On the Debates: Part One

I was asked by a website who loves lists to rank the
first batch of candidates after the Democratic debate
last night.

Now, I’m never above taking a writing job, and I’ve
done far worse than rank political candidates (Gossip
Girl fanfic, anyone?), but this is one job I just couldn’t do.

Not because of some high moral authority, but because
after watching both parts of last night’s debate, it’s hard
to say who the winners and losers are.

Actually, that’s only half true.

Based on my social media feeds, the prevailing mood
seemed to be variations of the following:

Oh god, are we really doing this again?
None of these people can win.

Who are these people?

Beto looks like he’s going to ask Senator Warren to
copy her math homework.

Okay, so that last one was just me, but still--things
were looking bleak.

And why?

We had a roster of candidates who, for the most part,
were articulate, informed, and--if nothing else--totally
inoffensive.  Not one accused the other of having little
hands or no scruples or having a father who assassinated
JFK.

This was how debates are supposed to look.

So maybe...debates are the problem?

First of all, sign me up for the petition to force at least
half these people out of the race.  The GOP field in 2016
was laughably crowded, but at least I could name all of them.

I consider myself to be pretty politically savvy, and I
couldn’t pick Tim Ryan out of a line-up if you paid me.

Listen, I believe in democracy, and I believe in letting
people have their say, but why don’t we just break the
debates down into two categories:

Night One:  You Could Actually Win This

Night Two:  You Don’t Have a Chance in Hell But Feel
Free to Tell Us How You Feel

Maybe somebody from Night Two will move to Night One
during the next round of debates.  Wouldn’t that be exciting?

We could use a little excitement.

This is when I have to split myself right down the middle
and become one of those infuriating people who talks
about what I like versus what’s realistic.

I like policy.

I like policy wonks.

I like getting in the weeds.

But what’s realistic?

Well, in politics, it’s pretty much agreed that you have to
be at least a little bit of an entertainer.  As one of the many
coaches who tried to get me interested in sports once said--

You don’t get to pick your opponent, which means you
don’t get to choose how you play.

None of us like that we’re sending somebody into the ring
next November who is going to have to out-soundbyte a
Magic 8 Ball designed by Breitbart, but that’s the opponent,
and we don’t get to choose how we play.

The confounding thing about last night’s debate is that it
seems as though Democrats are still determined to believe
they have some say over how this whole election thing is
going to work.

And you know what?

We can have some say in it--but only if we win.

And we win by being aggressive, hitting hard, and not getting
lost in those weeds I love so much.

Bill Clinton was Bill Clinton because he could explain quantum
physics to a 3rd grader and make that 3rd grader feel like
they understood it even when they didn’t.

That’s how he became President.

Is that catering to the lowest common denominator?

Absolutely.

Do we need the lowest common denominator to win?

Not necessarily.

But if we tell those people to screw--

(And goodness knows, I would love to tell those people that.)

--Then we need to excite and expand our own base.

And you know what’s really exciting?

Entertainment.

You know what’s not?

A policy wonk.

A progressive base can talk all it wants about how it wants to
hear policies and issues, but at the end of the day, we all lose
our minds every time AOC tweets out a TKO, and that means
we’re probably looking for a little of that in our next candidate.

Why do we think people are responding so favorably to
(swallows bile) Joe Biden?

He once threatened to take then candidate Donald out
behind the gym and rough him up--and WE ALL CHEERED.

At least, I cheered.

The media keeps parading out pundits who are saying
Democrats can’t make their campaigns all about how
awful the President is.

Hey candidates, listen to me, a Democratic voter--

We want blood.

I want Mitch McConnell thrown in a Turkish prison.

I want every piece of clothing Ivanka ever designed burned
in a pyre in front of the Lincoln Memorial.

Do not believe the media when they tell you we don’t want
you to get angry.

If you still believe that after 2016, you do not deserve to
stand on any stage, let alone a debate stage.

There is a fine balance between being able to shake
hands with diplomats and pummel a bully who is keeping
kids in cages, and the next President is going to have to
be someone who knows how to strike that balance.

That being said, the moderators should not have to help
you find the daylight between you and the other candidates
--that should be your job.

The fact that Mayor de Blasio and (swallows more bile) Rep.
Gabbard were the only ones who came to that debate
prepared for a fight just shows how out-of-touch most of
these people are when it comes to figuring out what it’s
going to take when the cameras are on.

I’m not trying to have a conversation about electability.

Like most people, I agree that the election system is
broken, and it’s impossible to predict what a broken
system will churn out.

But what concerns me is the unwillingness to adapt to
the rules of play.

After everything we’ve encountered as a country, our
debates have not evolved and it appears our candidates
haven’t either.

It’s as though most of these people wouldn’t know a
hot take if it burned their perplexed faces off.

There’s been an argument over whether or not the
Democrats should have a debate solely about climate
change, but based on what I saw last night, it would
basically be a bunch of people agreeing with each other
while occasionally arguing over a subsection of a bill as
if it contained the coordinates to a buried treasure.

Meanwhile the American people have no idea who most
of you are, and until they care about who you are, they
are not going to care about what you believe or what
kind of President you’re going to be.

And that doesn’t mean start talking about your cousin
who couldn’t pay her hospital bill and your great-aunt
who drowned when the ice caps melted.

Why are we still doing anecdotes in debates?
Please tell me we, the public, are too smart to fall for
that anymore.

Please tell me that no longer works and these
candidates are just too stubborn to admit it.

You have to define yourself with charm.

With confidence.

By not--are you listening?

BY NOT.  USING. TALKING.  POINTS.

Say what you want about the President and his
habit of spitting out words like he’s a human
Boggle game, but people--even people who don’t
like him--like that he doesn’t sound like robot.

We know this.

We all know this.

Why are some of you still so bad at speaking
like human beings?

Why are you worried about watching what
you say?

Is anyone still under the impression that
voters care if a candidate--

Oh right, Democratic voters do.

Democrats hold their candidates to higher
standards.

Right.

That’s why I’m ripping apart scholars and
geniuses, and the GOP is ready to re-elect
someone who thinks the moon is part of Mars.

And maybe that’s where we’re really in trouble.

Because we feel like we can’t mess this up
and so we’re looking for the perfect candidate
to try and defeat a candidate we all agree
couldn’t be more imperfect, and that idea is
messing with our heads so badly that all we
want to do is scream, Beto, that’s more than
enough Spanish for tonight and please look up
what pandering means.  Ask Mayor de Blasio,
he can explain it to you.

It seems like, if nothing else, one thing is
crystal clear--

Whatever we do, we cannot do what we’ve
been doing.

As much as we’d all like to get back to a sense
of normalcy, normal is dictated by the opponent.

And you can’t choose your opponent, so you
have to become the opponent.

Tonight is Part Two, which is probably going to
devolve into a shouting match between Biden and
Sanders to see who gets to read the newspaper
first while Senator Harris tries not to roll her eyes
so hard they fall right in Rachel Maddow’s lap.

There has to be a better way, everybody.

There just has to be.