Dem Debate Tonight (that is interesting) [8PM EST] {7 Feb}

Bernie rapping now.

Steyer vs Biden.

His long form podcasts about that are much better.

Steyer vs Biden is odd.

Hey dude, use POC. Just saying.

I’m out. Good luck to all.

Warren still trying to attack on the use of PACs, but it’s not really a good take… And ultimately it’s pretty disingenuous.

Pete is an impeccably articulate speaker.

I think that overall, Warren is having a good debate.

Bidden’s last response wasn’t too bad.

Klobuchar has used this FDR story before.

Its pretty good. I was moved.

Did Bernie answer the question?

Biden just started coughing and almost died in the middle of Steyer’s closing argument

Final thoughts:
Biden did fine… But i didn’t see anything that’s gonna turn his train around.

Klobuchar had a good night.

Warren had a good night.

I don’t think Bernie had as good night.

Pete had a good night, mainly in that i don’t think he took too many hits, despite being a front runner. And he had some good moments.

Yang… Dunno why he is on the stage.

Steyer actually seems like he should run for Senate somewhere.

I thought Amy had a really good night. If I was undecided and looking for somebody to stop Bernie she would have won my vote.

I’m sure Biden wishes he could take his very poignant moment on the CNN Townhall on stuttering and cancer and played it instead of being on the stage If they could create a position comforter in chief, I’d be happy to see Joe get a lifetime appointment. But he may not make it to South Carolina

Warren was fine, except for her silly yammering on PACs. She was asked on CNN if she would take Bloomberg’s money. Yes I would but blah blah

Steyer was doing a fine job for auditioning for the DNC chairmen role, and would actually be good, except for he has never held an elected position, and so far has spent approximately $2million/vote This made his attack against Pete seem particularly silly.

Yang really is good at math with an impressive grasp of economic figures. I think the man is having fun up there, I’ll miss him but it is time for him to leave.

I think Pete needs some new material, “future former Republican was cute the first 5 time I heard it now it’s just annoying.”. His answer on Soleimani was quite good, but he should have answered this way. " From , what I know from public report, no I wouldn’t. The dangers of dragging us into war with Iran, outweigh the benefits of killing him". Then launched into his read intelligence reports, listen to generals, formulate a strategy. He needs to do some serious damage control on the MJ arrests though.

Bernie was better than normal. But his rational against USMCA was further proof why he will be an completely ineffective president, nothing less than perfect according to Bernie, will ever be good enough.

I agree with this even though I don’t like Amy at all (she’s on the bottom of my list). Posted in the other thread but an audience of undecided NH voters were all impressed with her performance.

It was funny monitoring twitter and reddit during the debate - the former hated Steyer, the latter impressed.

It seems to me Pete talks way too much in platitudes.

Saddens me to say, but I don’t think Warren is going to be in the race for much longer.

Fwiw, Schumer also voted against it because of climate change. If climate change is viewed as an existential threat (I know you don’t see it as such, we’ll agree to disagree) then it is rational to reject legislation that ignores it (where appropriate.)

Pat Toomey (R-PA) made a good case why it was a step in the wrong direction from a free-trade perspective. I heard other Republican complain it gave way to much to union. In general. Republicans hated the changes in the bill. Pelosi called it a win for Democrats and it seems she was telling the truth. The final vote was 89-10 and 385-41 in the house, and Bernie once again was in a small minority. Hard to see how he is going to build a consensus.

As far the climate change aspect, it seems addressing climate change was non-objective of the bill.

I> ni committee reviews, floor comments and statements, several senators cited the absence of environmental provisions addressing climate change as one reason for voting against the implementing bill.

Environmental concern

It seemed unlikely the administration would have pursued climate change, not only because of Trump’s skepticism of the science behind it, but also because a trade-negotiating objective Congress approved in 2015 says trade agreements are not to establish obligations for the U.S. regarding greenhouse gas emissions. The language is part of a customs enforcement law that added several negotiating guidelines to the Trade Promotion Authority statute, which sets the ground rules for trade deals sent to Congress for approval.

Democratic presidential candidates Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Michael Bennet of Colorado voted for the pact. Sanders, another candidate, said in a written statement that it should be rewritten because it does not guarantee that companies will stop shifting jobs to Mexico.

So climate change wasn’t Bernie’s rationale, and the climate provision predates Trump…

Yes, jobs are going to be shifted to Mexico, there are almost 1 million unfilled manufacturing jobs today and that number is going to increase to 2 million in a few years due to retirements. Mexico is enjoying low unemployment 3.2% and rising wages, like the US. We should celebrate this. First and foremost, Mexican are human beings, they deserve to have education, health care, food and housing and even cellphones and computer games just like Americans. The $2.40 hour/wage for manufacturing jobs they get is a good living in Mexico

One of the big benefits when Mexican have jobs at home they don’t try and sneak into this country illegally. We have already experienced the benefits of a good Mexican economy by the low number of Mexican being caught by ICE. Now when they have decent-paying jobs they’ll have less incentive to do things like smuggle heroin and other drugs into this country.

I’d rather see the jobs shipped to Mexico, than China or Vietnam, because Mexico is a big market for American business. Finally, let’s not forget lower wages in Mexico means lower prices for goods sold here. Which is good fro US consumers.

Bernie doesn’t understand trade.

I’m going to spoiler this to avoid yet another thread going on a derail. :) It’s nothing bad, just citing Schumer’s reasons for voting against it but at least people who don’t want to read it won’t have to be forced to scroll past it.

Summary

Locking in a trade deal that will not only not do anything to mitigate climate change but in fact make it worse for years to come is bad policy. Short term thinking is the exact opposite of what we need to be doing regardless of what the trump administration wants and regardless of past or current considerations that ignore environmental impacts.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and other Democrats announced Thursday they would not support the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), citing the proposed deal’s failure to address climate change.

“Despite the fact that it includes very good labor provisions, I am voting against USMCA because it does not address climate change, the greatest threat facing the planet,” Schumer said in a statement.

“Instead of advancing global climate security by outlining binding and enforceable climate commitments from all three countries, the Trump administration provides significant incentives for manufacturers to move their business and their jobs from the U.S. to Mexico, where clean air and clean water regulations are much weaker," he continued.

"Meanwhile, the Trump administration also included handouts for the oil and gas industry, such as lifting tariffs on tar sands, and refused to include any mention of the climate crisis in the agreement,” Schumer added, citing his previous vote against the North American Free Trade Agreement and saying the USMCA shares many of the same problems from a climate perspective.

Several other Democrats opposed the trade deal citing climate concerns, including Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Kamala Harris (Calif.), Ed Markey (Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.), Jack Reed (R.I), Brian Schatz (Hawaii) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Sanders mentioned climate change as a factor in his opposition to the deal during Tuesday’s night’s debate, only to be cut off by the moderator who promised to address climate change later.

“But they’re the same,” Sanders retorted.

Gillibrand called the deal a “missed opportunity to address the urgent threats we face from climate change. It fails to close loopholes for corporate polluters or set binding, enforceable standards to protect clean air and water.”

Schumer made his announcement shortly before the Senate was set to vote on the revised North American trade deal on Thursday. The measure overwhelmingly passed the upper chamber in an 89-10 vote after the House signed off on it in December following months of closed-door negotiations.

Schumer’s statement praised Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Democrats, as well as Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, for securing workers’ rights provisions within the final version of the deal.

“But on the greatest issue facing our planet, addressing the climate crisis, the USMCA falls far too short,” he added.

I think that Pete was definitely on the defense, as he should have been. He has momentum going into NH, so his main goal was “don’t fuck it up”, like Rubio did with Christy right before NH.

However, i his answer about Solemani was his best answer of the night, because it was the right answer. There’s no way for any of us to actually know what the right choice was in that case, without having access to the Intel and the analysis. The reason that Trump’s action was dumb is because he almost certainly did not consume any of that.

Another thing, regarding Warren … She gave a good answer at one point, about how of she can get something for the people, she’ll take it, even if it doesn’t solve everything. And then she’ll get up tomorrow, and try to get more.

This is, ultimately, they problem with Bernie’s group… That they don’t seem to get this. The perfect is always the enemy of the good. But only Warren’s method will with. Bernie’s won’t. He will never achieve sweeping, revolutionary change. The strategy doesn’t work that way. You need to do the work, and chip away at the stone, and achieve something over time.

Which is why, if Bernie did by some miracle land in the White House, the backlash when he failed to achieve most his stated goals would be… destructive.

I’m not sure that I agree with this. His supporters would be just like hard-core supporters of anyone/anything. They all think that Bernie can’t fail, he can only be failed. So any failure would just be attributed to “the system,” Republican obstruction, or institutional Democrats.