Bernie Sanders won the debate. Hillary Clinton avoided losing it.

[DirkGently]

Sanders won the debate. We know this, because all of the other candidates tailored their responses to his positions, which have never changed. They raced to agree, or to carefully relate in slightly different ways. The entire discussion orbited around Bernie Sanders and the unprecedented wave of support he has generated.

Hillary Clinton spent the debate leaping to her left, trying to rationalize and excuse positions she has taken that fly in the face of current public opinion.

- She ignored a fistful of references to her continued support for the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Poor O'Malley tried repeatedly to get her to bite. At one point, asked if she wanted to respond, she actually just said, "No."

- She voiced a softened version of her “shadow banking (and not Wall Street financial firms and giant banks) caused the mortgage crisis” schtick that is complete nonsense.

- She tried a “I’m a reformer; you’re a revolutionary” thesis to try to play on the idea that Sanders is too radical for Americans.

But the fact is that Sanders is not too radical for Americans. He is an FDR-style Democrat who embodies the principles that made the party work best. He spent the debate simply articulating views he has fought and argued for for 50 years.

Clinton spent it trying to convince us she’s just like Sanders, but more “practical.”

I understand what the establishment press and pundits were reacting to. They worried that Clinton would keep to her center-center / center-right positions and be booed off the national stage. Instead, to her credit, she sprinted left like a frisking greyhound and arrived, panting, right where Sanders has always been.

To her supporters, this was a victory. To Chris Matthews and Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC, it was the best of all possible worlds, because Clinton managed to sound like a more "sensible" Bernie Sanders, instead of herself.

To the public, Clinton weather-vaned admirably in the prevailing winds of opinion, just as she has done with Iraq and gay marriage and the Keystone Pipeline and the TPP. But people would be fools to think she has magically leviated all the way over to the “progressive” side as she tried (a bit lamely) to claim.

None of this means Sanders will win the election. Hillary is smart and solid and smooth and well-funded, and she doesn’t frighten Wall Street or corporate America one whit, and yet she is not a blustering loon yarking about giant border walls guarded by Tyrannosauruses or zombie fetuses having their brains harvested,like the entire Republican field. If she’s the nominee, she can win.

But so can Sanders. No one is buying the red-scare theory or whatever that concocted Black Lives matter controversy was supposed to be, and not only does the man have the right ideas for the right time, but we know they are his ideas, and that he means them.

Like Hillary on the debate stage, America is sprinting toward Bernie Sanders.

[randys1]

1. Each person decides who won, and the media influences what people think, especially people

who didnt see it.

Your opinion is he won, just your opinion.

My opinion is the American people won because we have 3 good candidates.

My choice is to not attack any of them.

[DirkGently]

3. Agreed. But it is worth pointing out

that the massive wave of approval directed to Hillary Clinton by the press was not only contrary to the opinions of most of the public, but was based on her ability to bring herself closer to Bernie Sanders, rather than to provide a contrast.

I was most struck by this watching MSNBC, which elected to have rather obvious HRC supporters Chris Matthews and Andrea Mitchell cover the entire debate. I don't know where Chris Hayes (who to be fair I think also supports Hillary) and Rachel Maddow were, but the old establishment horses seemed rather obvious in converting their collective sighs of relief into a clear victory for Hillary Clinton.

She DID do very, very well. But she did it by trying to sound as much like Bernie Sanders as possible.

This is relevant to the ongoing primary and to the general election. Do we want (and can we win with?) the epitome of the modern progressive approach Bernie Sanders has championed for years -- Sanders himself, or with a conservative Democrat who has swiftly backpedaled on her 90's-era hawkish, Wallstreet -friendly views that ruffle fewer feathers among insiders or elites?

[beerandjesus]

2. Excellent post.

I actually didn't think Bernie was at his best during the debate (although some of Hillary's lines were SUCH groaners, it's hard for me to think of her as having "won"--notably the line about how she went to Wall Street and said, "hey gang, c'mon!&quot , but one thing was absolutely, unequivocally clear:

Bernie set the tone for the debate. Everyone (except maybe Webb) was following Bernie's lead.

Anyone who denies this is either kidding themselves or willfully blind.

[DirkGently]

17. She DID do well. I think she actually explained "Social Democracy"

better than Bernie did, while trying to maintain a sort of artificial distinction between the way she was describing "capitalism," and the way Bernie explained his version of "socialism."

Both ended up saying they favored well-regulated free markets, but Hillary was oddly more comfortable with that topic, although she was again trying to stake out essentially the same position as Sanders.

[beerandjesus]

18. Actually, I completely agree.

I thought she did very well over all, except, predictably, on the topics where she doesn't have a leg to stand on, like the TPP. But there were a few moments where my eye-rolling, honest to God, was inadvertent!

But: From a pure debate performance standpoint, I actually thought she and Bernie were about even--and I watched the debate at a Bernie watch party, where most of his lines were getting cheers. Bernie "won" the debate--and has thus far won the whole campaign cycle--because he's been driving the conversation. To say he's "moved the conversation to the left" is an understatement--can you imagine if it were just Hillary and Jim Webb running?

Awesome OP!

[sabrina 1]

20. She did do well. But for people listening closely eg, she did not directly answer one of the most

important questions, about Social Security. She danced around it while Bernie was crystal clear. I was yelling at the TV to Bernie 'ask her about the Chained CPI', that's a yes or no question. He did but Cooper switched to another topic right after Bernie asked it. I don't think it was deliberat, Bernie just waited too long there.

THIS is why HE won with so many ordinary people. THESE are the issues that are most important to them and so many comments from people who are not as familiar with him as we are, showed that people really were listening.

[beerandjesus]

22. Not just that, she danced around it and ran out the clock.

For me, that was another of the "groaner" moments I mentioned in another post. The question was Social Security, Medicare, and expanding Medicare so that ALL Americans are eligible. She spent so much time being obtuse about SS that she ran out of time before getting anywhere near Medicare-for-all.. which is good debate tactics, but crap substance.

[sabrina 1]

23. Yes people did notice that also. Now that Bernie can expect that tactic, he can use his time to say,

Sec Clinton didn't answer this, but to me it's very simple. Medicare should be expanded to everyone, and SS should be expanded' etc and then explain how, ending with 'do you agree with me'? Even if she doesn't answer, it would emphasize that she is fuzzy on a lot of things while he is very clear.

[upaloopa]

4. How does one come up with that?

Do you dream it at night? Where on earth is any if that written down?
Is there a contest to see who can come up with the best anti Hillary crap? Have you hated her for years and had this stored up ready to spring forth on an occasion like today?
I don't really get all the vitriol!

[nashville_brook]

15. and that was a response to the OP?

was there a wrong turn at the hot dog stand?

[StrongBad]

5. There are now 2 post-debate scientific polls indicating the exact opposite of what you said.

I'm gonna side with data rather than rhetoric, thanks.

[DirkGently]

7. I'd love to see the science

showing that Clinton didn't sprint toward Sanders' positions on Iraq, Keystone, gay marriage and the TPP.

Got a link?

[StrongBad]

8. Completely irrelevant to how ppl will vote

[tblue]

13. Do you trust she'll stay with all those positions or revert on some?

I'd like to believe she will keep them, but I can't find a reason to. I'm open to being convinced, but right now I have no faith. Nothing personal, just a result of paying really close attention for a really long time.

[DirkGently]

14. Bingo. That is the actual issue on "flip-flopping"

I don't have a problem with leaders changing their minds -- that's what we *want* them to do, when they're wrong.

The implication with a hastily "adjusted" position that just happens to coincide with prevailing public opinion, is the question of whether the "new" is position genuine, or just lip service based on polling, which in turn raises the question of whether the person be counted on to pursue it.

Obama, for example, says now he was always in favor of gay marriage, but waffled on the issue because it wasn't politically viable to support it in 2008. I don't have a sense of where Hillary "really" was on marriage equality, or whether she particularly cared one way or the other.

I do think she is shading her opinions on Wall Street's role in the financial collapse. She was with Bill in his enthusiasm for growth in the financial industry, and for the de-regulation many blame for for crash. Her donors and friends come from that class, and I don't think she has any intention of reigning in their problematic tendencies.

Likewise on TPP, the Clinton 90's-era paradigm included NAFTA, and up until recently she was fully onboard. I'd need to hear some explanation as to her rationale for pulling a 180 there to fully believe it.

[sabrina 1]

21. Yes and we've learned that those 'scientific' polls were of people who did not WATCH the debate. The

multiple polls of actual VIEWERS all show Bernie winning.

So much for 'scientific polls'.

[StrongBad]

24. That is simply not true. Please read this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251690927

In this poll, of those that won the debate, 54% said Hillary won.

[cosmicone]

6. Hillary is a politician just as much as Bernie

Bernie sprinted like a greyhound and changed positions on gun control -- or did you miss that part?

Politicians always change positions and adjust their message. Carter did, Reagan did, JFK did, Clinton did, Obama did, GW Bush did. That is the hallmark of a skillful politician.

You can't blame Hillary for being very good at her chosen profession -- that is what leaders are made of.

[DirkGently]

12. Did Bernie move on gun control?

I heard him defending his vote on an inarguably controversial bill, but not changing positions as Hillary has on Iraq. And the TPP. And gay marriage. And Keystone. Etc.

Frankly, I think Hillary's willingness to sound more eager about gun control is not particularly helpful in the general. The support is for background checks and anti strawman-bills and closing gun show loopholes. That's across America, including most members of the NRA. Sanders is on the right side of those issues, where he's always been.

I question whether simply sounding more belligerent about gun control helps Dems in the general. We need to aim (heh) at what's achievable. I haven't heard Hillary argue for something new and helpful -- she's is instead perhaps louder in insisting that "something" be done.

[JaneyVee]

9. Sorry, but Anderson Cooper set the tone.

And Hillary handled him better.

[DirkGently]

10. I liked Patton Oswalt's tweet regarding Cooper ...

“A Vanderbilt heir is grilling the candidates on socialism”

http://www.salon.com/2015/10/14/patton_oswalt_for_the_win_the_must_read_democratic_debate_liveblog_a_vanderbilt_heir_is_grilling_the_candidates_on_socialism/

[tblue]

11. I am not voting for a master debater, I'm voting for a leader

who inspires and has impeccable character, who sticks up for nobodies like me, and who prioritizes issues pretty much the same way I do.

Bernie's the kind of candidate I have dreamed of supporting. If he wasn't in this race, I feel like I'd have literally no representation in this coming election.

I don't take his efforts lightly. It is insanely difficult to run for any office, let alone the Presidency. Can you imagine giving impassioned speeches 12 times a day every day for months? Dancing on 'Ellen' and wearing Larry Wilmore's silly hat and shades?

Bernie is and always was going to be the underdog. We always knew that overwhelming MSM pundits and SuperPAC money plus entrenched power would pile up against him, disappear him or attack him on things that either aren't relevant or aren't true.

The silver lining is the side of Bernie that's revealed when he refuses to play that game. He was man enough to call the media out for its relentless attacks on Hillary. I'm so proud of him for that. Whether she'd do the same for him remains to be seen. But Bernie's intestinal fortitude in the fight for what matters is proven now, and that's what I'm looking voting for.

[DirkGently]

16. Exactly. I felt Hillary was awarded

a lot of style points for smoothly adapting her more conservative views for the debate, as though that were more worthy than Sanders having the superior positions and record to begin with.

It's great they apparently agree on so much, but substance should matter more.

The suggestion seems to be that Hillary the new populist / socialist is more palatable than Bernie the original.

[thesquanderer]

19. This has been Hillary's "New Coke" rollout, "now more like Pepsi"

People who liked Pepsi/Sanders still preferred the genuine article. I guess the question is whether Clinton people care enough to prefer the original Clinton... and I suspect they don't. The reason this version of "new Coke" might work better than the soda did is that I get the sense that many HRC supporters were never really invested in her positions. She can say anything and they will still support her. They like her largely for reasons other than exactly where she stands on issues. Except maybe for being one of the more right-wing/hawkish dems on foreign policy and civili liberties, I think that's one area where she has been very consistently different from Sanders, and she remains there, and I assume there are Dem voters who are indeed more conservative on those issues.