he hasn't tried that himself with Obamacare but he doesn't care if he's a hypocrite). He'll pound her on these two things - the first will turn out his base ("see I told you they want open borders!") and the latter will sway some independents towards him. Terrible optics for the election.

Yeah, I worry about that too. This kind of thing is driving my increasing interest in Harris - I do kind of want a politican that's center-left but triangulating for the election.

Anyway, the debate was interesting. I wound up watching the beginning (with my kids) and the end after they went to bed. One thing I enjoyed was my ~ 7 YO son watching Sanders talk and then saying, "Is he angry?" Yeah, that's kind of his thing.

I did like Warren the best of the candidates on stage. At times she veered into Sanders-esque simplicity - I didn't really like her caricature of the villainous health insurers scheming to deny every penny in claims that they can. You don't have to write a love letter to insurers to know that the health care story isn't really that simple, and that we're not going to get to a fair health care market just from insurance company profits and overhead.

hitbyambulance · Post by **hitbyambulance** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:13 am

i had to leave during the last half hour. but where can i find the archived stream?? doesn't seem to be up anywhere at this time. @isgrimmur

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:41 am

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:54 am
At times she veered into Sanders-esque simplicity - I didn't really like her caricature of the villainous health insurers scheming to deny every penny in claims that they can. You don't have to write a love letter to insurers to know that the health care story isn't really that simple, and that we're not going to get to a fair health care market just from insurance company profits and overhead.

She totally ignores that Medicare denies over 500,000 claims per year. Will her "Medicare for All" system "scheme to deny every penny that it can"? Yes, she's ignoring the complexity of the problem. Insurers do some dumb and terrible things but the vast majority of claims are approved and paid. There are always going to be issues and outliers in any system.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:56 am

When you have 500 lb co-morbid diabetics getting stem cell skin grafts to save a foot they'll lose in a year anyway, damn straight people generally get the care get want, often at the expense of care others need.

Warren's overly simplistic charicture of health care is only mildly better than Trump's, "who knew it was so hard" approach.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:28 am

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:33 am

I have a special hatred for insurance companies. Our care is routinely denied even for life-critical things like insulin. Because my kids are 60 lb diabetics who don’t want to lose their feet or be hospitalized because every delay in payment or treatment increases short term profits. Often at a long term cost.

An overweight person is going to be more likely to exercise if they keep their foot. Creating incentives to do so (and healthier eating options) might be easier if government helps and has an incentive to do anything more than assign blame to the new “welfare queen.”

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:58 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 3:27 pm Saw an ad for this the other day. Looked like an MMA promo. Just more bullshit bread and circuses.

"Two days! Twenty contenders! Don't miss The Delectable Debate, the Diatribe in Detroit, it's Rrrrrrrrround Two!!!"

They need to hold it in the Thunderdome.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:59 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:56 am When you have 500 lb co-morbid diabetics getting stem cell skin grafts to save a foot they'll lose in a year anyway, damn straight people generally get the care get want, often at the expense of care others need.

And that, my dear man, is the crux of the problem.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:27 am

Zarathud wrote: ↑Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:33 am I have a special hatred for insurance companies. Our care is routinely denied even for life-critical things like insulin. Because my kids are 60 lb diabetics who don’t want to lose their feet or be hospitalized because every delay in payment or treatment increases short term profits. Often at a long term cost.

An overweight person is going to be more likely to exercise if they keep their foot. Creating incentives to do so (and healthier eating options) might be easier if government helps and has an incentive to do anything more than assign blame to the new “welfare queen.”

Just to be clear, I'm talking about extremes. My example above involved a 40+ YO who was morbidly obese and had a gangrenous foot due to non-compliance. He had to lose two middle toes no matter what and was recommended for a foot amputation. He would not accept amputation so the surgeon decided to try to save the foot after removing the toes. Since compliance with wound care was unlikely, he decided to use the stem cell biologic. Cost for saving the foot that would likely come off in a year anyway was crazy.

That is not to say it wasn't he patient's right. It's his foot. But I saw the before and after (and during photos) and it just seemed absurd.

FWIW I saw this case case presented at a public conference (promoting biologics, ironically) with all that information so there is no PHI violation here.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:59 am

Trying to "tweak" a system that is designed to respond to medical events and prolong life isn't the answer and I think debating it is a waste of time because the system is doing exactly what it was designed to do. Instead, the entire medical profession needs to be upended and geared from the get-go towards prevention. Of course treatment will always be part of medicine but preventative medicine is still in its infancy. And at the same time, you have the Trump administration and the GOP kicking out the legs of preventative measures by jeopardizing free lunch programs for school children. This, in turn, puts these children at life-long increased risk of all kinds of chronic problems that the medical establishment then needs to respond to and we all end up paying for.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:56 pm

Medicare is driving prevention. Providers are highly incentivised for prevention and there are penalities for poor performance.

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:00 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 30, 2019 9:30 pm I'm not a registered Democrat, so I won't be voting in the primaries. That means that this presidential election doesn't involve any real choices for me. I'm perfectly happy to read the cliff notes afterward, at least until the actual election.

Ballotpedia wrote:Indiana utilizes an open primary system. Voters are not required to register with a party, but state statutes stipulate that citizens vote in the primary of the party they have voted for most often in the past. According to FairVote, however, "there is really no way to enforce this," and primaries are effectively open.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:00 pm

So are they doctoring for the test? How are baselines established?

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:04 pm

Lawbeef" wrote:Medicare is driving prevention

Medicare is driving screenings, lifestyle and behavior modifications in 25-50 year olds? I'm not referring to Medicare advising grandpa his cholesterol is too high or that grandma needs lose 25 lbs.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:24 pm

Fucking idiots. Dems deserve to lose.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:59 pm

Booker had a very good night. Castro, too. Harris held her own and Gabbard did better than expected. All of them drew blood from Biden, although I don't think he's out of it yet. I went into tonight thinking Harris was the one to beat; now I like Booker better. Harris is starting to rub me the wrong way.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Thu Aug 01, 2019 12:06 am

Compared to the first night candidates, the second batch was pretty meh.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:50 am

Kraken wrote:Booker had a very good night. Castro, too. Harris held her own and Gabbard did better than expected. All of them drew blood from Biden, although I don't think he's out of it yet. I went into tonight thinking Harris was the one to beat; now I like Booker better. Harris is starting to rub me the wrong way.

Yes let's draw blood from the leading candidate and shit on Obama policies. Everything to help Republicans. Very good.

This is not about policy. This is about beating Trump.

This is why D's are so bad at this.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:07 am

Totally agree - this is why the clown car is so dangerous. Biden is the front runner so they nearly all formulated the same strategy which was attacks on Obama's policies to get at Biden. ffs... these guys are all working to get Trump re-elected. Only good thing is that it will mostly fade since it is early. However, I expect anything of 'race war' advantage will be plucked out and used against them as the race spools up. Them speaking for what Trump will call 'open borders' and other 'brown people' issues isn't going to help.

It also didn't help that the moderators basically staged their questions for maximum drama. I get that it is tv but it feels like everyone is oblivious to the attacks on our democracy. I am pretty tired of the "elite" not taking Trump seriously as a danger to our nation. 2020 is not going to be a safe election. Everyone involved needs to stop treating it like this is a standard Presidential race. (And yes there were exceptions such as Harris who specifically talked to it and Biden who tried but flubbed it badly).

rittchard · Post by **rittchard** » Thu Aug 01, 2019 12:52 pm

malchior wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:07 amIt also didn't help that the moderators basically staged their questions for maximum drama. I get that it is tv but it feels like everyone is oblivious to the attacks on our democracy. I am pretty tired of the "elite" not taking Trump seriously as a danger to our nation. 2020 is not going to be a safe election. Everyone involved needs to stop treating it like this is a standard Presidential race. (And yes there were exceptions such as Harris who specifically talked to it and Biden who tried but flubbed it badly).

FWIW Pete has spoken up on the attacks to our democracy time and again, and has made democratic reform a day one issue. He didn't get much of a chance to discuss many of his ideas at the debate but he has talked about it a lot. I do love that he stands apart from the fray and just does his own thing, but I worry that he will be forced out of that at some point and that's just not his thing (attacking other candidates).

While I agree this could be a crazy election, I would say in the end it will still be "standard" in the sense that as long as the inane electoral college system is in play, almost all of the yapping going on is irrelevant and it will still come down to a few key states and a few key counties. Dems will win the popular vote no matter who they throw up there and whatever wonky policies they are running on, and all that will matter is whether they can flip any of the states they lost last time.

- - -

Back to the debate, I FF'd through most of last night's. I thought Booker stood out well, and Andrew Yang did as well. Booker seemed much more comfortable and interesting compared to last debate and I think this performance will keep him going to September. Yang has some interesting points but running as "Asian Math Guy" is not going to cut it; sadly it comes across to me as a joke for Trump to stomp on. I thought Tulsi looked gorgeous and Kamala seemed ill prepared to deal with being attacked by her. Overall it felt like Kamala lost some of the luster she gained at the last debate. All the attacks on Biden were annoying but as the frontrunner he has to be able to deal with this at some point so I guess he might as well start practicing now lol. I thought overall he did OK but his closing seemed a little weak, particularly when he gave out his website Biden3030wtfI'msoold.com (Edit: Oh I guess he was trying to tell people to text Joe to that number LMAO)

- - -

On a side topic, I was just thinking how interesting it is the way we judge age in this country. The best athletes in most pro sports are considered done/old when they approach or pass 30 and generally the peak is considered in the 20s (I think?). Mentally I don't know about the rest of you but I felt like I was at my sharpest in my early 30s and have steadily gone downhill through my 40s. Ditto for stamina/energy, and definitely for memory. And yet for some reason for possibly the most demanding job on the planet people keep complaining that someone in their late 30s is too young?

Dramatist · Post by **Dramatist** » Thu Aug 01, 2019 1:49 pm

rittchard wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 12:52 pm On a side topic, I was just thinking how interesting it is the way we judge age in this country. The best athletes in most pro sports are considered done/old when they approach or pass 30 and generally the peak is considered in the 20s (I think?). Mentally I don't know about the rest of you but I felt like I was at my sharpest in my early 30s and have steadily gone downhill through my 40s. Ditto for stamina/energy, and definitely for memory. And yet for some reason for possibly the most demanding job on the planet people keep complaining that someone in their late 30s is too young?

My opinion on this is wisdom is important for a president and with age comes wisdom (for most anyway). I do believe that there is a too old though and that Bernie and Biden are too old to be the best that they could be. I don't think that Buttigieg is too young either. He seems wise for his age and I would so love to see him debate Trump.

I had to work late both nights and missed watching the debates but I still like Warren and Buttigieg the best. But even if the Democrats nominate a mop with a hat I'll vote for the Democrat (I'd even get a Mop with a hat bumper sticker).

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Thu Aug 01, 2019 1:49 pm

tjg_marantz wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:50 am
Kraken wrote:Booker had a very good night. Castro, too. Harris held her own and Gabbard did better than expected. All of them drew blood from Biden, although I don't think he's out of it yet. I went into tonight thinking Harris was the one to beat; now I like Booker better. Harris is starting to rub me the wrong way.
Yes let's draw blood from the leading candidate and shit on Obama policies. Everything to help Republicans. Very good.

This is not about policy. This is about beating Trump.

This is why D's are so bad at this.

If Democrats nominate an elderly white male centrist with a long and cautious history, they will lose. Biden is the consummate old-school politician. The sooner he is taken out, the better. That probably can't happen until the primaries since he is the Establishment character.

Fortunately, three or four of those 20 contenders will make very strong candidates.

rittchard wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 12:52 pm On a side topic, I was just thinking how interesting it is the way we judge age in this country. The best athletes in most pro sports are considered done/old when they approach or pass 30 and generally the peak is considered in the 20s (I think?). Mentally I don't know about the rest of you but I felt like I was at my sharpest in my early 30s and have steadily gone downhill through my 40s. Ditto for stamina/energy, and definitely for memory. And yet for some reason for possibly the most demanding job on the planet people keep complaining that someone in their late 30s is too young?

To partially undercut what I just wrote above: In politics, experience and connections matter more than stamina and energy. Age is an asset until suddenly it's a liability. Candidates in their 60s should be at the sweet spot between experience and flexibility, between knowledge and wisdom. When they get much past 70, you have to start watching for signs of decline. My candidate (Warren) is nearing that age, and will definitely benefit from having a young running mate. Biden is already looking and acting elderly.