- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
- Click here to share on LinkedIn (Opens in a new window)
- Click to email a friend (Opens in a new window)
Warren explains why a woman can beat Trump
(CNN) - Six Democratic presidential candidates debated on Tuesday night in Iowa, in what was the last chance to see their faces before the voters of that state gave the starting signal to the race for the Democratic nomination within 20 days. How did each one do? These are the winners and losers of the debate, according to Chris Cillizza.
MIRA: The highlights of the Iowa Democratic debate
WINNERS
Pete Buttigieg: The former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, showed Tuesday night that he is the best polemicist in this group. But he also did something more important than that: in the first 30 minutes of the debate, Buttigieg showed a competence, firmness and depth of knowledge along with personal experience that should help him pass the commander-in-chief test in the eyes of voters. He spoke strongly and powerfully about his problems with President Donald Trump's approach to Iran and the need to return to the planning table in Congress to authorize the use of military force. It is also worth noting that despite Buttigieg's status as one of the frontline candidates in the race, he rarely seems to be on the receiving side of the harmful attacks of his opponents.
Elizabeth Warren: The Massachusetts Senator pronounced the phrase of the night, noting that the four men on stage had lost 10 elections while the two women in the place - she and Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar - had never lost an election. And it wasn't just a phrase made that will be quickly forgotten; It is an effective response to the idea that she is too liberal to defeat Trump. While Warren looked somewhat unstable during the foreign policy discussion at the beginning of the debate, he found his way when he spoke about health, demonstrating a commitment to aim big, a contrast between his approach (in everything) and Buttigieg's and the former Vice President Joe Biden.
Amy Klobuchar: The Minnesota senator came to the debate with a simple objective: to present herself as a pragmatic alternative to voters looking for someone other than Biden (or, to a lesser extent, Buttigieg). She, in general terms, achieved that goal, although Klobuchar was less prominent in this debate than in the previous one. (Her inability to remember the name of the Kansas governor, Laura Kelly, was more than a bit embarrassing.) Would Klobuchar have expected a more stellar turn in this debate? Yes. Will you feel very happy with your performance? Yes too.
Politics: The most common criticism in these presidential debates is that the focus is on personalities, not policies. I hope those critics have seen Tuesday night's debate. There were lots and lots of policies (health, attention to minors, foreign policy, climate change) and very few questions focused on personality. If one was a potential voter who tuned in to this debate to know the position of the main candidates on the main issues of the day, he got what he was looking for.
1990: The discussion between Warren and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders about whether she was the only person on stage who had defeated a Republican in the past 30 years focused much of the debate on how much time had passed since then. Also, speaking of 1990, that made me think of 1990: when the Milli Vanilli playback scandal occurred (look for it, children!), “Twin Peaks” appeared on television (I still can't believe that happened) and the "Ninja Turtles" (Damn you, Shredder!) Were all the rage. Those good times.
LOSERS
Joe Biden: If Buttigieg is the best of the polemicists among the six main candidates, then the former vice president is the worst. On Tuesday night, he seemed to forget or incorrectly express a point, forcing him to return and repeat it to make sure he did well. It was a hesitant performance, in which he was less blunt and self-confident than others on stage. Biden also spent a lot of time talking about the mistakes he had made in the last elections (support for the war in Iraq was the most prominent), for which I don't think his campaign would like him to use much of the debate. With all that said, Biden has not been a great polemicist in this whole process, and has not had any significant impact on their numbers in the polls. And Biden did not commit any catastrophic error that would disqualify him or seriously affect his current support in the first four states with the right to vote.
Bernie Sanders: Sanders's disdain for Warren's statement that he had told him that a woman could not win the White House in 2020 - "I didn't say it," he said - bothered me. Sanders tried to portray the issue as irrelevant, plotted by Republicans and the media to distract voters. But is not. Warren herself said - for the record! - that when she told Sanders she believed that a woman could win, "he disagreed." (Warren reiterated that position in the debate). Sanders effectively contrasted his record about the war in Iraq and about trade with Biden. But somehow he was left out when the topic went to “Medicare for all,” which was a debate mainly between Warren and Buttigieg, and never had a decent answer to the question about the real costs of their programs.
Tom Steyer: In a nutshell, the billionaire businessman was very overwhelmed. He struggled to show that he was better prepared than his rivals to administer the country's foreign policy - his response focused on the fact that he has traveled a lot internationally (and, no, I'm not kidding) - and from there things didn't go much Better for him. During most of the debate, it felt as if the top 5 were involved in a conversation and Steyer, well, was just there.
Democratic Debate