So was last night’s rumble in the tundra a game-changer, or was it just another bland debate that didn’t move the needle one way or another?
Probably a mix of both.
Coming off a rough week and a terrible night in New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton showed that she is not going to crumble under pressure. I give her points for doing her homework. She mentioned Dontre Hamilton, Gov. Scott Walker (I’m sure he loved the attention) and Wisconsin’s union struggles. She also had a masterful closing argument for why voters should choose her over Sanders: Even if we go after Wall Street abuses, there will still be jerks like Walker, threats to unions, racism, sexism, economic inequality and other problems we need to address.
Sanders, on the other hand, showed that he is a viable candidate beyond New Hampshire who is harnessing the frustrations of those who watched the 1% get away scot-free after crashing the economy. Sure, Obama stanched the bleeding but he hasn’t really transformed the nation or the economy in the way that we had all hoped he would. (Note to Marco Rubio: Obama’s not the left-wing bogeyman you’re making him out to be. Republicans got very lucky when Obama--a pragmatic, cautious leader--was elected after the GOP wrecked the economy and destabilized the Middle East.)
|
Also of note was how often Clinton and Sanders spoke directly to the wants and needs of African Americans and Latinos. In this they are fighting for South Carolina voters and each other’s supporters. Is Clinton truly stronger with minority voters than Sanders? That hasn’t been put to the test yet. I'm not convinced. And both are far more in touch with minorities’ concerns than the racists in the Republican Party who are driving away generations of blacks and Latinos with their hateful rhetoric.
I’m not sure what the mood was like in the Helene Zelazo Center. Just a few loyal Dems were allowed in (well, Chris Abele was also there, but money will buy you anything) and the credentialed press corps was shut up in another building altogether, with no access to the debate other than a video feed and the spin room afterwards.
I had press credentials for last night’s debate. But I didn’t use them, knowing that it would be akin to watching it at home on the couch, but without the couch. Yippee.
Instead, I witnessed the peaceful and awesome protests outside. Even more impressive than the grand poo-bahs who could attend the debate were the regular folks who braved the cold to make their voices heard. Especially strong was the Fight for $15 contingent, who are harnessing that economic frustration that’s affecting both sides of the presidential debate with their “Come Get My Vote” message.
Of course, only the Democrats are listening to them, but the Republicans ultimately will pay for their opposition to a living wage and continually siding with low-wage employers. Bernie has endorsed a $15 federal minimum wage and Hillary is almost there, supporting a $12 minimum wage. I hope that Hillary and Bernie take the $15 folks seriously, both on the campaign trail and in office.
Another fantastic event was the debate watch party the Democrats held at Lakefront Brewery. It was packed to capacity with Dems from all parts of the spectrum. The Hillary and Bernie contingents sat next to each other with absolutely no friction. I hope that no matter who wins the nomination, both groups of supporters will say it was a fair fight and will unify to clobber the GOP candidate in November.
Hillary and Bernie’s debate is almost beside the point. The real stars of the show were the Milwaukeeans who are engaging in the political process. After many seasons of political polarization it was heartening to see passionate, engaged debate-watchers cheer on their candidate, learn more about the issues and, heck yeah, have a beer or two with friends.
So, what are your thoughts? Did last night’s debate produce a winner? Will the Hillary and Bernie camps find common ground this fall? Can either one win in November? And will any candidate actually earn the votes of low-wage workers and minority voters?