When I woke up this morning, I was surprised to learn that Hillary Clinton had wiped the floor with Bernie Sanders at last night’s Democratic presidential debate.
“Hillary Clinton won — by a landslide,” Politico’s Katie Glueck wrote, summing up a survey of early-state insiders.
“Her performance at the first Democratic presidential debate was so commanding that even her greatest vulnerability — the lingering controversy over her private email practices as secretary of state — ended up redounding to her benefit,” the New York Times‘ Patrick Healy gushed.
“Instead of turning in the safe and solid performance she needed,” Slate’s Josh Voorhees wrote, “Clinton was closer to spectacular on Tuesday night.”
Weird. I thought I watched the same debate, but I walked away with a different conclusion.
Sure, the former secretary of state delivered a strong performance in Las Vegas. And, as I wrote last night, Sanders continued to look flummoxed by his gun record and out of his depth on foreign policy.
But Sanders shined, at times, too — deftly condensing his hourlong stump speech into a two-minute opening statement, disarming questions about his democratic socialism and his Vietnam War-era conscientious-objector application and proving he knows how to say, “Black lives matter.” Not only did he defy expectations that he’d lash out at his chief rival, Sanders appeared generous and substantive — and landed the line of the night — when he dismissed a question about Clinton’s “damn emails.”
Clinton’s highest praise appeared to emanate from Democratic insiders who’ve always seen her as the heir apparent — and from Acela corridor reporters so obsessed with her campaign’s purported death spiral that they were overwhelmed to find she had a pulse. In their race to set expectations, the latter seemed to forget that Clinton is a master debater who went toe-to-toe with President Obama more than two dozen times during the 2008 campaign season — and that Sanders’ experience amounts to debating Peter Diamondstone.
Vermont’s junior senator wasn’t talking to political reporters last night. He was introducing himself to the many Americans just tuning in to the race — who don’t follow politics closely and may well have never heard of the guy. There were an awful lot of them: According to Nielsen, more than 15 million people watched the debate, making it the highest-rated Democratic debate in history.
Those viewers seemed to want to learn more. Data collected by Google Trends shows that Sanders’ name was the one most searched throughout the debate. According to Vox, Crowdtangle found that he gained 35,000 Facebook followers during the debate, compared to the 18,000 Clinton racked up. Twitter said he scored the top moment of the event with his email quip. Notably, three focus groups — conducted by Fox News, CNN and Fusion — agreed that Sanders prevailed.
Sanders’ campaign was quick to highlight its own metrics. Some 100,000 people turned out to 4,000 house parties to watch the debate, according to spokesman Michael Briggs. In the hours after it began, he said, the campaign picked up $1.3 million through 37,600 contributions. At one point, 10.25 donations were coming in every second.
We won’t know for a few more days whether Vegas had any measurable impact on public opinion polls. But we do know that a whole lot of people turned on the tube and liked what they saw from the democratic socialist from Vermont. That, to me, sure seems like a win.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Bernie showed clearly that he doesn’t understand what capitalism is all about with his answer about wealth inequality and said it is much more fair in socialist practicing countries. What he doesn’t understand is that those countries don’t invent, perfect, and innovate because there is no incentive to do that. We are the creative and technological leader because of capitalism pure and simple.
Mr. Stern you’ve obviously never been to social democratic Scandinavia. There’s a reason they have the highest standard of living and highest level of happiness in the world. ‘Mercans need to get out of the country more.
@Keith Stern: Alfred Nobel was Swedish…
I’m glad to see I was not the only one who thought Bernie won. He did seem at times to be more distracted than usual, but that’s not surprising. I think he accomplished two things helpful to his campaign. (1) His kindness to Hillary on the email issue certainly ingratiated voters who have been leaning toward her but have not yet decided. (2) Although I personally wish he had a stronger record on gun control, the fact is that he is closer to mainstream America–including mainstream Democrats–on that issue. This will really help him, in, say, the South Carolina primary.
He was kind to Hillary but said afterward the email thing is no small issue. Did she do something illegal? Probably not. Did she do something unethical. Of course. Doe it call into question her judgement? Of course. I hope she takes the opportunity next time to criticize Obama about breaking his promise on Afghanistan and about bombing hospitals.
Hillary Clinton was promised the presidency back in 2007, the day she stepped aside for Obama, and accepted the SOS position as severance. It was set in stone by the party/parties that control them all back then and anyone who honestly still believes we have any actual say in the matter is naive.
Regarding the “gun control” issue, the master distracter of them all. Because Bernie won’t jump through hoops to persecute an entire group of decent, hard working people who have never actually done ANYTHING wrong, for the actions of a few lunatics… Well, now we’re just going to start talking logic and reason, which will make most out there just glaze over and turn back to the propaganda box.
Hillary — like Regan and Goneril–does not want for “that glib and oily art.” She came across as a machine politician. Bernie — like Cordelia– was plain spoken and honest.
Never heard of BS before this election cycle. I am willing to consider him more out of a disdain for any familial political dynasties.
The American people must make a fundamental decision. Do we continue the 40-year decline of our middle class and the growing gap between the very rich and everyone else. Or do we fight for an economic agenda that creates jobs, raises wages, and provides health care and educational opportunity for all?
Are we prepared to take on enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class.
American people do not care about the private e-mail server of Hillary Clinton. Go visit any major city in America and you will see homeless people. Even Koch brothers would agree that we do not need a President that lacks Humility and would agree that we should end crony capitalism.
Once someone thinks they are better than everyone else they tend to lose their integrity. Case in point, the Clinton machine. I am one Democrat who think we should support the independent minded Bernie Sanders for President because he has the values I would think make America even better for our children.
John values are one thing, ideas that work are another. He points out the wealth equality of socialist countries failing to mention the highest taxes in the world. In this country anyone has the ability to better their financial situation. Some choose to do that, some would rather whine how unfair things are here. I’ve seen people start with a pickup truck doing odd jobs and end up with a lucrative business. That is what has made America great and will continue to unless we get someone like Bernie leading the country who believes people shouldn’t have to earn their wealth and want to punish someone because he or she has.