I am suffering through the Democratic presidential debate on CNN.  I don’t know if I will be able to do an analysis like this again.  I have already done two for the Republican debates, but at least those had some entertainment with Trump.

Watching a Democratic debate is watching a contest on who can promise the most money to the most number of people.  In the world of Democratic politics, costs don’t exist.  You can raise the minimum wage, have paid family medical leave, free tuition for college, etc., all at the point of the government’s guns, and you never have to worry about how you will pay for it.  You just repeal the Bush tax cuts and the money is there.

I didn’t care for Anderson Cooper.  He seemed to interrupt the candidates a lot, especially when they were finishing their sentences.  Still, CNN probably did a better job than Fox News.

I will attempt a brief analysis here.  This is both from a libertarian perspective and how I think others will view the candidates, even though it is hard for me to get into the head of an average Democrat.

Lincoln Chafee

He is the only one who would not throw Edward Snowden in a jail.  He also emphasized his vote against the Iraq War.  So from a libertarian perspective, there were  few things to like.

Overall, I thought he was dull though and I believe others will see him the same way.  I highly doubt he has any chance.

It is also interesting that he claims to have never changed his positions in going from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party.  He says the Republicans left him.  I say it just shows how little difference there is between the two major parties.

Martin O’Malley

I originally thought he would be the big challenger for Hillary Clinton.  He is a major leftist, but he doesn’t even get to claim the far left mantle on the stage.  If Clinton gets in more trouble with scandals, and Biden doesn’t enter the race, O’Malley still has a chance.  He should probably stay in the race just because he could win by default if Clinton’s supporters are forced to abandon her and go with someone else.

Jim Webb

Webb spent half of his time talking about how he wasn’t being given enough time and that he needed more time.

This is far from an endorsement of Webb, but he seems to be the most logical person on the stage.  He was more reasonable on gun control and he is the only one who came close to admitting that there are costs to all of these government schemes being offered.

When the candidates were asked whether “black lives matter” or “all lives matter”, they were all scared to say that all lives matter.  I thought Webb should have taken the opportunity to differentiate himself.  Even within the Democratic Party, blacks do not make up a majority of the voters.  And even many black people will accept the radical statement (note the sarcasm) that all lives matter.

I know there exist some somewhat reasonable and rational Americans out there who are registered Democrat.  Webb should try to get these people and stake himself as the only non-leftist.

Bernie Sanders

Sanders is a self-avowed democratic socialist.  But he just likes to talk about the top 1%.  His economic views are terrible and basically don’t make any sense.

Sanders was decent on foreign policy, but he is no Ron Paul.  He is just less of a war hawk than the other candidates in the race.  I was hoping he would give Clinton an even harder time than he did.  Sanders also showed opposition against the NSA, which was good to hear.

Sanders said that black lives matter and criticized the fact that the U.S. has the greatest prison population in the world.  But he said nothing about the war on drugs.  When asked later, he mildly supported the legalization of marijuana.  Big deal.  For someone on the far left, he sure is terrible on the issue of the drug war.  Sanders has previously avoided the subject by saying it isn’t that big of an issue.  But if he cares about the large percentage of black people in prison, he should care about the drug war and its harmful effects.

Hillary Clinton

What can I say about Hillary Clinton?  I already think she is a career criminal who desperately wants to exercise power over others.

She spoke about wanting equal pay for women.  In the next breath, she spoke about wanting paid family medical leave.  So employers are supposed to pay women more while also paying them for having babies.  If you combine her two proposals, it sounds like a formula for increasing unemployment for women.

She is still forced to defend her support for the Iraq War and she was well prepared to do so.  Clinton is a decent debater, as she has had a lot of practice in the past.

Clinton is a war hawk.  She softens her positions in the primary debates.  But we know her record as senator and secretary of state.

Overall, I don’t think that much is going to change after this debate.  We will have to see if Joe Biden gets in and brings a little entertainment.  Clinton is still the frontrunner, but you never know what will happen with the email scandal or any other scandal.

Please forgive me if I don’t do a full analysis the next time there is a Democratic debate.  Watching a couple of hours of this is not without pain.