The October debate thread (no videos)

Why does CNN let Warren run over her speaking time at every debate?

dave said:

Why does CNN let Warren run over her speaking time at every debate?

 It took only 2 hours and 42 minutes to arrive at out first conspiracy theory.

Must be CNN uses some kind of algorithm that let's those at top of polls speak longer.

Morganna said:

 It took only 2 hours and 42 minutes to arrive at out first conspiracy theory.

Who else is surprised that Tulsi didn't mention her friendship with Assad?  

Tulsi is pals with Trey Gowdy, one of Trump's impeachment defense attorneys?

She's an idiot.

sbenois said:

Who else is surprised that Tulsi didn't mention her friendship with Assad?  

 Anderson asked about a friendship we'd be surprised to hear about.

dave said:

Tulsi is pals with Trey Gowdy, one of Trump's impeachment defense attorneys?

Gowdy isn’t one of Trump’s impeachment defense attorneys. The job is on hold because of lobbying laws, and now he’s not expected to fill it at all.

@dave based on that chart, Bernie got cheated. There will be a long discussion of that fact tomorrow. Mark my words.

I didn’t watch this one. I’m opposed to still having too many people in this. They should have had a better plan to dwindle the field. I think it will take away from the impact of the final nominee. It should have been 6 by now for sure. 8 at most.

How was Bernie? Did he curb all the yelling given that he just had a heart attack last week?

Pete will go up a point - Warren will go up - Biden will go down a point - Sanders will stay the same - 

The others - eh.

I hate that they are increasing attacking each other. All that will do is divide a party and make people question the final nominee. Corey is absolutely right about that.

I gotta say that, just as a human being, I am VERY impressed by Bernie's stamina. 

Klinker said:

I gotta say that, just as a human being, I ...

Never doubted you were one.

Klinker said:

I gotta say that, just as a human being, I am VERY impressed by Bernie's stamina. 

 https://twitter.com/nbcsnl/status/985369977975902208

Morganna said:

@dave based on that chart, Bernie got cheated. There will be a long discussion of that fact tomorrow. Mark my words.

 They didn't want to stress him.

jamie said:

Pete will go up a point - Warren will go up - Biden will go down a point - Sanders will stay the same - 

The others - eh.

 I think Amy goes up a number of points (from 2 to 4 or 5 maybe). She had a terrific night. Joe goes down more than 1, Bernie too. Warren goes nowhere, or down a point. She was a bit flummoxed at all the digs. I think Pete goes up 2 or 3. I also think Steyer goes up a bit. Everybody else should just go home.

Amy did have her best night - just not sure if it will affect her numbers.  

Wonder who will drop out next - not sure how Castro is hanging in there.

Dennis_Seelbach said:

 I think Amy goes up a number of points (from 2 to 4 or 5 maybe). She had a terrific night. Joe goes down more than 1, Bernie too. Warren goes nowhere, or down a point. She was a bit flummoxed at all the digs. I think Pete goes up 2 or 3. I also think Steyer goes up a bit. Everybody else should just go home.

 I agree on Amy. And on no change for Warren. Hoping Cory goes up a bit. I think Bernie stays the same. His following is devoted. Can't decide on Pete. For those who like an aggressive approach, he upped his game. That does not appeal to me so I leaned more towards Beto.  Biden will probably stay the same. Steyer, nice man but I don't see him gaining.

Castro got so much retaliation for his attack against Biden that I think he is being cautious. Harris might get a bump. She took on Warren and she pushed on women's reproductive rights so it will be interesting to see. And for women listening, Tulsi's clarification of her stance on limitations on late term abortion will get support from more conservative women.

Good debate.

jamie said:

Amy did have her best night - just not sure if it will affect her numbers.  

Wonder who will drop out next - not sure how Castro is hanging in there.

 Maybe some of the candidates that did not make the debate. Is Tim Ryan still campaigning?

Amy, Pete B and Yang, was impressive! They challenged some of the policies and made valid points.

I like Warren’s passion and give her credit for fighting, taking chances of what she believes in. However, she was beat by the above 3, who challenged her policies.

Will the polls change? Not much.

dave said:

 

 Is this a factor of how much she had to respond to other candidates' critiques of her?

mrincredible said:

dave said:

 

 Is this a factor of how much she had to respond to other candidates' critiques of her?

 Most likely.  The times should be broken out between when she was responding to one of the panelists, vs. responding to another candidate.

[Edited to add] I'm not saying Dave should do that, I meant some news organizations should give it a try, if they're going to do a story on how much time each candidate had.

I missed the first 45 minutes or so of the debate, and what I saw was mostly a yawn, so I guess anything of note happened early.  And I lost interest completely when the infuriatingly banal "who are you friends with that would surprise us" question was asked.  It's just another version of the idiotic "say something nice about your opponent" question that pundits love to ask.  It's a reflection of the centrist notion that if we all "just got along" every problem in the country would go away.  It reflects a fantasy bizarro world where Republicans would respond in kind if liberals would just be a little bit nicer.  And it's an asinine question to spend any time on at a debate.

ml1 said:

I missed the first 45 minutes or so of the debate, and what I saw was mostly a yawn, so I guess anything of note happened early.  And I lost interest completely when the infuriatingly banal "who are you friends with that would surprise us" question was asked.  It's just another version of the idiotic "say something nice about your opponent" question that pundits love to ask.  It's a reflection of the centrist notion that if we all "just got along" every problem in the country would go away.  It reflects a fantasy bizarro world where Republicans would respond in kind if liberals would just be a little bit nicer.  And it's an asinine question to spend any time on at a debate.

 This.  

Did they ask this of the GOP in 2016?  If they had we might have found out about Stormy Daniels a few months earlier.

Klinker said:

I gotta say that, just as a human being, I am VERY impressed by Bernie's stamina. 

 In Vermont.........Bernie and a Suburu will always see you through.

DaveSchmidt said:

Klinker said:

I gotta say that, just as a human being, I ...

Never doubted you were one.

 I read Mr. Klinker's comment as saying the same as, "As a human being, and not a replacement cyborg, Bernie has a lot of stamina".

ml1 said:

I missed the first 45 minutes or so of the debate, and what I saw was mostly a yawn, so I guess anything of note happened early.  And I lost interest completely when the infuriatingly banal "who are you friends with that would surprise us" question was asked.  It's just another version of the idiotic "say something nice about your opponent" question that pundits love to ask.  It's a reflection of the centrist notion that if we all "just got along" every problem in the country would go away.  It reflects a fantasy bizarro world where Republicans would respond in kind if liberals would just be a little bit nicer.  And it's an asinine question to spend any time on at a debate.

 In a 3 hr debate the moderators have to change it up a little bit here and there to try to keep it interesting. All policy , policy, policy can get pretty dry. A question like they asked can be a way to get to know the candidate better as a person. They could have answered anything really, didn’t have to be in the political sphere. calling it “infuriatingly banal” and “a reflection of the centrist notion” is a little uptight if ya ask me. 

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

I missed the first 45 minutes or so of the debate, and what I saw was mostly a yawn, so I guess anything of note happened early.  And I lost interest completely when the infuriatingly banal "who are you friends with that would surprise us" question was asked.  It's just another version of the idiotic "say something nice about your opponent" question that pundits love to ask.  It's a reflection of the centrist notion that if we all "just got along" every problem in the country would go away.  It reflects a fantasy bizarro world where Republicans would respond in kind if liberals would just be a little bit nicer.  And it's an asinine question to spend any time on at a debate.

 In a 3 hr debate the moderators have to change it up a little bit here and there to try to keep it interesting. All policy , policy, policy can get pretty dry. A question like they asked can be a way to get to know the candidate better as a person. They could have answered anything really, didn’t have to be in the political sphere. calling it “infuriatingly banal” and “a reflection of the centrist notion” is a little uptight if ya ask me. 

 I guess there is an audience for those kinds of questions.

Chris Cillizza would approve.

Smedley said:

 In a 3 hr debate the moderators have to change it up a little bit here and there to try to keep it interesting. All policy , policy, policy can get pretty dry. A question like they asked can be a way to get to know the candidate better as a person. They could have answered anything really, didn’t have to be in the political sphere. calling it “infuriatingly banal” and “a reflection of the centrist notion” is a little uptight if ya ask me. 

they asked zero questions about climate change or immigration just to name two issues that were overlooked.  If it's "uptight" to be strongly opposed to stupid, pointless, banal questions in a debate where some of the participants literally got less than ten total minutes of speaking time, I'm guilty as charged.  Someone like Julian Castro probably ended up spending about 10% of his speaking time on this idiotic question.  admittedly this is a minor example, but IMHO it's an example of what's wrong with our presidential campaigns -- a focus on trivial nonsense that entertains the pundits.