A combative Democratic debate saw clashes on healthcare policy and the Green New Deal. Our experts weigh in Geoffrey Kabaservice: ‘Centrists lacked a strong fighter in the ring’All of the Democratic participants in last night’s debate harshly criticized the American economic system that rewards the most advantaged and further marginalizes the disadvantaged – but this winner-take-all system is also at work in the Democratic primaries. Even though nearly all the candidates delivered energetic, policy-dense, and largely gaffe-free performances, the end result is that the most prominent figures on the stage – Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders – will remain in the top echelon of candidates, while most of the rest are finished.Though the debate did nothing to change the candidates’ relative positioning, it did surface the differences between the Democratic party’s progressive wing (led by Sanders and Warren) and its moderate wing (here represented by most of the other candidates), which are significant and have real bearing on whether the Democrats will end up moving too far to the left to be able to defeat Trump in 2020.If John Delaney and Tim Ryan had been substantial candidates, their criticisms of the progressives’ positions on issues like decriminalization of border crossings, healthcare for undocumented immigrants, abolition of private insurance under Medicare for All, imposition of a wealth tax, the Green New Deal and opposition to free trade might have put Sanders and Warren on the defensive. But since they are in fact back-bench representatives whose candidacies may have gasped their last after the debate ended, their critiques merely provided an opportunity for the progressives to grandstand about how Democrats need to show moral courage and not imitate Republicans.All in all, however, this event felt like an undercard to the following evening’s much-anticipated rematch between Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Democrats may remember it as a missed opportunity to get at the real issues dividing the party, which might have been discussed in a more illuminating way if there had been fewer candidates on stage. * Geoffrey Kabaservice is the director of political studies at the Niskanen Center in Washington DC as well as the author of Rule and Ruin: The Downfall of Moderation and the Destruction of the Republican Party Theodore R Johnson: ‘It took two hours to mention black people’In a city that is more than 80% black, it took nearly two hours for the Democratic presidential candidates on stage in Detroit last night to mention black people and the specific challenges they face. This was especially surprising considering black voters will comprise a quarter of the primary electorate and the fact that whoever wins the black vote also wins the nomination. And once the topic of black America finally came up, the candidates rushed to discuss their respective policy proposals that they hoped would signal their seriousness about racial equality, from the funding of black colleges to the study of reparations.But black voters know that campaign promises rarely materialize once a candidate becomes president, so one’s reputation, trustworthiness and passion tend to be what wins black support. On this score, the candidates were who we thought they were. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren were the only two on stage who entered the evening with observable black support in their coalition, and it will remain that way after tonight. Though Marianne Williamson managed a few applause lines on race, Joe Biden’s comfortable lead with black voters – and, thus, the inside track to the nomination – is quite safe. * Theodore R Johnson is a senior fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice Malaika Jabali: ‘Bernie Sanders shone on healthcare’With 45 minutes of Tuesday’s Democratic debate dedicated to healthcare, it gave Senator Bernie Sanders ample time to distinguish himself from the candidate pool. Sanders offered his expected talking points on the failures of the current system and policy solutions, but he also called out CNN’s own advertising dollars from healthcare companies and the moderators for parroting conservative talking points.He broke from his relatively congenial approach in the first debate with pointed digs at John Delaney – who may be the most diametrically opposed candidate to the senator politically – epitomizing the break between tepid Democratic politics of old and popular policies on the left. Sanders clarified that healthcare is not a “business” when Delaney attempted to flaunt his corporate savvy, and he noted that healthcare was not something to profit from, as Delaney has in his career.Despite questioning that appeared more like an interrogation, Sanders handled these opening minutes expertly and he stayed focused throughout, keeping his eyes on the need for structural change to improve the livelihood of the working class. * Malaika Jabali is a public policy attorney, writer and activist whose writing has appeared in Essence, Jacobin, the Intercept, Glamour and elsewhere Lloyd Green: ‘Will Elizabeth Warren derail Sanders?’Elizabeth Warren won Tuesday’s debate but it was far from a knockout. John Delaney, a former three-term Maryland congressman and businessman, stood toe-to-toe with Warren and Bernie Sanders during the two-plus-hour contest and exited unbowed.Delaney hammered away at Medicare for All, which would outlaw private health insurance and raise taxes on the middle class. He became another reminder that the Democratic party is populated by moderates too – as if Joe Biden’s frontrunner status weren’t enough.It was only after Delaney had dinged the evening’s presumptive co-stars that Warren pushed back: “I don’t understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president … to talk about what we really can’t do and shouldn’t fight for.” She also made a case for electability.Warren’s performance won’t propel her to the lead. More likely, it will boost her chances of derailing Sanders and emerging as the last progressive standing. * Lloyd Green was opposition research counsel to George HW Bush’s 1988 campaign and served in the Department of Justice from 1990 to 1992
