Home | About | Donate

A Democratic Debate Report Card

Easy Peasy you think would be tough as nails? The woman afraid to face a FOX town hall? The woman who backed down from stating the DNC rigged things in 2016 as soon as her handlers told her she couldn’t do that? The woman afraid to back Bernie in 2016?

Nope. She acts like she’s tough as nail, but she’d been blown by the winds of pressure of the establishment full force like a tissue in a hurricane.

‘Tough as Nails’ LOL LOL LOL LOL

1 Like

Some folks are critical of Bernie, and I have my criticisms as well. However, the final question is “who is best, of those that we can vote for?” To me, Bernie is far and away the best candidate that I’ve seen, overall. What would really be good is to have someone who is MORE RADICAL than Bernie come on the scene, to make Bernie seem more of the ‘centrist’ that he practically is. (Oh, and I would ‘like’ it if folks would relax a bit about “troll pointing” – merely point out your position, and let it go at that – that should be enough.) Peace and justice, cousins. Thanks

1 Like

How do you think Sanders was “tripped up”?

I don’t know of anyone claiming that regards the Thursday debate.

I know of some saying he won with his closing statement.

1 Like

He had a good closing statement, don’t disagree. I suggest you read the comment I was responding to.

Yeah I read, modeforjoe’s concern trolling of Sanders a day ago.

And I commented on it. Perhaps you should read all the comments that preceded yours.

Yep, your “tripped up” thing was a form of light concern trolling. Telling that you can’t cite anyone else doing claim Sanders was tripped up.

And yeah, I saw the Secular Talk video pointing out that Sanders should not give out sound bites that can be used against him, but nowhere did Kyle K claim Sanders was tripped up.

I don’t know what the secular sound bite video is and don’t care. Sanders is a politician, not god. I thought he had an decent debate, but I think he has trouble when he gets off message. That isn’t exactly news or an uncommon phenomenon. If you want to call that “concern trolling” because it makes you feel uncomfortable, feel free.

1 Like

The problem is you’ve not managed to cite Sanders doing that in the debate.

You’ve also, despite requests, not managed to cite anyone else making your claim about Sanders being tripped up in the Thursday debate.

So until you can do provide evidence, you post reads like light concern trolling of Sanders. You’re not alone.

1 Like

I watched the debate myself and my opinion is my own.

The second debate was put of control. The moderators absolutely had no control. It was the Williamson candidate kept throwing the debate into chaos. Enjoyed.

I also believe Bernie understands very well what the problems are and what needs to be done. My point is that he is not doing a very good job of explaining his views to those who are not already persuaded There will be a ton of ignorant criticism and labeling coming his way–a tsunami actually–and he needs to prepare for that and meet it with grace, superb detail, well expressed linkages between issues and so on. We can want him to succeed, but his success will depend upon effectively (clearly, sympathetically, personally) persuading those who don’t get it. I caucused for him in the 5th here in Wa last time around. Spent three different days in caucuses. This is not about me changing my view of his values and ideas–I am simply becoming alarmed at his inability to be guided by his handlers into doing a more acceptable job for non believers. So yes, I think he’s blowing it, and he’s not working hard enough to hone his message so it is audible and well received. If he can’t become more effective, yes, even a bit more charming and accessible (aka welcoming to listen to) all your hopes and prayers for him will come to naught.

Thank you for that; you understand the problem I am attempting to describe. Below I also state that I believe he has the best understanding of most of the key issues that concern all of us. I merely want him to be more effective, welcoming, personable, detailed as a presenter. He has to bring strangers to the table, and he needs to develop a style of describing his views that can become persuasive to those who don’t understand what he’s up to. I am just wondering whether his handlers have spoken to him about this–I mean, they should. He needs coaching, for crissake. I want him to succeed.

1 Like

Thanks. Actually, I had picked up on that four years ago but went into desperate denial, caucused for him here in WA and so on. I think my denial has now given way to some impatience. It’s not enough for you or me to like or value him; he needs to be able to convince those who do not instantly understand those deep level causes that are driving America off the rails.

That’s not citation of Sanders being “tripped up”.

He sure managed to bring that FoxNews town hall to his side.

More concern trolling then.

In a town hall you have as much time as you choose to use to explain things. In these debates you don’t.

“Senator Sanders, you have proposed all sorts of bills that will radically change many aspects of our economy. Please list them all, explain in depth why we should make these changes, how you will finance each one, please be specific, and give us detailed descriptions of which ones you will do in what order and how you will get them through Congress, including details of how you will work with the leaders of both parties who oppose you. You have 10 seconds. Go!”


“Senator Sanders. Your ideas will destroy Capitalism which is the best system in the world. Yes or No. Do you really want to destroy Capitalism and America by forcing Medicare for All on us?”

Where are those questions from?

I didn’t watch the debate.

If they’re from the debate they’re preposterous and include conclusions in them that simply aren’t reality based.

They are the kind of stupid questions Hannity tries on Fox.

I only watched some of the Sanders FoxNews town hall.

Or are those hypothetical questions.

They are ludicrous hyperbolic versions of the various actual questions, intended to illustrate how stupid some questions were.

The first one’s point is that some answers are too complex to answer in the few seconds given to answer. The second one’s point is that some Yes or No questions (like the hand raising ones) are set ups with no good yes or no answer.

So in the vein of “have you stopped beating your wife, yes or no?”

Yeah, but more subtle.

Well, your hypothetical examples ain’t subtle. But I’m sure you’re aware of this.

This FAIR piece on the term “government run health care” (used by Maddox in a debate question for Sanders) is a good example of limiting terms to get a result. As the piece points out, insurance is only one part of the US "health"care system.

1 Like