Steyer made the debate.

[MH1]

Heard it on Rachel. Here's an article.

I don't have much to say other than, maybe he's a better politician than I had been giving him credit for.

I have him as my "choice" here because he talks about the right things in the right way, and I think it would be great for him to have a larger audience. I have no delusion that he has any chance to win, among lifelong politicians. (Not sure I would want him to, either. Maybe we need someone who knows how the sausage grinder works.)

In the actual primary, if he is still there, I may or may not vote for him. But either way, I'll be glad he had a chance to be heard. Yes, he can buy that chance, and he has been ... not just now that he's running for Prez. I'm not one who assumes anyone who has money is necessarily a complete asshole. At least he's been putting his $$$ behind good causes for a while now. I respect that. And I think he's a good addition to the debate.

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/10/21060196/steyer-democratic-debate-polling-qualifier

Steyer is the sixth Democrat to make the stage, where he’ll join former Vice President Joe Biden; Sens. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Amy Klobuchar; and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg as the only qualifiers in a 13-candidate Democratic field. Candidates needed at least 225,000 donors, as well as certain levels of support in qualifying polls either nationally or in key early states, to make the cut.

Steyer’s debate qualification came in one fell swoop Thursday night, when Fox News released new polls for the Nevada caucuses, which will take place February 22, and for the South Carolina primary on February 29. Though Biden still leads the field in both states, Steyer came in third in Nevada — tied with Warren — and was catapulted to a narrow second place in South Carolina, just slightly ahead of Sanders.

In Nevada, Steyer claimed 12 percent of caucus-goers, albeit with a 4 percent margin of error. He did even better in South Carolina, earning 15 percent support with a 3.5 percent margin of error, representing an 11-point jump since October 2019. Both polls were conducted earlier this week, from January 5 through January 8.

[elleng]

1. Good strategist,

an important attribute.

[MH1]

7. Yup, and I predict he will back almost any of our candidates

that win the nomination.

[elleng]

8. Yes, he's said as much.

[bdamomma]

2. I saw him on

Lawrence O'Donnell, He said he's an outsider and will change DC??? Nothing against him, but aren't we into this sick situation for the same reason.

[MH1]

3. I heartily disagree that the current sick situation has any similarity

to what someone like Steyer would bring.

That said, I do agree that we are at a point where we are probably best served by someone who knows how this particular machinery works.

But depending on who is left on the ballot when they get to my state, it is conceivable I will vote for Steyer if he is there. There are worse options.

[crazytown]

4. With the serious candidates concentrated on IA and HH, Steyer put $21m into NV and SC ads

to catch the Fox News polls there, and got a double digit payback. He put little into IA, and got 2% in the DMR/Selzer poll.

Steyer bought a place the debate stage as a soap box for his issues. Every minute he gets to speak, is a minute we lose to hear serious candidates discuss the campaign. That Steyer is on stage, and Harris is not, is a travesty.

[MH1]

5. I was sad to see Harris drop out. I think hers is an important voice.

But it is hardly a "travesty" that a non-candidate is not on the stage.

(Steyer's) "his issues" are MY issues. So I am happy he figured out how to get that soap box. That was the point of my post.

[MH1]

6. Just to add, every minute I have to hear Bernie yell,

is a minute I didn't get to hear an intelligent, well-spoken person present good, relevant points about what is needed to actually get some progress in this country. This country, the real one where we live, not the fantasy one that Bernie is running for President of.

I'm glad the guy I think has good stuff to say, gets a chance to say it. And if it means Bernie has a little less time to yell, that's a bonus.

(I'm fine with Warren, by the way. I'd be happy to hear more of her intelligent and well-spoken points.)

[crazytown]

9. On stage, Steyer is not a a divisive figure and avoids overt criticism.

But at this moment, we are having to choose between those who will be our nominee. While Steyer and Yang debated finer points of policy, Sanders flew under the radar. People do not like to hears Democrats saying - 'You should not be nominated because ...', but it is an essential part of the process ... and at this point in time, critical.

Bernie has a policy, set in stone, to give the vote to incarcerated death row / capital crime felons. When will that get an airing? That's something that Tom could raise, if he was a serious candidate, but he is not.

[MH1]

10. Bernie will not be the nominee, too many people can't stand him

Steyer actually has a better chance.

Didn't Carter, the peanut farmer, surprise a lot of people?

I'm less concerned about the ability of incarcerated felons to vote, than that of the non-incarcerated. Steyer does have a policy for the latter: https://www.tomsteyer.com/right-to-an-equal-vote/

As for death-row / capital crime felons: I have opposed the death penalty since forever. That was the first issue I learned my lesson about litmus tests and voting. There shouldn't even be a question about "death row" inmates, IMO. But I don't expect Dem candidates to vociferously support ending the death penalty - frankly, there are more important issues. (basing "importance" on totality of suffering)

[crazytown]

11. Do you remember Willie Horton?

The GOP 'weekend passes' ads killed Micheal Dukakis. It is a huge vulnerability.

I have opposed the death penalty since forever, as well. I am also apposed to an inmate involved in a mass shooting getting a vote on gun control, a terrorist getting a vote on national security, or a serial killer getting a vote on women's rights.

CNN Town Hall April 22, 2019

Anne Carlstein, junior at Harvard, studying mathematics from Chapel Hill, North Carolina

QUESTION: Senator Sanders, you have said that you believe that people with felony records should be allowed to vote while in prison. Does this mean that you would support enfranchising people like the Boston Marathon bomber, a convicted terrorist and murderer? Do you think that those convicted of sexual assault should have the opportunity to vote for politicians who could have a direct impact on women's rights?

SANDERS: (snip) If somebody commits a serious crime, sexual assault, murder, they're going to be punished. They may be in jail for 10 years, 20 years, 50 years, their whole lives. That's what happens when you commit a serious crime.

But I think the right to vote is inherent to our democracy, yes, even for terrible people, because once you start chipping away and you say, well, that guy committed a terrible crime, not going to let him vote. Oh, that person did that, not going to let that person vote. You're running down a slippery slope ... I do believe that even if they are in jail they're paying their price to society, but that should not take away their inherent American right to participate in our democracy.

CUOMO: (snip) you're writing an opposition ad against you by saying you think the Boston Marathon bomber should vote not after he pays his debt to society, but while he's in jail. You sure about that?

SANDERS: Well, Chris, I think I have written many 30-second opposition ads throughout my life. This will be just another one.

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1904/22/se.03.html

[MH1]

12. Good point.

My initial take is that I don't agree that Steyer needs to attack Bernie on this point, as Bernie is not likely to prevail. On the other hand, if you are saying that Steyer could do a service by helping to illuminate these red flags in Bernie's positions, you could be right. Something to think about.

I think Steyer is in it literally to get his message out. And I'm okay with that because I agree with his message. To the extent the eventual nominee is essentially on the same page with the main issues, I don't see Steyer harming the cause. More that he is an another voice in the chorus. I do think he could be a dark horse candidate in that he is pleasant and non-divisive, and doesn't carry the baggage that the politicians do. Is it best for America at this time to elevate a non-politician to the Presidency? I don't know, but if it dumps Trump, I'll take it.

[crazytown]

13. "if it dumps Trump, I'll take it"

and so say all of us. This is a whatever it takes election

[MH1]

14. Yup, you got it.

[squirecam]

15. Harris removed herself

It was hardly Tom’s fault.

[crazytown]

16. I don't blame Tom for Harris running out of money.

I fault him, like I do Yang, for using a stage that is intended to help choose between candidates, as a soap box for issues close to their heart.

You need look no further than Amy, to see what happens when serious candidates are starved for time.

[squirecam]

17. Amy

Is still running. As long as she is, she has the opportunity to get her message out.

Her opportunities are not equal. That’s life. You need to make the most of the opportunities provided. And step aside if you can’t.

Tom made his fortune. And is entitled to spend it how he wishes. If that means that 15% of South Carolina voters gets him on stage, then that’s their right to vote for him.

I’m not going to begrudge Tom. He doesn’t have my vote, but he has the right to be on the stage.

[democrank]

18. I'm looking forward to hearing what he has to say

Steyer has a lot of solid ideas.

[TidalWave46]

19. I am one hundred percent ok with him.

I'm not happy or disappointed that he made the debate. He qualified under the rules in place. I like having him speak for us and he has been great for us historically.

"I have him as my "choice" here because he talks about the right things in the right way, and I think it would be great for him to have a larger audience."

That is one of the reasons I love the primaries so much. We get multiple great voices elevated for a period of time. I personally think Williamson did an amazing job for us. All of them outside of Gabbard.

[question everything]

20. Interesting he made it, but Yang did not