The only candidate who really screwed up his facts significantly was Tim Ryan. He rarely spoke, and when he did he was wrong.
CNN’s analysis of the winners and losers
They think Ryan didn’t know his facts.
They think Beto was very weak. Others, like Trevor Noah, thought Beto made a good attempt to break through the “noise.”
They think DeBlasio was obnoxious, which is to be expected. It’s about like saying Yoko was off key.
CNN took no notice of Tulsi Gabbard, but she picked up the most internet buzz, and others concluded she “won” the debate by a mile when the schooled the perpetually misinformed Tim Ryan. Despite relatively little screen time, she received the most internet searches – including from me – so I’d conclude she was the big winner in that she moved the needle from “Who?” to “Know her now; impressed.”
You have to admire Tim Ryan’s chutzpah in thinking he was presidential material. He was mocked by the nation, and even by the people who voted him into Congress. (“Tim Ryan could have actually fallen directly on his face into a pit of cream pies and whoopie cushions and it would have been better.”)
I think Tim Ryan was somewhat unfairly attacked over his mistaken claim of the Taliban being behind September 11. I think he knew it was Al Quida but that he was using it as a shorthand rather than saying “the Taliban shielded Al Quida who were behind September 11.”
I disliked his debate for using the false Republican talking points that coastal Democrats are ‘elitists’ who live in ‘ivory towers.’ I don’t necessarily think that it’s a coincidence that the candidate most willing to embrace Republican rhetoric was also the most factually inaccurate.
In regards to Tulsi Gabbard, I’ve heard a lot of negative things about her as she is definitely the most ‘horseshoe’ of the candidates. This refers to the notion that the far right and the far left have more in common with each other than they do with their seeming allies in the center right and center left.
So, I was surprised at how articulate and rational sounding she was. She did give a subtle ‘tell’ though. The issue of Iran supporting terrorism had been brought up only a few minutes earlier, so it’s hard to believe it could have slipped her mind, but when answering what she thought the Iranian nuclear deal failed to cover, all she mentioned was missiles.
Obviously I don’t think she’s a supporter of terrorists, as she pointed out, she volunteered to serve in the military after September 11, however, like Trump, she has been accused of being sympathetic to dictators, and her answer here I thought was a bit of a tell in that direction.
If you don’t mind me asking instead of Googling, why don’t the mainstream Democrats in Hawaii like her now?
Basically, she supported Bernie instead of Hillary in 2016. Totally went against the party’s endorsement.
Thanks, Fallen! I am surprised she is unpopular with the rank and file Democrats, as opposed to the leadership, for that reason, but I know nothing about Hawaii politics.
Hawaii Democrats are followers. We’re a one party state.
And Obama’s best career move was to leave. He would’ve had to wait in line to run for senator, let alone president.
CNN’s probably trying to steer voters toward the candidates they prefer.
I predicted a while ago that if Bernie Sanders won the nomination he’d pick Tulsi as his running mate. The mainstream Democrats in Hawaii don’t like her anymore, and there’s a lot of smearing going on.