So who won the first Democrat debate in Detroit? Well, CNN's Chris Cillizza has a very surprising answer that will shock (and depress) many. According to Cillizza, it was Donald Trump.
Of course, he had a list of other winners (and losers) as well but that was the pick that stood out. He presented that surprising choice in his July 31 "Winners and losers from the first night of the CNN debate."
Donald Trump: An extended conversation about eliminating all private insurance. A top-tier candidate -- Warren -- fully embracing decriminalizing illegal immigration. All of that is music to the President's ears. Remember that his poll numbers -- job approval that has never broken 50%, etc. -- suggest that there is no positive message that wins Trump a second term. Which means he needs as much fodder as possible to cast Democrats as deeply out of touch and representative of a creeping socialism. He got plenty on Tuesday night.
So Elizabeth Warren embracing decriminalizing illegal immigration is music to the President's ears yet oddly enough, Cillizza still considers Warren as one of the winners of the debate but even more bizarrely he also listed her as a loser. First let us see why Cillizza considers Warren to be a winner:
Elizabeth Warren: Her retort to Delaney was the line of the night -- and encapsulates for a lot of Democrats why it's so important to nominate someone who is willing to take on big fights, unapologetically. And her answer on electability -- that no one thought Donald Trump could win -- was pitch-perfect.
Okay, that was pretty weak gruel for declaring Warren as a winner of the debate so let us now see Cillizza completely contradict himself by also choosing her as a loser:
Elizabeth Warren: Yes, she made both lists. She had moments, without question (See: Winners). But Sanders seemed to better and more strongly articulate the liberal positions that define both of their campaigns, repeatedly. And Warren's high-profile embrace of decriminalizing illegal immigration will add fuel to the fire for the already existing concerns among some Democrats that she is taking positions that could make her unelectable in a general election.
Major head scratch here for putting Warren on both the winners and losers list. Also why did Cillizza not mention her refusal to admit that middle class taxes would have to be raised in order to support the Medicare For All program? In addition there is another implied criticism of Warren by Cillizza which he placed on the loser list:
Anecdotes: Some consultant somewhere some time ago told a candidate that the best way to "connect with voters" is to tell a story about "Bill from Buffalo," who has had some sort of terrible misfortune and was done wrong by the government. Can we all agree that this anecdote-driven empathy needs to end? It's not effective. It feels totally pre-planned and scripted. It tells us zero about what a candidate would do for the country as a whole. Enough!
