Before I start with the candidates, I'd like to offer some general thoughts. First, I think Anderson Cooper did a good job as the moderator. His questions were tough and he really seemed to make an effort to get the candidates to answer them. Unfortunately, despite his best efforts, those being questioned often just refused to answer. Cooper could have done a better job with follow up questions and I was disappointed that he allowed Bernie Sanders to derail his question for Hillary Clinton regarding her emails. Overall, I was pleased with how Cooper and CNN conducted the debate.
As to the candidates themselves, much of what we saw was long on left-wing ideology and short on solutions. There was the typical politics of division and envy; populist appeal replete with promises of free stuff paid for by someone else and rants against the usual suspects: big business, capitalism, and of course the Republicans. What was offered was more government without much in the way of acknowledging that government played a significant role in causing most of the ills against which they railed. Further, many assertions made by the candidates were allowed to be offered as fact instead of being challenged. Chief among these was the continued claim that climate change is "settled science". This is mainly based on a survey that was conducted that states that 97% of scientists agree that climate change is real and it is caused by man. The facts behind this claim are far less convincing. The poll has since been shown to have been "cherry picked" more like a high school paper rather than a peer reviewed scientific study. It is produced by an activist woman with a master's degree, not a PhD researcher, who initially polled a large and diverse pool of the scientific community - physicists, geologists, meteorologists, climatologists and other earth scientists. When the first results returned a roughly 50/50 split in opinion, the pollster did what any respectable researcher would do: begin throwing out responses that didn't support her hypothesis. In the end, thousands of responses from the scientific community at large were reduced to about 79 responses from mostly climate scientists and wonder upon wonder, 97% of them believe in the work they are doing - a surprising result to be sure.
I also found it very telling that nearly to the person, all the candidates named groups of their fellow Americans as enemies with the exception of Jim Webb who actually named an enemy.
Now for the candidates. I'll start with the lessor knowns.
First, former Rhode Island governor Lincoln Chaffee. He basically said, I have been in politics my whole life and I have never been involved in a scandal. In a sane world that should be a given not considered a selling point - so next!
Then there was former Maryland governor Martin O'Malley. He is polling 4th in Maryland which says something about how his own State feels about him. He left the State deep in dept and his gun control laws have resulted in a surge of gun violence throughout the State especially in Baltimore which is already well ahead of previous years in gun murders.
There was also James Webb. Webb is a fellow Naval Academy alumni so I have a bit of a fondness for him. He is what one would have traditionally called a Southern Democrat and he was truly the odd man out as the only one on stage who wasn't clearly far left. During the George W. Bush years, I lost some respect for Webb for his belligerence towards the president. He wasted much of his time to comment complaining about not getting equal time - time which would have been better spent making his points. Webb is highly educated, experienced, and accomplished which makes him more than capable of making compelling arguments for his views.
I'll discuss the two better known candidates, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and former Secretary of State Clinton next. Sanders is a self-described socialist. He promised loads of new domestic spending which the GAO estimates would cost about $17 trillion and said it would be paid for by the rich. The problem is the entire net worth of all the billionaires in the US would only amount to about $7 trillion and then that source is wiped out. Then what Bernie? He also proposed free college for everyone. As someone who has lived overseas and traveled extensively, I can tell you that highly educated people without jobs to apply the knowledge to results in unrest. You see it throughout the developing world where college educated young men sit in cafes all day long growing angrier and angrier because there is no opportunity. Additionally, much of what Sanders said about economics demonstrates he has no understanding of the subject whatsoever.
Lastly, there was Clinton, a progressive, who spent much of her time railing against business, the wealthy, of which she is one, and claiming as achievements among other things, the US action against Libya which has left that country in complete chaos. Much of the rest of the world is similarly far worse off now as a result of her tenure as Secretary of State. Her one big applause came when she refused to respond to the implication by Chafee that she is dishonest. Despite the thunderous applause by the audience, I have been very pleased to see that her debate performance has failed to lead to a bump for her in the polls. Character does still matter.
In all, those on the far left got what they were looking for - more promises of free stuff, vilification of other groups of Americans, global warming hysteria and America continuing to lead from behind in international affairs. For those of us on the right, there was a collective yawn.
I also found it very telling that nearly to the person, all the candidates named groups of their fellow Americans as enemies with the exception of Jim Webb who actually named an enemy.
Now for the candidates. I'll start with the lessor knowns.
First, former Rhode Island governor Lincoln Chaffee. He basically said, I have been in politics my whole life and I have never been involved in a scandal. In a sane world that should be a given not considered a selling point - so next!
Then there was former Maryland governor Martin O'Malley. He is polling 4th in Maryland which says something about how his own State feels about him. He left the State deep in dept and his gun control laws have resulted in a surge of gun violence throughout the State especially in Baltimore which is already well ahead of previous years in gun murders.
There was also James Webb. Webb is a fellow Naval Academy alumni so I have a bit of a fondness for him. He is what one would have traditionally called a Southern Democrat and he was truly the odd man out as the only one on stage who wasn't clearly far left. During the George W. Bush years, I lost some respect for Webb for his belligerence towards the president. He wasted much of his time to comment complaining about not getting equal time - time which would have been better spent making his points. Webb is highly educated, experienced, and accomplished which makes him more than capable of making compelling arguments for his views.
I'll discuss the two better known candidates, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and former Secretary of State Clinton next. Sanders is a self-described socialist. He promised loads of new domestic spending which the GAO estimates would cost about $17 trillion and said it would be paid for by the rich. The problem is the entire net worth of all the billionaires in the US would only amount to about $7 trillion and then that source is wiped out. Then what Bernie? He also proposed free college for everyone. As someone who has lived overseas and traveled extensively, I can tell you that highly educated people without jobs to apply the knowledge to results in unrest. You see it throughout the developing world where college educated young men sit in cafes all day long growing angrier and angrier because there is no opportunity. Additionally, much of what Sanders said about economics demonstrates he has no understanding of the subject whatsoever.
Lastly, there was Clinton, a progressive, who spent much of her time railing against business, the wealthy, of which she is one, and claiming as achievements among other things, the US action against Libya which has left that country in complete chaos. Much of the rest of the world is similarly far worse off now as a result of her tenure as Secretary of State. Her one big applause came when she refused to respond to the implication by Chafee that she is dishonest. Despite the thunderous applause by the audience, I have been very pleased to see that her debate performance has failed to lead to a bump for her in the polls. Character does still matter.
In all, those on the far left got what they were looking for - more promises of free stuff, vilification of other groups of Americans, global warming hysteria and America continuing to lead from behind in international affairs. For those of us on the right, there was a collective yawn.
No comments:
Post a Comment