Impressions from the September 12 Democratic Debate

Jim Bogden • September 17, 2019

I was asked for my reactions to the recent three-hour discussion hosted by ABC News with 10 of the candidates for the 2020 Democratic nomination. As a person who relies entirely on the written word for news and information, it was the first time I had seen most of the candidates in a live setting.

The format consisted of reporters forcing each candidate to think fast on their feet to create concise responses that convey substance and meaning. This might be a valuable skill for a president to have in the television age, but is it essential to the job? The brief, constrained exchanges do not allow a viewer to form an informed opinion into how a candidate would approach the many complex challenges of being president. This format does not allow for thoughtful, reasoned discussion of the issues or meaningful exploration of how a person would wield the levers of governance. For this viewer, the show merely left me with some general impressions to supplement what I already knew about them.

That said, here are some of my impressions of the candidates:

Although intelligent, Beto O’Rourke and Andrew Yang seemed out of their depth. I could not picture either in the Oval Office or representing the United States at a G7 summit. Ideologically, O’Rourke is too far out of the political mainstream to have any chance of being elected in 2020. While it seems that Yang can diagnose social problems, he doesn’t seem to have much ability to solve them.

Bernie Sanders did not impress me as a potential president despite his large number of devoted followers. He knows the issues, is supremely confident that he has the right solutions, and has plenty of experience. But I cannot imagine that the American electorate wants to replace one strident, cantankerous, old New Yorker with another.

In contrast, I could picture the other four men and three women as all being effective as president, who could restore dignity to the office, and who could lead the world in addressing critical problems. All would be a worthy nominee of their party that I would be happy to vote for.

Elizabeth Warren was consistently impressive with her ability to respond to questions even as she reframed them into a larger vision. She was down-to-earth, specific, and idealistic all at the same time. My one concern with her ability to win the general election is her insistence on eliminating the private health insurance industry. Is the country ready for such a massive change?

Julián Castro made a strong first impression with his gravitas and intellect. An unpleasant exchange with Joe Biden was a bit off-putting, but it was clearly a political strategy in action. One cannot fault a politician for being political.

Kamala Harris has great presence and seems solidly grounded. She is simultaneously an exciting symbol and a viable candidate, although her grasp of the finer points of issues didn’t appear to be as firm as some of the others’.

Pete Buttigieg fully lived up to his reputation for being an uncannily effective communicator with the ability to frame issues in fresh and thought-provoking ways. Yet I couldn’t help but think that he needs more experience to lead the nation.

Amy Klobuchar expressed firmness, competence, and a common-sense approach to issues. She would be a fine candidate if Democrats decide they want a solid centrist as their nominee. (Reports of her harsh management style, however, are a big minus in my book.)

With his emotional appeals to values and the better angels of our nature, Cory Booker might be the leader this nation needs in times of crisis. But he did not give the impression of being a skilled strategist or firm manager. The country may not be in the mood to be led by an idealist.

Joe Biden struggled with the constraints of the format; clearly, he would be more comfortable expressing himself at his own pace. His age seemed to inhibit his ability to communicate. I could not help but wonder if his decision-making ability might be similarly impaired.

As a person who has learned not to trust first impressions, I found the experience of watching the debate only somewhat useful in the process of choosing the next president. At least the candidates are now more familiar. Still, I like to receive guidance from the professional opinions of experienced reporters, trusted policy analysts, and credible political leaders. Many are captivated by Elizabeth Warren. So am I.

< Older Post

Newer Post >

Mail

Common Sense for the Eastern Shore

Six Reasons Why the House Budget Bill Will Hurt Rural America

By Michael Chameides, Barn Raiser • May 21, 2025

Right now, Congress is working on a fast-track bill that would make historic cuts to basic needs programs in order to finance another round of tax breaks for the wealthy and big corporations.

Who Will SNAP Cuts Affect in Maryland? On the Eastern Shore?

By Catlin Nchako, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities • May 21, 2025

The House Agriculture Committee recently voted, along party lines, to advance legislation that would cut as much as $300 million from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. SNAP is the nation’s most important anti-hunger program, helping more than 41 million people in the U.S. pay for food. With potential cuts this large, it helps to know who benefits from this program in Maryland, and who would lose this assistance. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities compiled data on SNAP beneficiaries by congressional district, cited below, and produced the Maryland state datasheet , shown below. In Maryland, in 2023-24, 1 in 9 people lived in a household with SNAP benefits. In Maryland’s First Congressional District, in 2023-24: Almost 34,000 households used SNAP benefits. Of those households, 43% had at least one senior (over age 60). 29% of SNAP recipients were people of color. 15% were Black, non-Hispanic, higher than 11.8% nationally. 6% were Hispanic (19.4% nationally). There were 24,700 total veterans (ages 18-64). Of those, 2,200 lived in households that used SNAP benefits (9%). The CBPP SNAP datasheet for Maryland is below. See data from all the states and download factsheets here.

Not Law Yet

By Jan Plotczyk • May 21, 2025

Apparently, some people think that the GOP’s “big beautiful bill” is a foregone conclusion, and that the struggle over the budget and Trump’s agenda is over and done. Not true. On Sunday night, the bill — given the alternate name “Big Bad Bullsh*t Bill” by the Democratic Women’s Caucus — was voted out of the House Budget Committee. The GOP plan is to pass this legislation in the House before Memorial Day. But that’s not the end of it. As Jessica Craven explained in her Chop Wood Carry Water column: “Remember, we have at least six weeks left in this process. The bill has to: Pass the House, Then head to the Senate where it will likely be rewritten almost completely, Then be passed there, Then be brought back to the House for reconciliation, And then, if the House changes that version at all, Go back to the Senate for another vote.” She adds, “Every step of that process is a place for us to kill it.” The bill is over a thousand pages long, and the American people will not get a chance to read it until it has passed the House. But, thanks to 5Calls , we know it includes:

Eastern Shore Delegation: 2025 “Highlights”

By Jared Schablein, Shore Progress • May 13, 2025

Let's talk about our Eastern Shore Delegation, the representatives who are supposed to fight for our nine Shore counties in Annapolis, and what they actually got up to this session.

Democrats reach historic goal: A full slate in Virginia House races

By Markus Schmidt, Virginia Mercury • May 12, 2025

For the first time in recent memory, Virginia Democrats have candidates running in all 100 House of Delegates districts — a milestone party leaders and grassroots organizers say reflects rising momentum as President Donald Trump’s second term continues to galvanize opposition.

2025 General Assembly Report: Results for Working Families on the Eastern Shore

By Jared Schablein, Shore Progress • April 22, 2025

The 447th legislative session of the Maryland General Assembly adjourned on April 8. This End of Session Report highlights the work Shore Progress has done to fight for working families and bring real results home to the Shore. Over the 90-day session, lawmakers debated 1,901 bills and passed 878 into law. Shore Progress and members supported legislation that delivers for the Eastern Shore, protecting our environment, expanding access to housing and healthcare, strengthening workers’ rights, and more. Shore Progress Supported Legislation By The Numbers: Over 60 pieces of our backed legislation were passed. Another 15 passed in one Chamber but not the other. Legislation details are below, past the budget section. The 2026 Maryland State Budget How We Got Here: Maryland’s budget problems didn’t start overnight. They began under Governor Larry Hogan. Governor Hogan expanded the state budget yearly but blocked the legislature from moving money around or making common-sense changes. Instead of fixing the structural issues, Hogan used federal covid relief funds to hide the cracks and drained our state’s savings from $5.5 billion to $2.3 billion to boost his image before leaving office. How Trump/Musk Made It Worse: Maryland is facing a new fiscal crisis driven by the Trump–Musk administration, whose trade wars, tariff policies, and deep federal cuts have hit us harder than most, costing the state over 30,000 jobs, shuttering offices, and erasing promised investments. A University of Maryland study estimates Trump’s tariffs alone could cost us $2 billion, and those federal cuts have already added $300 million to our budget deficit. Covid aid gave us a short-term boost and even created a fake surplus under Hogan, but that money is gone, while housing, healthcare, and college prices keep rising. The Trump–Musk White House is only making things worse by slashing funding, gutting services, and eliminating research that Marylanders rely on. How The State Budget Fixes These Issues: This year, Maryland faced a $3 billion budget gap, and the General Assembly fixed it with a smart mix of cuts and fair new revenue, while protecting working families, schools, and health care. The 2025 Budget cuts $1.9 billion ($400 million less than last year) without gutting services people rely on. The General Assembly raised $1.2 billion in fair new revenue, mostly from the wealthiest Marylanders. The Budget ended with a $350 million surplus, plus $2.4 billion saved in the Rainy Day Fund (more than 9% of general fund revenue), which came in $7 million above what the Spending Affordability Committee called for. The budget protects funding for our schools, health care, transit, and public workers. The budget delivers real wins: $800 million more annually for transit and infrastructure, plus $500 million for long-term transportation needs. It invests $9.7 billion in public schools and boosts local education aid by $572.5 million, a 7% increase. If current revenue trends hold, no new taxes will be needed next session. Even better, 94% of Marylanders will see a tax cut or no change, while only the wealthiest 5% will finally pay their fair share. The tax system is smarter now. We’re: Taxing IT and data services like Texas and D.C. do; Raising taxes on cannabis and sports betting, not groceries or medicine; and Letting counties adjust income taxes. The budget also restores critical funding: $122 million for teacher planning $15 million for cancer research $11 million for crime victims $7 million for local business zones, and Continued support for public TV, the arts, and BCCC The budget invests in People with disabilities, with $181 million in services Growing private-sector jobs with $139 million in funding, including $27.5 million for quantum tech, $16 million for the Sunny Day Fund, and $10 million for infrastructure loans. Health care is protected for 1.5 million Marylanders, with $15.6 billion for Medicaid and higher provider pay. Public safety is getting a boost too, with $60 million for victim services, $5.5 million for juvenile services, and $5 million for parole and probation staffing. This budget also tackles climate change with $100 million for clean energy and solar projects, and $200 million in potential ratepayer relief. Public workers get a well-deserved raise, with $200 million in salary increases, including a 1% COLA and ~2.5% raises for union workers. The ultra-wealthy will finally chip in to pay for it: People earning over $750,000 will pay more, Millionaires will pay 6.5%, and Capital gains over $350,000 get a 2% surcharge. Deductions are capped for high earners, but working families can still deduct student loans, medical debt, and donations. This budget is bold, fair, and built to last. That’s why Shore Progress proudly supports it. Click on the arrows below for details in each section.