Quick Notes On The Fourth Primary Debate

Image result for democratic debate

Before I get to the candidates, I must point out that I am extremely disappointed in CNN for not having a single question about climate change in the whole three-hour-long debate. Now that is out of the way, let's get into it.

Biden didn't make any sense; that's not a good sign for 'the most moderate candidate'. No one went after Biden and he still dropped the ball several times. He had his moments of charm, but they were few and far between. Every time he spoke, I became worried that he might actually be Trump's opponent in 2020. He is this party's biggest risk.

Buttigieg was aggressive and hostile to other candidates. That might have been what he needed to stand out, but it did not sit well with me personally. His approach should have focused more on policy than the other candidates.

Klobuchar got a lot of screen time but failed to make the most of it. I had a hard time pinning down any of her views.

Castro's situation was nearly the same. He shined with strong analysis of his opponents' policies but seemed reluctant to offer viable alternatives. 

O'Rourke did not fully explain his plan to effectively ban assault rifles. This had to have lost him votes. His sprinkled in Spanish was rough and he failed to get me excited about any of his policies. In general, however, I still think he is a strong candidate; I just wish he would run for Senator Cornyn's seat instead.

Booker always seemed to bring the debate back to neutral. As a viewer, I appreciated that, but it doesn't win votes. A very charismatic speaker, but his policies are short of exciting.

Yang showed that he can play the politics game and make it seem like a Ted Talk. Good performance, even though I disagree with his policies.

Gabbard made ending unnecessary wars central to her agenda and I think she deserves more attention for it. Especially with her experience as a veteran to back her statements up.

Harris did better than she did in the second debate. She answered questions head-on and with a lot of passion. Her piece on reproductive rights was one of the highlights of the debate.

Warren was the target of several attacks and showed that she can take a right hook without losing any composure. This is extremely important for whoever will be facing off against Trump in 2020. However, when it came to Medicare-for-all, once again she failed to explain how she will fund it. Her supposed reason is that she does not want to give Fox news the satisfaction, but this is the third time it has come up now and I expected a stronger answer.

If this debate had a winner, it was Sanders.

Sanders reminded voters how charismatic he can be when he gets his moment. Further, he showed resilience in a tough time in his campaign. No more than a few weeks ago, Sanders had a heart attack and lost his daughter-in-law to cancer. I think any other candidate on that stage would have ended their campaign after that, as I am sure many of us would. But on Tuesday night, Sanders showed that when life gets tough, he gets tougher. He was sharp, persuasive and full of heart.

Also, it was kind of fun to see Steyer's face pop up on the screen every now and then.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Infest the Rat's Nest

Image
Usually made from trash and debris left by humans, rats can embed a nest nearly anywhere the sun does not shine. As such, a rats’ nest will not be found in plain sight. However, by tracking the footprints, tail marks, droppings, or urine spots of a rodent, one can find a rats’ nest. A rats’ nest is a breeding ground for infectious diseases. If handled inadequately, a rats’ nest can quickly become a bigger problem for all those concerned. Creatures living within a rats’ nest have no care for those that do not. Self-interest is a rat’s only end. WE THE PEOPLE Self-interest is at the heart of tyranny. Wherever there is a position of power over the people, there is the possibility for tyranny. There is an opportunity for one to place their own self-interest above that of the common good. Tyranny is what this nation’s founders feared most. They feared that upon achieving independence from the tyrannical ruler King George III, this nation would fall back into submission to some
Read more

On the Discourse of Immigration

Image
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/20/us/paintings-us-mexico-border-fence/index.html Until quite recently, serious conversation about immigration was all but dismissed from philosophical discourse. However, this consensus of silence imposed by opinion makers who found the topic distasteful or inconvenient was abruptly undone by a number of recent events - including the sudden rise of immigration as a topic in the last U.S. presidential election. In the limelight of this discourse, we find two prominent scholars of philosophy with polar opposite opinions on the matter; Wellman and Abizadeh. Wellman argues that insofar as a state is legitimate, it ought to have the right to close borders to would-be immigrants as it sees fit. Abizadeh argues, in contrast, for a moral right to not be excluded, such that states have no moral right to close their borders to any would-be immigrants without a unilateral democratic justification. The aim of this post is to identify and present each of their arg
Read more

Aristotle v. Parmenides: The Case of Generation

Image
INTRODUCTION Aristotle calls his philosophical position on form and matter: the theory of principles. In developing this position, Aristotle confronts a challenge posed by many presocratic philosophers, including Parmenides, regarding generation. In his own argument, Parmenides denies the possibility of generation, or change, whatsoever. In response, Aristotle posits that his theory of principles can answer the problem that leads to this philosophical challenge. The aim of this paper is to briefly summarize Aristotle’s Theory of Principles, explain Parmenides’ argument as well as Aristotle's response to that argument, and then conclude by considering the merits or concerns of each position. THE THEORY OF PRINCIPLES Aristotle posits that three essential components are involved in every process of change. There is the subject, as in the thing that undergoes a change, and two opposing properties, as in attributes or qualities. These opposing properties are those with conflic
Read more