Who Won the Sanders vs. Biden Debate & How Would We Ever Even Know? by Joaquin Flores
(2020-03-16 at 13:31:20 )

Who Won the Sanders vs. Biden Debate & How Would We Ever Even Know? by Joaquin Flores

Has the Coronavirus cancelled American Democracy? CNN hid the DNC candidates debate from the American people in the best way it knew how - it aired it strictly on CNN and has only made Biden-friendly snippets available on YouTube and its own website. If we missed it, we would never see the real debate replete with Mr. Bidens gaffes.

Does anyone even watch TV anymore?

Not like that, they do not: only 44% of United States of American people even have cable, and the demographic is skewed over to the 55+ crowd.

This means that CNNs debate was intentionally aimed at shoring up support among the very over-achieving-yet-low-information voter that characterizes the Baby Boomer and oldest of Generation X cross-section.

How will we ever know who really won the debate if we can not watch? 56% of Americans do not have cable, and coverage of the virus garnered more TV viewers. Mr. Sanders likely voters are often caught in wage-work in the gig economy, and do not enjoy the Boomer pastime of weekends off.

So before the debate even starts, Mr. Sanders can not reach his base and energize them - point for Mr. Biden.

It comes as no surprise: CNNs main goal was to host this debate in such a way that it actually went away. That is because the more people see Mr. Biden, the less they like him. Additionally, the more Mr. Biden has to talk, the greater odds that he will make another "gaffe".

What is fascinating was that the DNC leaked a story that the debate may not happen at all. Another version was leaked that it may be more like a town-hall with both candidates sitting down. This "weather balloon" was floated precisely to gauge the public response without taking responsibility for posing the question. The publics response was that there had better be a debate and that if Joe Biden wants to sit down it is because he can not stand up for more than twenty minutes at a time because he has early signs of Alzheimers.

There is no point to veer off into conspirology regarding the timing of the public hysteria on the Coronavirus and the American election cycle. There are varying views about the seriousness of this outbreak in proportion to temperature and scope of public attention on it, and I am very underqualified to have an opinion on that count.

But it would be malpractice also not to mention that this point has not just been raised, but has gained significant traction especially among Donald Trump supporters. After all, a healthy stock market and decent employment figures at least on paper, are Donald Trumps main electability factors for swing-state voters going into November.

The extraordinary effect of this pandemic on the stock market does not match our experience with H1N1 - what Mr. Biden in this debate called "N .. N1H" mumble. Donald Trumps tough position on China and the DNCs cozy relationship with the fast-rising Peoples Republic have led to all sorts of rabbit hole theories on what is really afoot.

Did enough people hear Mr. Biden’s flub? Anyhow it is cosmetic - half point, Mr. Sanders.

On the one hand, any global epidemic is a critically good reason why emergency health services at the very least ought to be heavily government subsidized, even if that means working with private insurers.

Mr. Sanders sort of made this point - and that is the problem with Mr. Sanders. He is not a good debater. He does not answer questions directly, and takes too much time to circle back around. When he does finally circle back around as he did in this debate, he does not land them right.

He makes criticisms of his opponent Mr. Bidens fundraising by speaking in vague generalities about money in politics today, without actually concluding that Mr. Biden - yes Mr. Biden - is one of those politicians that Mr. Sanders is quite loosely referring to. That just does not work in todays low attention span world, but I suspect these would not have landed well fifty or sixty years ago either. Half-point, Mr. Sanders.

Mr. Biden responded by flat-out lying about Mr. Sanders having nine Super Pac backers. Do you see what you just read there?

Even as I report that, it seems to infer that Mr. Biden was wrong about the number. See, that is how it will be reported in media, and still people will come away believing that Mr. Sanders has some PAC backers and therefore he is a hypocrite when he somewhat gestures an attack on politicians-and-money-and-we-may-assume-that-Biden-is-one-such-politician. Half point, Mr. Biden

Both candidates seemed to make the argument that in such cases where a state of emergency is declared, deductibles should be waved and those without coverage should be welcome anywhere medical services are provided.

Mr. Sanders supporters who evaluate objectively must have been outrageously frustrated at Mr. Sanders bizarre gestures. Mr. Sanders speaks as if we can read his mind, read between the lines ad infinitum. He told the televised audience (due to the virus, there was no live audience) that since it is an emergency, he wants everyone who is sick to go to the doctor and "it is taken care of". What is taken care of, the bill? Yeah it is taken care of once we have to pay out of pocket for it, or what did he mean exactly?

As he continued to nearly ramble, we could then tease out that people should pay it and that since it is an emergency, we would .. what, figure it all out later? It would take an already well informed voter and an extraordinarily active listener to tease out what Bernie was gesturing at: Go to the doctor if you are at all sick, and expect them to bill you as they would - but I will use the fact that this is a state of emergency to give an executive order to reimburse all healthcare providers at a rate my government will work out with them, so that at the end of the day, despite what you were sent in the mail, you will not pay one red cent.

But he actually did not clearly say this during peoples attention span. His objection to Mr. Bidens solution is that it would not cover shrink visits for someone having a nervous break-down in response to their spouses infection. Because Mr. Sanders could not say that the more leftish thing, which is that the emergency response does not cover undocumented immigrants and there are many. Quarter point Mr. Sanders

Because that is what United States of Americans want who are electing a president. The entire mythology around congressional deadlock seems there to hide what may well be the positive side of the kind of executive power creep that we have seen with legislation like the Patriot Act. By declaring a state of emergency on, say, the state of healthcare in general, Mr. Sanders - if well counseled - could arrange an executive order on that too, and just bypass congressional obstructionism.

That said, he made a number of very good points about societys priorities and why if we can authorize 1.5 trillion to bail out big business last week, we could not bail out the United States of American people in the time of a pandemic that threatens hours at work, mortgages, healthcare, and rents? Point - Mr. Sanders

And yet still saying this all is a pretty good attack on how Donald Trump has handled this, but he could not make that attack directly on Mr. Biden. Yes, it is good to show you can beat Donald Trump, but right now people want to see what is so wrong with Mr. Biden who is otherwise in the lead?

So in truth, Mr. Sanders flubbed that too. Mr. Bidens people know that Mr. Sanders rambles and that most people are not these incredibly active listeners that are going out of their way to hear out Mr. Sanders.

Those who do hear him out, realize he is the one with the right ideas and policies. Mr. Biden understands how listeners in fact listen. So, all Mr. Biden had to do was say that he agreed with Mr. Sanders on a few of the points that were hard to follow anyway. And that is what Mr. Biden did. Point - Mr. Biden

Certainly CNN made a spectacle of the virus, and framed the whole debate around it. One thing political scientists and social psychologists know is that emergency crises have a conservatizing effect on the populace.

Even as Mr. Sanders campaign rests not upon broad and lofty visions for an improved tomorrow that builds on the tolerable one today, the Coronavirus hype switches up how we view things.

While Mr. Sanders speaks to intolerable and unjust problems in United States of American society today, despite his best efforts to seem establishment friendly, his branding is anti-establishment.

So the coronavirus plays very well for Mr. Biden because of the fact that he is seen as an insider that - warts and all - knows how to wheel and deal with other politicians and if he were president right now, as was posed in the debate, could call on his Republican allies in the legislative branch to get "something" done. An openly establishment candidate like Mr. Biden uses some progressive-sounding talking points to cover his bases, but is clearly the more conservative candidate. Undecided voters, who also tend to be low-information television watchers and less net-savvy, would tend to go over to Mr. Biden as opposed to taking chances on what appears to be a radical with admittedly good ideas. Point - Mr. Biden

The timing certainly is inconvenient for whatever modicum of democratic procedure exists within the Democrat Party. We would have otherwise had the debate in Arizona where one of the next primaries is set to take place. With a national state of emergency at play, the debate was far removed from Mr. Sanders friendly Arizona, where no doubt thousands of his ardent supporters would have held a media event in the form of a bullhorned tailgate party outside. While CNN would have ignored this, as is their standard practice, and Mr. Sanders would have well worked his magic in Arizona and shored up some energy in a state where he is struggling to keep up. Mr. Sanders really responds to a crowd, and is very good at reading and feeling them. But they were not there. Point - Mr. Biden

The best thing about Joe Bidens campaign is that the media does all the work for him, and fills in the huge, massive, gaping holes in his logic and even his dementia afflicted basic syntax. Point - Mr. Biden

My obligation was to cover this debate and weigh in on the ins and outs, and offer a final verdict on the outcome.

I did the same in 2016 and I did so in a way that readers believed was on the balance fair, if not tilted in favor of Donald Trump. The right thing for me to do is disclose my own bias - like 40% of Americans, I am a socialist. I think then that readers thought I was tilted towards Donald Trump speaks to my fairness. Point - Mr. Flores

Of course the debate covered other subjects too, but since you will never be able to see it again, and since the rest of the debate conformed to the same pattern we have been on about here, we can superimpose this onto the rest of the debate which you might see again in several decades.

That is, if CNNs successor wants to make a full length documentary about how Mr. Bidens massive loss to Donald Trump in 2020 was critical to Donald Trumps eventually becoming a four-term president after he evoked executive orders and stacked the courts.

Last night?

For those listening, Mr. Sanders actually won big.

For everyone else and all other factors in consideration, Mr. Biden communicated more effectively and will probably be seen as winning by anyone watching CNNs heavily edited clips, which is how most people - if they see it at all - will get to see it.

Reprinted here from the "Strategic Culture Foundation" provides a platform for exclusive analysis, research and policy comment on Eurasian and global affairs. We are covering political, economic, social and security issues worldwide. Since 2005 our journal has published thousands of analytical briefs and commentaries with the unique perspective of independent contributors. SCF works to broaden and diversify expert discussion by focusing on hidden aspects of international politics and unconventional thinking. Benefiting from the expanding power of the Internet, we work to spread reliable information, critical thought and progressive ideas.