The first thing that struck me about last night’s Democratic debate in Durham, NH was how different is was from any of the Republican debates. First and foremost was the respect that the competitors showed to one another. Sanders called her “Madame Secretary”, and Clinton called him “Senator Sanders”. It bespoke professionalism and decency.
The questions were serious. Things like criminal justice, the Flint water crisis and other topics are never asked of the Republicans. (Probably because the moderators would have to explain what the question was about.) There were legitimate differences in both approach and substance but whenever possible, both Sanders and Clinton looked for, and noted common ground. Further, when given the opportunity to go after one another (Sanders about Clinton’s emails, Clinton about Sanders ads) they declined. At the very end, when asked whether each would choose the other for a running mate, both demurred and pledged to work together and said that either of them was a far better choice than any of the GOP contenders.
So who won? In my estimation, they both did. Both showcased their positions and presented themselves to the American public in ways that many low-information voters hadn’t seen before. An interesting aside: both have plans for what they’d like to get through Congress, but the truth is that Paul Ryan is likely to hold on as Speaker, and thus nothing gets to the floor of the House, even as we regain the Senate. Doesn’t matter who is elected president, until the intransigent leave Congress, it’s all gridlock.
Thus, the question is less who won, and rather for whom will you vote in the primaries? If you are a long term Clinton supporter, nothing Sanders says will ever change your mind. If you are a new voter, “meeting” Sanders for the first time your decision will rest on whether you believe he is correct that without fundamental changes to the issue of money in politics, nothing can ever change.
So who won? You choose:
I notice the local UMass/7News tracking poll shows Sanders lead dropping from 33 points on February 1 to 14 points this morning.
ARG has him at 12 points.
The Globe has him at 9 points.
The race seems to be tightening.
Two questions:
1) can Hillary overtake him?
2) is this tightening mostly a factor of NH voters loving to be contrarian, or is it something Hillary is actually doing?
2b) if so, what is it?