Reflections: The first round of the 2020 Democratic Debates

While you have no doubt seen numerous articles by now classifying the “winners” and “losers” of this week’s debates, none of them really matter because quite frankly, the election process, as we saw in 2016, is more a popularity contest than a speech and debate tournament.

So rather than focusing on winners and losers, let’s look instead at where the candidates place on the spectrum of “Irrelevants” to “Top Contenders”.

All 20 of the 2020 Democratic Candidates that participated in this week’s debates.

Warm bodies (i.e. irrelevant)

• Andrew Yang is someone I thought might be able to shape the discussion, but when he was surprised by his own policy (wait, giving every adult American $1000 would cost $3.2 trillion dollars?!), he lost more than just his voice.
• Michael Bennet was about as surprised to hear his name called as the rest of us. I hope he enjoyed the moment because it’s not likely to happen again.
• John Delaney, Tim Ryan, and Jay Inslee: Do you remember who was who? Exactly.

No chance, but still relevant

These candidates know they have no chance at the nomination and likely won’t be considered for anything after they fall out of the race. However, that isn’t why they’re running. These candidates are here to shape the debate and by extension, the direction of the party. We saw this in 2016 when Sanders popular liberal ideals pulled Clinton much further left of center than she was originally headed.

• Bill de Blasio will be the guy who keeps the other candidates in shape for the final rounds of presidential debates leading up to November 2020. Like Trump, de Blasio doesn’t seem to care for the rules and has no problem interjecting and going off script and off topic. If the Democrats want to take back the Oval Office, they can’t just brush off these moments as Hillary Clinton did in 2016. Again, this is a popularity contest, not a speech and debate tournament and democrats need to play to both.
• Eric Swalwell: Because you probably already forgot who he is, he was the guy pushing for the party to “pass the torch” and seek out younger candidates. His rhetoric may be self-serving, but he’s not the one who will benefit. Buttigieg (37) and Gabbard (38) are not only younger than Swalwell, but also have more traction. More likely though, is his “pass the torch” rhetoric for a younger candidate might push people to take a closer look at middle aged candidates like Booker, Harris, Castro, and Gillibrand.
• Marianne Williamson has little to nothing to offer in the way of policy and leadership, but her reminders that policy alone will not beat Trump is a much needed one for both the candidates on stage and the viewers at home. Despite being vaguely reminiscent of Sarah Palin, her analysis is actually spot on and we should all heed her warnings.

Future cabinet members

These candidates are not likely to appeal to the party at large but may very well at least be able to build their case for a cabinet position.

• Amy Klobuchar won’t get the nomination for president so long as Biden, Warren, Sanders, and Gillibrand remain in the race, but will likely have her choice of cabinet positions should it come to that. No other candidate has been able to speak so well on such an array of topics and yet still fail to elevate themself to contender status as Klobuchar has.
• Tulsi Gabbard may very well become Secretary of Veterans Affairs. I’m not sure she’s made a case for much else.
• Beto O’Rourke: O’Rourke’s popularity spurs largely from a viral video of him delivering an impassioned speech on race that may earn him a spot as 2021's new press secretary. Since then however, he has yet to replicate that moment and has stayed mostly out of the spotlight. Lacking any deliverables thus far, including a Senate race victory, the Oval Office is just a bit beyond his reach. Plus it doesn’t help that in every way you may like Beto, Mayor Pete is the deluxe version and has him beat.
• John Hickenlooper: Not likely to make a big splash in the debates, but given his record and background, don’t be surprised if his name comes up again after he drops out of the race should the democrats win in 2020.

On the Brink

These candidates are also in it to win it, but if they want a shot at the nomination, they’re going to have to up their game significantly to break through to that top tier.

• Cory Booker had a lot of moments that raised his profile and continues to be one of the more recognizable names in this race. While he has the potential to break into the top tier, until he finds a way to truly distinguish himself, it seems unlikely he will be able to do so on his own accord and may have to hope for a major blunder from the top contenders. And for that, he should be writing Kamala Harris a big thank you right about now.
• Julian Castro is probably the one candidate who has undersold themself the most. A former HUD secretary under President Obama, successful mayor of the nation’s 7th largest city, and all-around likeable guy, Castro just needs to work on branding himself as the serious contender he can be if wants any hope of returning to the White House.
• Kirsten Gillibrand: I’m really not sure what her strategy is here. She’s probably the most informed, articulate, and recognizable candidate on stage after Elizabeth Warren but unlike Warren, is unable to rally support and deliver a resonating message. If she can overcome that obstacle, she should be able to stay at it for the long haul.

Top Contenders

These are the candidates who are truly in it to win it and are still the top bets for securing the nomination

• Kamala Harris: If anyone still didn’t know who Kamala Harris was before the debate, they certainly know who she is now. No one showed up more prepared, equipped, and on point than Kamala Harris. She seized command of the debate from the moderators on multiple occasions, provided the media with ample zingers and replayable moments, and still made time for presenting her platform.
• Elizabeth Warren: Although a sharp departure in style from Harris, Warren is every much her equal and then some. Of all the candidates, she has some of the most comprehensive plans on the widest array of issues thus far. Despite an underwhelming performance Wednesday night where she should have been the clear star, she enjoys a high favorability rating among the general public and as senator that will keep her in this race well beyond the initial round of debates and into the primaries.
• Joe Biden: Despite the bludgeoning he took from Kamala Harris and Eric Swalwell, Biden remained mostly composed and on message; even if a bit lost and unsure of his stance in response to moderator’s questions. Still riding the momentum of being Obama’s VP, Biden only had to show up and not say or do anything too egregious, which is why he was the only candidate who could afford to cut a response short.
• Bernie Sanders: Like Biden, Sanders is riding the momentum of years passed and had little to gain by going off script. So no surprise he too stayed on message and at maximum volume.
• Pete Buttigieg: Mayor Pete rose to contender status shortly after his town hall on Fox. Like the other contenders, he didn’t have much to gain at this stage, but with much less momentum coming into this debate he certainly had a lot more to lose. If he can maintain or build upon the popularity he has garnered in recent weeks, he could very well take this fight all the way to the DNC next July.