February 4, 2016

People keep asking: Am I watching the debate?

The answer is: Yes, I am. Not up for old-time live-blogging. My son, John Althouse Cohen is carrying on the old live-blogging tradition, here.

I'll just say I'm very put off by the anger and the yelling. It's so stressful!

ADDED: What are they yelling about? It seems to be the theater of showing fire. I am scarcely able to follow the substance. I'm puzzling over the weirdness of the variations of angry face. Bernie seems to be doing his usual thing. Hillary seems on the edge of losing her temper. I'm seeing faces that I interpret as sheer hate.

86 comments:

Oso Negro said...

Nothing less appealing than angry, old, white people.

Humperdink said...

The Bern!, while on a roll, says Goldman Sachs paid a $5 billion fine for illegal activities ..... and stopped there.

All he had to do was look at Hillary, point his finger at her say: "You were in bed with these people". He could not do it. Just couldn't. Wasting his time.

traditionalguy said...

Clinton defies anyone to catch her doing anything for the unsolicited mega bribes she has taken and Sweet Old Bill has taken every year for years and years.

Apparently the mega bribes are continually given because the Wall Street Banks, credit card industry and and Big Pharma are all stupid people who get nothing at all for the money the dish out.

M Jordan said...

Sanders is coming across as a complete crank, Hillary a shrew.

I assume. I'm not watching it.

Original Mike said...

Another potty break.

Terry said...

If it's sheer hate you are seeing, it can't be directed at Muslim terrorists, or at foreign governments. It must be directed at their fellow citizens.

Meade said...

Humperdink is right -- Bernie lacks the ability to make the kill.

Gahrie said...

I've figured it out...Trump is Peron, Sanders is Hugo Chavez and Hillary is Cruella de Ville.

Original Mike said...

When did Hillary start prefacing her comments with the condescending "Look, "?

Meade said...

Sanders isn't Hugo Chavez. He's barely George McGovern.

Limited blogger said...

Yes, the anger was the first thing I noticed. Not very presidential.

Original Mike said...

Oh, God. Osama again.

Come on Bernie, the topic is foreign policy judgement. Do you have to have it spelled out for you?

L. I. B. Y. A.

SteveR said...

Get off my lawn!

Fabi said...

Bernie says we need Muslims on the ground fighting ISIL. I was told that this had nothing to do with Islam.

Original Mike said...

If Bernie is elected President, he's going to have to learn how to pronounce Korea.

n.n said...

They're arguing about whether the next social justice movement should wreak havoc in America or stay the course in Europe, Africa, Middle East, etc. Also, whether there needs to be more babies terminated in order to increase profits at Planned Parenthood et al and to secure democratic leverage from Obama's refugee crises.

Original Mike said...

Holy cow. The Koch Brothers hate veterans.

PB said...

There's a lot of hate on the left. Mostly a result of trying to transfer their self-loathing of the failure of their policies and core beliefs.

Original Mike said...

Wow. The Koch Brothers want to destroy SS, Medicare, and a bunch of other stuff.

All in agreement. Group hug.

Original Mike said...

This debate has more potty breaks than basketball has time outs.

chuck said...

So both want to support "our Syrians" against ISIL. Well, our Syrians are about to be eliminated due to the Russian backed offensive launched by Assad. Remember the intractable war in Ceylon? China gave weapons to the Cylonese government and they won the war. War settles many things, and when you screw all your friends you won't have any friends when you need them. That's where we are now.

grackle said...

I’m struck by the similarity between the candidates on both sides, Demo and Repub, of their answer to ISIS. They all want to “bomb the shit” out of ISIS. They all want Muslim troops to lead the way while US troops stay in the background as advisors, logistic support, air cover and occasional special ops raids as needed.

Here’s what I believe: Muslim troops will fight well enough as long as the USA is actively involved and the Muslims have substantial amounts of USA troops fighting alongside them. But they are not going to be sent out as front line fighters with Americans in the rear. They do not believe in any leading from behind bullshit.

And who can blame them? Why take up a superpower’s fight and further the superpower’s goals if the superpower will not fight for it’s goals(muddled as they may be)?

Deirdre Mundy said...

Wake me up if someone mentions the email scandal.

Donald Douglas said...

"I'll just say I'm very put off by the anger and the yelling. It's so stressful!"

Hillary's a harpy!

YoungHegelian said...

Bernie seems to be doing his usual thing. Hillary seems on the edge of losing her temper. I'm seeing faces that I interpret as sheer hate.

And this surprises you why? Hillary is famous for her nasty temper, even among her supporters. Sanders is, by his own admission, like Larry David, another gentleman not exactly known for his chill demeanor.

Mutaman said...

"I'll just say I'm very put off by the anger and the yelling. It's so stressful!"

Has Althouse ever been in a courtroom?

Original Mike said...

Bernie doesn't strike me as particularly angry.

Michael K said...

Bernie had better stay away from Fort Marcy Park.

rcocean said...

Hillary is very unattractive candidate. Her husband is much better campaigner. Sad.

Bernie doesn't want to win. No guts. I had high hopes he would take Hillary down. Sad.

rcocean said...

When you can't destroy a 70 year old cranky Jewish socialist with a thick Brooklyn accent in a debate. You really are politically incompetent.

Original Mike said...

Emails. I didn't do it and the Bushies did it too.

Fabi said...

Does this debate conclude with Hoveround Jousting?

Steven said...

The Democrats: The Party of Angry Old White People Shouting.

Bay Area Guy said...

Rachel Maddow. - smart gal, but hopelessly Leftist. She's stuck, can't learn, can't re-assess her views.

Bay Area Guy said...

Democratic Debate - Old & Older

rcocean said...

Democratic Debate - Dumb and Dumber

Skeptical Voter said...

Ah both of these clowns fall in the Sweet Old Bob category. Only good thing about it is that 99 and 44/00th percent of the folks aren't watching.

M Jordan said...

Thank God, it's finally over.

I assume. I'd dint watch it.

Original Mike said...

Hillary just invaded Bernie's space.

Terry said...

When was the last time American politicians leveled as much hatred at named private citizens as the Dems have leveled at the Koch Bros.? The Civil War? You get the idea they'd rather have sent seal team six after Chas. and David Koch than Osama bin Laden.

Terry said...

. . . It's been awhile since I took civics, but aren't citizens in the US encouraged to influence the law making process?

Original Mike said...

Only the right kind of citizens, Terry.

Spiros Pappas said...

Why is Bernie's bitchface considered cute?

Michael K said...

My stomach is not strong enough to watch.

Original Mike said...

Hmmm. Joe Trippi just gave a good reason why Bernie doesn't go after the email scandal. Democrats don't care about it, so he'd just piss them off.

PB said...

This debate doesn't have potty breaks, it catheter bag emptying breaks.

walter said...

When will she resort to Hildebeast's secret weapon outfit.?

Mark said...

When was the last time American politicians leveled as much hatred at named private citizens as the Dems have leveled at the Koch Bros.?

When they constantly demonized some guy named Richard Mellon Scaife, whoever he was.
Ninety-nine percent of conservatives and Republicans had no idea who that guy was, and yet the Dems were obsessed with asserting that he was controlling everything and everyone.

sunsong said...

Why is Hillary never challenged on her recurring mantra that "she gets things done"? No she doesn't. Nor does she work well with republicans. Look at the difference of what John Kerry has accomplished as Sec of State compared to Hillary. She just did a lot of traveling. And as a senator she was pretty crappy, not accomplished. She says she told Wall St to behave themselves - but they clearly didn't listen to her. She has been fighting all her life - that seems true - but she has not been getting much done.

coupe said...

This country fought a cold war over progressives. We still have B-52's flying nuclear weapons around the world, troops in Japan and Germany, and now they want us to elect one for President?

Are people that stupid, or is there no true Americans left?

The only thing I can figure out, is that half the voters aren't even citizens.

"The only good progressive is a dead progressive." General Patton

coupe said...

Bernie always appears to me like he forgot his top dentures.

cubanbob said...

I tried watching, it was bearable only by muting it. Angry and angrier and together they couldn't run a gas station profitably even if they stole the customer's cars.

averagejoe said...

Original Mike said...
Emails. I didn't do it and the Bushies did it too.
2/4/16, 9:32 PM

LOL! Good one, OM. Pithy!

Humperdink said...

A minor point that brought a smile to my face. OK, a smirk.

During the debate, a commercial break was coming up, camera zooms away to a view behind the candidates. Hillary starts to step away from her podium, stops, and then returns to the podium to turn over her notes over so they can't be seen. Who's going to sneak over and take a peek? Bernie? A drone? The Koch brothers?

I think Hillary! senses a conspiracy under every rock.

Rusty said...

cubanbob sums it up nicely.

Jupiter said...

Bay Area Guy said...
"Rachel Maddow. - smart gal, but hopelessly Leftist. She's stuck, can't learn, can't re-assess her views."

Spot on. Except for "smart" and "gal".

AprilApple said...

Democrats don't care that Hillary is a criminal? No that is sad.

Robert Cook said...

"It seems to be the theater of showing fire."

This is exactly what it is. Theater. Advertising strategy. Most of those aspiring to be President are loyal members of the establishment, power-grubbers who will continue the establishment's practice of serving the financial/military agenda of our plutocrat owners. To brand themselves and attract customers--voters--they have to act now as if they are "outsiders" speaking for the people against the big special interests of Wall Street and the corporations...which means they are rank liars who take the American people for imbeciles. In this, they're not necessarily wrong, in that those Americans who vote seem to think things can be improved or will change by voting into office the same members/servants of the ruling class as have held office for much of living memory.

Robert Cook said...

"This country fought a cold war over progressives."

Wha---????!! That doesn't even make sense.

BTW, we fought a cold war over who was going to rule the world, and we had every intent it was going to be us. We still have this intent, and we're acting on it.

"We still have B-52's flying nuclear weapons around the world, troops in Japan and Germany, and now they want us to elect one for President?"

"One," what? What does anyone running for President have to do with B-52s flying nukes around the world?

Tank said...

AprilApple said...

Democrats don't care that Hillary is a criminal? No that is sad.


Living here in northern NJ, I know some of these people. Good, decent people. My friends. I would trust THEM with my life. But they know what she is, but don't care. They are still going to vote for her. I can't explain it. As AA would say, sometimes nothing is better.

I heard some excerpts from last night on the radio this morning. Sanders does not know how to close. The Vagina (she played the Vagina Card last night, did you notice FF?) left him giant holes [see that?] to jump in and stab her to death. He did not do it. She accused him of smearing her by insinuation re: Goldman Sachs. All he had to say was, "It's not a smear if it's the truth." Really, does anyone in the world believe anyone would pay $300K to hear that woman talk for an hour? Even Dems, who don't care about EMail, care about Goldman Sachs.

gerry said...

Even Dems, who don't care about EMail, care about Goldman Sachs.

Goldman Sachs owns the Democrat Party.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

We're watching the re-run on You Tube with our morning mate (Rosamonte especial from Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004B607MU?keywords=yerba%20mate&qid=1454680763&ref_=sr_1_6&refinements=p_89%3ARosamonte&sr=8-6 )

First thing to notice in the intro was the objectionably loud and fast foreground music stepping all over whatever the two speakers were saying.

The speakers themselves, once the music volume dropped enough to hear them, were talking quite fast. They cannot properly be called "moderators." Perhaps "fomenters" or "inciters."

Then the candidates out-bidding eachother with other people-s money.

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

When will Hilary's email indictment occur? Seems to me that if there were going to be an indictment, President Obama would want it to occur as early as possible, probably last year.

1) Gives Hilary time to defend against it and time to fade from memory before the elections

2) If it is bad enough to force Hilary from the race, it gives other dems a chance to run. Biden or Warren, for example. Both of them are registered as candidates with the FEC but neither has done anything to raise money or get on ballots. What I am hearing is that after March it is technically too late.

By dragging it out, is President Obama sabotaging the Democrat presidential campaign not just for Hilary but for anyone else as well?

I've long wondered whether President Obama was just flat out incompetent or whether he was a liberal in disguise. Perhaps a Kock Brothers plant?

Think about where we have gotten in the past 7 years. Ron Paul made a credible run for Prez. Lots of liberal senators and reps including Rand Paul and Ted Cruz but others as well. The entire country seems to be moving in a liberal direction. We had 2 liberals running for Prez and one of them, Cruz, is #2, perhaps.

If you wanted to change the country from progressive to liberal, it is hard to beat what President Obama has accomplished. In the past year or so I have been coming more and more to believe it is by design.

John Henry

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

Hilary, again last night, claims to be a "Progressive who gets things done".

I would love to hear someone ask her something like:

"Sec Clinton, as you know airline travel in the US can be a terrible experience. Many flights are late causing great hardship. As a progressive who gets things done, is this something you would address if elected? Would you get the planes to fly on time?"

Think how cool it would be if she would say that. It harks back to another progressive/socialist/Fascist who was famous for making the trains run on time.

John Henry

tim in vermont said...

BTW, we fought a cold war over who was going to rule the world, and we had every intent it was going to be us. We still have this intent, and we're acting on it.

We know you are mad the wrong side won.

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

Just to be clear, I fully approve of moving the country in a liberal direction. It is why I supported President Obama in 2008 and 2012.

I think Trump, though perhaps not a liberal himself, would continue to move the country in a liberal direction. Perhaps not on purpose but so what.

I think Cruz or particularly Paul would do an even better and more explicit job of this.

John Henry

tim in vermont said...

The emails, the rapist husband, the Clinton Foundation, cattle futures, all of that crap was termites in the framing, which was weakened to the point that winning six coin flips in a row might be more than the old structure can take.

tim in vermont said...

I see the NYT has a front page story how Colin Powell received a couple of emails on his personal server classified as "confidential" and "secret." I had a secret clearance. I was a $7 an hour security guard in a defense plant in college. I never got to actually see anything. Secret is the lowest rating you can have.

BTW, there were pictures on the file cabinets, which I was supposed to ensure hourly were locked and undisturbed, of men languishing in prison looking pretty old and bedraggled, with the caption, "still rotting, don't even think about it" or something like that.

Of course none of those laws apply to Hillary.

Tank said...

gerry said...

Even Dems, who don't care about EMail, care about Goldman Sachs.

Goldman Sachs owns the Democrat Party.


Just the Dems?

tim in vermont said...

The funny thing is that Obama robbed Hillary in 2008 same as Kennedy robbed Nixon in 1960, one more way that Hillary is like Nixon. Both have earned a certain right to be paranoid, both have taken it too far.

Original Mike said...

"I see the NYT has a front page story how Colin Powell received a couple of emails on his personal server ..."

Did the NYT say he had a personal server? The reporting I've seen on this has been explicit that Powell did not have a personal server.

Big Mike said...

Why is Hillary never challenged on her recurring mantra that "she gets things done"? No she doesn't. Nor does she work well with [R]epublicans.

She doesn't. She didn't. If elected, she won't. She's running on her sense of entitlement and nothing else.

As to why she isn't challenged, she has been challenged -- by Carly Fiorina. As I commented on another thread, I'm not sure whether Sanders merely lacks the instinct for the jugular, or whether he lacks the fire in the belly to actually do what it takes to win the nomination.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

I see the NYT has a front page story how Colin Powell received a couple of emails on his personal server classified as "confidential" and "secret." I had a secret clearance. I was a $7 an hour security guard in a defense plant in college. I never got to actually see anything. Secret is the lowest rating you can have.

And the FBI has already contacted him despite the fact that they apparently aren't able to track down an elusive elderly drunk woman who did all her government business on an illegal server. Also interesting how the State Dept. intentionally tries to suppress anything that hurts Hillary and leaks anything they think will help her. It's almost like they work for her. The corruption is truly beyond anything I could have imagined.

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

Tim,

My dad worked for the CIA in the 50s and 60s. I have a poster I found in his desk years ago showing a poor soul with the caption:

Lonesome?

Like excitement?

Want to be noticed?

Like to meet people?

Leave your safe open tonight.

John Henry

tim in vermont said...

I misspoke, I meant to say his private, personal email account.

Sammy Finkelman said...

2/4/16, 10:43 PM

When they constantly demonized some guy named Richard Mellon Scaife, whoever he was.

Publisher of the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, who was very interested in getting at the truth about Bill Clinton. He didn't really get that close to the truth, and his people were fed false leaks, but he was practically the only who had a chance of doing so. The Clintons didn't want anybody reviewing that or following things up and getting closer, so he was demonized.

Eventually, the Clintons succeeded in fooling Scaife, and he made up with them and Bill Clinton delivered an eulogy at his funeral in 2014.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/bill-clinton-richard-mellon-scaife-eulogy-109670

Bill Clinton on Saturday fondly memorialized one of the key financiers of what Hillary Clinton years ago deemed the “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

Speaking at a private memorial service in southwestern Pennsylvania for Richard Mellon Scaife, who died last month, Clinton recalled how, after his presidency, he built a “counterintuitive friendship” with the conservative billionaire, according to an account of the speech in one of the newspapers Scaife owned.

Sammy Finkelman said...

Christopher Ruddy, who wrote stories about the Vincent Foster case that were published in the New York Post between January and March 1994, worked for Richard Mellon Scaife after leaving the New York Post. He now runs NewsMax.

Ruddy's first achievement, before he went to work for the New York Post was debunking the PBS documentary "Liberators: Fighting on Two Fronts in World War II" whose theme was that an all-black army unit, the 761st Tank Battalion, had been the ones to liberate the Buchenwald and Dachau concentration camps. The veterans of the 761st Tank Battalion had cop-operated in the documentary people because they wanted something about getting credit for what they did in the war but it was turned into that. They knew that wasn't so and they didn't want that - but certain politicians did.

Scaife also helped the American Spectator. And probably get fed some false leaks by Arkansas State troopers, including a false version of the Paula Jones story, in which versikon she had dne something and consented.

Clinton wanted Paula Jones to sue, you see, as it gave him a public excuse for having a legal defense fund, and it wouldn't be obvious this was because of Whitewater. Her suit used legally faulty, because she used the wrong tort - no accident - Clinron probably sent her her lawyer, as well, as well, of course goading her on to sue by having people tell her they believed it and so on. Actually almost nobody had heard of the American Specator story,

While the Paula Sones lawsuit was legally faulty, and Clinton could probably have gotten it dimissed at many point, Clinton settled eventually, after the Monica Lewinsky scandal, because historically, prosecutors don't bring perjury charges against someone who lost the case he commited perjury in.

This s maybe not quite like Twin Peaks, but it is close.

Original Mike said...

Thanks, Tim. You never know with the NYT.

FullMoon said...

Hillary did not seem as bad as I wanted her to be. Didn't watch entire thing but saw her get in Bernie's face about "innuendo". He backed down and had no decent comeback.

She nods her head a lot, doesn't she? To show she is listening, and understanding? Seems intentional. Must have something to do with positive body language.

She got the last word anytime she wanted to, while Bernie has a habit of raising a finger towards moderators as if asking permission to speak, like a student raising hand in class.

JHapp said...

The "anger" was probably planned by the DNC and agreed on by the candidates to get some viewer interest.

Original Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
cubanbob said...

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...
Hilary, again last night, claims to be a "Progressive who gets things done".

I would love to hear someone ask her something like:

"Sec Clinton, as you know airline travel in the US can be a terrible experience. Many flights are late causing great hardship. As a progressive who gets things done, is this something you would address if elected? Would you get the planes to fly on time?"

Think how cool it would be if she would say that. It harks back to another progressive/socialist/Fascist who was famous for making the trains run on time.

John Henry"

Back to the future John. Trains are far more eco-friendly than planes. Vote for Hillary to get rid of the planes (for you) for the sake of the planet and get the trains running on time. Fascists never really change.

tim in vermont said...

Since we are on the subject of refugees, here is an interesting story about an attempted gang rape in Russia, translation provided by a commenter at SmallDeadAnimals.

As luck would have it, the last link in the article can be translated by your agent.

Here are some excerpts:

Migrants from the Near East in a nightclub in Murmansk begun to bother girls.

By the time they realized that they are not in the European Union it was too late.

Earlier the media informed about a 50 member group that was deported from Norway back to Russia due to "bad behaviour". This group apparently passed though Russia on their way to Norway.

After returning to Russia, the refugees decided to go have some good time in a nightclub, forgetting that they were no longer in Norway, they decided to have fun with some girls.

As it was they had a problem, in the region of Murmansk, tolerance toward immigrants is not up to the standard of good old, light of the world Europe.

From the comments in the local social media, it appears, that the migrants, after the local boys decided to give them lessons in local behaviour, wanted to hide in private residences. The migrants would have ended up in bad shape, if the police did not show up on time. It is rather cold in Murmansk at this time of the year.

The police, after arriving, attempted to cool the hot heads of the locals and pacify them to prevent lynching of the migrants. Locals though insist that even the police did not have much tolerance for the migrants and with a good measure added to the result of 18 migrants ending in a hospital and 33 in a cell block of the local constabulary.


Welcome to Russia

wildswan said...

No one is calling a winner on that debate - not Drudge, Wall Street journal, my local paper? Why? Did no one but Ann and John Althouse watch it? Who do they say won? If not, why not? At least flip a coin.

Sammy Finkelman said...

wildswan said... on 2/5/16 at 3:54 PM CST:

No one is calling a winner on that debate - not Drudge, Wall Street journal, my local paper? Why? Did no one but Ann and John Althouse watch it? Who do they say won? If not, why not? At least flip a coin.

The Wall Street Journal had an editorial about the debate)or rather Hillary's Goldman and Sachs answers) and the New York had a front page story about it. And a separate article about Clinton being put on the defensive on percieved ties to Wall Street.

The New York Times had an article (online only) about who won the debate, saying critics were split.

Conor Friedersdorf, a writer for The Atlantic, didn't know who undecided Democrats would prefer, but thought Hillary's attacks on Sanders were unfair. Ezra Klein of vox.com seemed to think Sanders came out better - the ending was powerful.



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/05/us/politics/who-won-the-debate.html

Douglas said...

Why doesn't Twitter's block function work perfectly to protect Lena Dunham from whatever criticism she doesn't want to hear? Why should Twitter prevent me from insulting her looks all I want so long as I can't send those insults to her?