Readers ask why I write about the Republican debates but have not written a post about the Democratic debates.  The assumption, I think, is that I don’t write critically about the Democrats as much as Republicans because I am either a left-leaning moderate or a liberal, depending on the issue.  And admittedly there is some truth in that, but I see two main reasons for my writing choices:  First, last night was only the 4^th Democratic debate, as opposed to the 160 Republican debates (okay, I exaggerate … it’s only 6, but it feels like this whole 2-year campaign has just been one long debate on that side of the aisle).  But second, and this is likely the real reason, the Republican debates are so much funnier!  You have a whole stage full of circus clowns, while policy, platforms and governance are never discussed, and there is a lot of mud and other disgusting substances being slung!  I mean, it is like a schoolyard brawl or a Bengals/Steelers football game!  The Democrats, meanwhile, discuss policy, agenda and important things, but depending on the venue, they all say what they think the audience wants to hear.  Yawn. The one humorous candidate is Martin O’Malley, and he isn’t trying to be funny … he just is.  Admittedly, he isn’t given anywhere close to the time that Clinton and Sanders are given, but then he is really only filler.  There is no chance that he will win the nomination, and I am not sure why he is still in the running, unless it is just for the humour factor.  But his continual bids and interruptions, trying to break into the conversation are humorous, except when they are annoying.

I am quickly coming to the conclusion that the debates, both Republican and Democratic, are a colossal waste of time and money.  The viewers do not learn a single thing that they can believe about the ideologies or agendas of any of the candidates, as they are all playing to the audience.  The debates are nothing more than free advertising, free air-time for the candidates.  And if there are winners or losers, it is only because some are more adept at speaking in a louder voice than others.  I once had a professor who told me something I have never forgotten:  when somebody is yelling, you lower your voice to barely above a whisper, because then they are forced to shut up in order to hear you.  Every single one of the candidates … well, except perhaps for Dr. Ben Carson … should take note of this.

Since there was more rhetoric and posturing in response to most of the questions than there was actual policy discussion, I do not intend to bore my loyal readers with an in-depth discussion of the debate.  Yes, I hear you breathing a sigh of relief.  Any who are interested can find the annotated transcript here:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/17/the-4th-democratic-debate-transcript-annotated-who-said-what-and-what-it-meant/   Note that the first hour covered domestic issues such as the economy, guns, divisiveness, healthcare, etc., while the second hour covered global issues and international relations (Iran, Syria, Russia).  Here I will just briefly mention a couple of interesting points and my take on them.

At one point, Bernie Sanders, when asked about a comment he had previously made regarding Bill Clinton’s past indiscretions, said that he is running his campaign based on policy rather than personal differences.  For the most part that is true of both him and Clinton, at least in comparison to the republican candidates.  Their rivalry to date has been fairly clean, policy-based, and notably lacking in vitriol.  I applaud both for that. However, throughout the debate, and you cannot see this from the transcript but if you watch the debate it is glaringly obvious, Sanders made Trump-like faces and gestures when Clinton was talking.  It was juvenile, distracting and beneath what I would expect of him.  It lowered him a few notches in my estimation.  It is one thing to discuss differences in platform, policy and ideology … that is what political debate should be about.  But leave the personal attacks out of it and show respect for the other candidates.  This lack of respect is the most disgusting part of the American political process and the very reason so many lose interest in it.  Are you listening, Donald Trump?

It was interesting to note that both Clinton and Sanders praised President Obama multiple times, from the Iran nuclear deal to the Affordable Healthcare Act (ACA, alias ‘Obamacare’), though they disagreed on where it should go from here.  One commentator, writing about winners vs losers in the debate, included Obama as one of the winners!  I don’t remember hearing this much love for President Obama coming from these two ever.  Oh but wait … the debate was held in Charleston, South Carolina, which has a 30% African-American population and which was recently the site of one of the most tragic racially-motivated mass attacks of the year.  Did I mention that the candidates pander to the audience, thus the rhetoric changes with the venue?

My all-time favorite Op-Ed writer, Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, published a running commentary of the debate on Twitter.  He is humorous, but his comments are spot on, and the tweet also contains some valuable links, in case anybody is interested:  http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/17/my-take-on-the-democratic-presidential-debate/    It’s a lot easier and faster (5 minutes, tops) than reading the entire debate transcript, and it contains many of the important points, along with his comments.  I highly recommend it.

So now we all understand why I write about the Republican debates more than the Democratic debates, yes? Although my vote is almost certain to be for the democratic candidate, whichever one that may be, I admit that the republican candidates are much more fun to write about, though admittedly they also increase the blood pressure, stomach acid and make me long for this election to be over.  So, luckily for me, there is another episode of the RDD (Republican Demolition Derby) on January 28^th.  Until then … I will have to be content writing about … well, just wait for it …